Amazon.com Widgets
  • Yes

    The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter.3 Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

    existence of GodThe Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -30 degrees to +120 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.

  • Yes, if you know where to look

    If you're looking for God with logic, with the material - you'll never find Him. There's proof of God in the spiritual. There's proof in the parent that gives their life for their child, in the neighbor that helps another after a disaster, in the nurse who cares compassionately for the sick. You can't see Him with your eyes - but if your heart looks, you can find Him.

  • Yes, there is proof of God.

    Modus Ponens

    "If X, then Y. X, therefore Y"

    X = transcendent logic
    Y = transcendent logician

    Anyone who denies X leads to misology. And if transcendent, then the logician would be omnipotent by default, since transcendent would include the entire omni (the universe) itself. The premises are valid when you consider the old Platonism debate on whether math is invented or observed (discovered). Bivalent logic would favor observed. Transcendent logic is a universal positive. Since one cannot doubt the premises without rejecting all deductive logical premises in general, then the premises is true and the proof is sound. Logic is math-based, and mathematical Platonism is rational. Thus, the proof is rational. The proof is trivially parsimonious, and extraordinarily so at that. The point is that we've taken logic for granted for far too long. Either one must accept the proof or deny logic altogether.

  • Yes I believe that there is a God and we all see proof everyday.

    The proof I speak of is the miracles that take place daily. Only the power of God can heal cancer with no treatment or make a child start crying when there were no possible signs of life. Some feel that there is no God but in the end everyone prays for God to be the one to save them.

  • God IS God

    There has ALWAYS been proof. Course you have to look for yourself. I've found that MOST of the people in the United States, live with blinders on. They wait for someone else to TELL them what and When to believe. Science has no clue even to THIS date, HOW the DNA starnd and the Atom, came to be ....... What they appear to be sure of though is that God didn't do it! Did you catch that? They DON'T KNOW, but they're SURE it isn't God! Honestly how reliable is the opinions of such people, and yet the entirety of the Atheist and Agnostic movements have jumped willy nilly into bed with Them. What's really funny taht even THEY can't explain it too you. But the first thing out of their mouth is that it doesn't make sense to believe in God without proof. Surprise .... Hell IS their proof!

  • It depends on your definition

    Whether or not there is any evidence depends completely on your definition of evidence. The thing is I have actually asked people who do not believe in god what they would define as evidence for god and they told me that they would need to actually feel his presence. And lets face it for all the people who would see "so why doesn't he reveal himself to us all?" If you were god and every day a million people asked you to reveal yourself to them because they aren't satisfied with the several hundred books which already filled with evidence would you do it? I know I wouldn't. And even if he did reveal himself I am willing to bet that a lot of people would find a way to rationalise it away and say it was a "mass hallucination." Or some kind of drug in the water supply. So while I feel there is more than enough evidence to prove it, for some people you can just never have enough proof to make them believe.

  • Yes and No

    Many people would agree or disagree with this statement for a number of reasons. The main reason why people will not agree with this statement is faith. Different faiths believe in different things. Some people are atheists so obviously they would disagree with this statement. While others are theists, they would agree with this statement. Some people are agnostic so they won’t have a clue and maybe deists won’t either. Everyone has their own opinion on God so everyone will have their own opinion on this statement. In my opinion, fully Christians would say this statement is true for one thing only, the Bible. In the Bible, it states the obvious that God (Jesus) is real as he has already resurrected form the dead which only a might powerful person could do so. The bible gives evidence to support that God is existent using stories and miracle, foe example where St Bernadette had 17 visions about Mary (Jesus’ mum).

  • No there isn't.

    There is absolutely no proof of any kind for the existence of any gods. Saying "if you look into your heart" means nothing to any logical person. The idea that the earths shape, position, etc. proves god simply has no idea what they're talking about. There could be fire aliens on Pluto saying the exact same thing, and it still makes no sense.

  • You can't disprove a negative.

    The burden of proof is upon those who make the positive claim. I can't disprove a unicorn of bigfoot just like i can with God. If I were to say to a friend "i just rode a dragon to your house" my friend would most likely ask "well prove it' because is a unusual claim, but if i replied "well you can disprove it" my friend would think I'm crazy and not think that I did until i proved it. That's the same with god. I cannot believe in anything until reasonable evidence has been put forth. So for now i don't believe there is a god because there isn't proof for or against it.

  • Not currently provable, but you can still believe

    Like others have said, we just can't know. If we did, we would be able to prove it with science and other means. However, being religious, you leave that up to your faith and personal experiences to prove God. Just like bible verses and other sayings prove, seeing isn't always believing.

  • No! But I have seen a dog. Maybe the others have dyslexia

    Logic, analytical thinking and testing possible ways that a god could be tested if there had been a plausible theory. As religion cannot qualify as even a hypothesis, there is no way to ever find proof. Proof requires something to be proved. No test on the supernatural influence has shown even a statistical valid positive correlation. To borrow from Einstein, there are only two infinities; the universe and mans ignorance. I'm not sure about the universe.

  • No proof

    There is absolutely zero proof for the existence of God. For something that has supposedly "created the world", there is nothing to support it. Religion is built on faith, faith by definition is believing in something that has no proof. The irrational belief in God has hindered our progression in science and I believe it is time to ditch these Bronze age myths.

  • There is no proof.

    God doesn't heal cancer. Treatment cures cancer. I don't pray for God to save me. The first answer is a science answer not a religious answer. The only thing that you can find is the bible and that wasn't even written by "God" it was written by someone else hints how there is stuff in there AFTER he died. If there was proof then science could investigate it.

  • Science and Religion

    The two arguments first posted on the YES side can just as easily be explained in Scientific terms. Since we have plausible evidence of Science, it is safe to assume that these are in fact not direct proofs of God's existence. HOWEVER, I do believe that in the future, we will be able to prove God's existence. Just as we have been able to decipher our world through the use of Science, we cannot simply assume that we cannot use Science to discover the now currently intangible evidences of God. You say we have proof of God in what we see everyday... but in fact we only have proof of what God has created (potentially). One day we will be able to actually determine God's existence scientifically, when we have the tools to do so.

  • Of course not.

    If there was proof of a God then we would be able to scientifically investigate that proof, and be able to (with science) answer questions about the nature and identity of that God. We can't do that, because we simply don't know... because there is no proof. Things like the Earth being perfectly suited for human life are not proof of anything. It could have been God or it could've just been luck: even a 1 in 100 billion chance is reasonable considering the size of the universe.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.