Vote
200 Total Votes
1

Yes

94 votes
23 comments
2

No

88 votes
24 comments
3

Time will tell

18 votes
5 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Mister_Man says2018-04-03T04:13:34.5127181Z
Shit actually, I am God, so I guess he does. High five.
reece says2018-04-03T15:36:08.5411684Z
@CyberWolf1232 Do you mean the "parting of the Red Sea"?
ladiesman says2018-04-03T23:06:42.4596552Z
@bioye This poll is referring to the God of the three Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam.
MemeDaFrigginFroggg says2018-04-04T00:09:32.8704552Z
G
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-04T20:38:07.5684087Z
Science proves it in an ironic way. The idea of God in and of itself is that God must be beyond science. Science is how man understands the universe and the bible says a couple times that man cannot understand the way of God. Now ^that saying right there^ doesn't itself prove the existence of God, but it's implications do. Christians love to say "disprove it" and atheists love to say "prove it". But in reality we cannot physically do either as something which is to be beyond the realm of science cannot be affected by science itself. So, how do we prove the existence of the Christian/Jewish God of the Holy Bible? Logic of course. First we need to prove that something can go against science and still happen, thus surpassing science. It cannot be something as simple as "we don't understand it yet". It needs to be something tried and true. PROVEN and unshakable in the scientific world. And it has to be defy it without any plausible scientific reason why. In other words it must go against science itself yet still be true. The only possible way to do this is with examples. No I'm not going to mention the bible as atheists can refute that stating that it was written by so and so and is fiction. You may attempt to disprove this if you wish. However only facts and logic will be accepted. No opinions. Well a couple years back ABC news showed a man named Alcedas Moreno fell 47 stories with his brother. They fell feet apart. Both hit the pavement. His brother had died, but he lived (albeit with injuries) and has now fully recovered. Now if you know the advanced or even basic laws of motion and have some understanding of how impacts work you know that this is impossible. Completely. The speed at which he was falling should have been enough to shatter literally every bone and rupture every organ at the least. No amount of hospitalization should have been able to save this man upon impact. His survival flies in the face of basic physics. Obviously this is just one example, however it is from a reliable source. You may look for others if you wish, however just one is enough to formulate the argument. So, we do have evidence if at least one event going against science, we know that the science is proven, and we know that we completely understand all variables and factors in this event. So religion is indeed plausible as we have proof that there are things that science cannot explain, which is the backbone of religion. A universal force? Well, a universal force would not have the consciousness to maintain itself, otherwise it would be God. A universal force from a scientific standpoint? Impossible. There would be evidence of this if such were the case and it would be much more prevalent. If other universal forces could act on gravity and physics than our science would be wrong. And given that we have completed the scientific method and have proven them all to be true that cannot be the case. (What if our science is wrong) it can't be. It has been tested and proven true with no flaws. It's the equivalent of saying what if 1 + 1 is not 2. Once am idea has been tested multiple times and proven true it is unshakable in the scientific world. (But all the other theories scientists had before now) were incomplete. Not only that, those same scientists knew they were incomplete. Today we act as if these men believed what they studied to be absolute, but they didn't. They simply advanced society with their research. We today do not have this issue as we have been able to test our theories. So why God? Again, a sentient being is the only logical way it could maintain itself. So why Christian and Jewish God? Why not Islam or Hindu or Buddhist or Norse, etc? Simple, of all the religions throughout history only two have maintained perfect historical accuracy. Obviously we have modern religions that have come up which do the same, but we can easily disprove the divinity involving these religions. Christianity and Judaism are the only two religions maintaining both perfect historical accuracy AND no possible evidence against the devine in their religions. So you can see that once you've proven that something is beyond scientific law that all the other arguments more or less fall into place. Ill go ahead and address the elephant in the room. Christianity and Judaism are two separate religions. They both maintain the Abrahamic God but they have many separate beliefs and customs. Also the various sects involved. That's up to you to decide. My goal was not to prove that one particular faith sect, it was to prove the existence of one particular God. The God of Israel. And seeing as logic is the only possible way to debate this and I have used logic to prove God, I would say this has been a success. Remember that the only difference between a theist and an atheist is the belief that something can surpass science.
reece says2018-04-05T08:22:10.3093023Z
Science abides by the philosophy of naturalism. Saying that theists believe in something that surpasses science is the same as saying theists don't care about what makes sense.
TKDB says2018-04-05T14:15:23.9857023Z
The advents of God, Jesus, and the Bible being the 2000 plus years old conversation pieces that they are, apparently inspired "ladiesman" to ask his questiion I guess?
Darth_Unicorns says2018-04-05T19:46:15.0566281Z
Why I don’t believe in (a) God(s): There is no solid proof
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-06T06:52:58.1337917Z
@reece that statement doesn't make sense. It's the same thing as a man telling another man to use an apple to prove an apple tree exists. One man simply believes that there is more to it than just an apple. The other has his mindset built upon the Apple itself. Who is the atheist and the theist is left to the eye of the beholder. If things have happened which defy science why is it so irrational to suggest that there may be something beyond science? After all science in itself is a man made concept.
reece says2018-04-06T07:07:46.1815688Z
@Spiffy-Gonzalez I don't believe this. Firstly, your using a naturalistic analogy to try to prove your point. Give me an analogy that isn't naturalistic. Secondly, we both k͟n͟o͟w͟ apples grow on apple trees. Both science and religion are man made concepts. The difference is, one has figured out more about the universe than the other. Religion starts from its conclusion, and thus has no where to go. Science is the opposite.
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-06T17:09:56.3247712Z
@reece my analogy perfectly suits the situation. If God made everything than God must have also made the fundamentals of the universe. You state that religion starts from the conclusion and science the opposite. Would you care to explain that? From my understanding science is the study of the natural universe. Science itself starts at the conclusion and attempts to find out why. The same as religion. We have always understood that for some reason we stand on the ground. This is the affect/conclusion. The cause (in short) is gravity. You also say one has figured out more about the universe than the other, which I assume you mean science has found more about the universe than religion. This statement does not make sense either, as religion is a set of beliefs and not a set way of attempting to study natural phenomena. You're comparing Apple's to oranges. If I were to say "atheism doesn't make any sense because science has discovered more than atheism" what purpose does that serve in a discussion about wether God exists? You cannot claim that having religious beliefs is illogical simply because something that has nothing to do with religion has discovered more than religion (which in itself is not a process of discovery).
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-06T17:12:19.2363712Z
@reece my analogy perfectly suits the situation. If God made everything than God must have also made the fundamentals of the universe. You state that religion starts from the conclusion and science the opposite. Would you care to explain that? From my understanding science is the study of the natural universe. Science itself starts at the conclusion and attempts to find out why. The same as religion. We have always understood that for some reason we stand on the ground. This is the affect/conclusion. The cause (in short) is gravity. You also say one has figured out more about the universe than the other, which I assume you mean science has found more about the universe than religion. This statement does not make sense either, as religion is a set of beliefs and not a set way of attempting to study natural phenomena. You're comparing Apple's to oranges. If I were to say "atheism doesn't make any sense because science has discovered more than atheism" what purpose does that serve in a discussion about wether God exists? You cannot claim that having religious beliefs is illogical simply because something that has nothing to do with religion has discovered more than religion (which in itself is not a process of discovery).
TheCoolestLoser says2018-04-06T18:14:41.5400212Z
Of course God is the leader of the Annunaki from Nibiru the advanced civilization who genetically engineered human beings as slave labor for mining their gold. The Holy Spirit is part of his consciousness who rules the spirit realm for souls who have passed on. His only begotten son is Jesus Christ savior of humanity. The trinity of consciousness allows God to operate as omnipotent in this universe as well as the multiverse. God is also a computer programmer on an unimaginable scale for us. He uses advanced and powerful quantum computation to generate the multiverse and all universes contained within (including this one). Evidence of reality itself being a computer simulation can be observed when one realizes every construct is a paradox much like how a quantum computer operates. This allows for everything, nothing and all that is in between to manifest in our minds.
TheCoolestLoser says2018-04-06T18:15:37.5128212Z
Of course God is the leader of the Annunaki from Nibiru the advanced civilization who genetically engineered human beings as slave labor for mining their gold. The Holy Spirit is part of his consciousness who rules the spirit realm for souls who have passed on. His only begotten son is Jesus Christ savior of humanity. The trinity of consciousness allows God to operate as omnipotent in this universe as well as the multiverse. God is also a computer programmer on an unimaginable scale for us. He uses advanced and powerful quantum computation to generate the multiverse and all universes contained within (including this one). Evidence of reality itself being a computer simulation can be observed when one realizes every construct is a paradox much like how a quantum computer operates. This allows for everything, nothing and all that is in between to manifest in our minds.
reece says2018-04-06T18:36:30.6879712Z
@Spiffy-Gonzalez "If God made everything than God must have also made the fundamentals of the universe." See what I mean? Why does there have to be God(s) to begin with? "From my understanding science is the study of the natural universe. Science itself starts at the conclusion and attempts to find out why. The same as religion.": Frist, what you mean by conclusion is called a premise when talking about science. Second, please don't try to smudge science and religion together. There's a reason why scientists of f̲a̲i̲t̲h̲ leave their religion out of the lab. 'religion is a set of beliefs and not a set way of attempting to study natural phenomena.': That's good, we're getting somewhere (even though it's a bit contradictory to what you've previously said a few lines above). Now you just have to stop claiming God is the cause to the fundamentals of the universe. Because I care about what makes sense. Confuting your atheist analogy: Atheism doesn't claim knowledge. It claims a lack of it. "what purpose does that serve in a discussion about whether God exists?": To be honest, I wish we didn't have to have this discussion. "You cannot claim that having religious beliefs is illogical simply because something that has nothing to do with religion has discovered more than religion (which in itself is not a process of discovery).": Both religion and science seek the fundamentals of the universe. One seeks through truth, the other seeks through faith.
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-06T23:33:44.3243736Z
@reece "why does there have to be a god(s) to begin with?" Wow what a surprise?! Imagine my shock when I say a discussion about the existence of God INVOLVE God!?! It's almost as if the whole conversation was revolving around this one subject. 😑 "First, what you mean by conclusion is called a premise when talking about science" Shocker. Wonder the reason I used the word conclusion when talking about science has something to do with the fact that you said 'religion starts from its conclusion... Science the opposite'. Conclusion: the end or finish of an event or process. Do not attempt to say I'm incorrectly using a word when I used it in the same manner you did. "Second, please don't try to smudge science and religion together". You either did not read what I typed or did not understand. I specifically said that you were comparing apple's to oranges. Religion is a belief system and science is a process and a way of studying. I'm sorry if you don't seem to understand that similarities can exist between things but that is the way it is. "There is a reason scientists of faith leave their religion out of the lab" probably because they are two completely separate things, much like I've been saying over and over, while you claim I'm making them seem like the same thing. "That's good, were getting somewhere (even though it's a bit contradictory to what you said a few lines above" Oh, ok I see, you believe that anyone who disagrees with you is wrong by default. Because if not than I don't understand your purpose here. You have yet to make or debunk any claims that anyone on the theist side has made. You've simply been making exaggerated claims about the meaning behind what I've said. As for your statement about what I've said being contradictory I would very much like to know where and how I have contradicted myself. Simply saying something isn't the same as showing it. I'll admit that part of it is up to me to re read what I've stated, and I have. I have yet to see any contradictory claims on my part. "Now you just have to stop claiming that God is the cause of the fundamentals of the universe. Because I care about what makes sense." Oh please let me drop everything and make sure I only do what you 'care' about. Please tell me what makes sense. The THEORY of evolution? The big bang THEORY? Quantum THEORY? Because if you state any theory and claim that it is better than religion than your are illogical at best. If what you intend to go by is science and what you believe is unaccepted by science it is already illogical. Then you intend to go against the idea that something may be greater than science based on these already unscientific concepts. Please tell me how THAT makes sense. OR if you have no beliefs as it relates to the creation of the earth than you have no place in this post, because every historical account perfectly aligns with that of the Christian and Jewish holy books. The only debatable concepts are the creation of the earth and the divinity involved. "To be honest I wish we didn't have to have this discussion" Well then I'm grateful that we aren't all subject to your wishes. "both religion and science seek the fundamentals of the universe. One seeks through truth the other through faith" Once again you are wrong. Science seeks to understand the natural universe. Not the fundamentals of it. It does not seek it through "truth" because we cannot know the truth until it is discovered. It seeks it through careful observation and testing. Religion does not seek the fundamentals of the universe. As I've said before religion is simply the belief that something is greater than our understanding. Different religions seek different things. At best you could say that religion seeks to define the world outside our understanding.
reece says2018-04-07T04:07:06.8952361Z
@Spiffy-Gonzalez Alright I give up. You win.
Zombieguy835 says2018-04-10T11:50:37.9482873Z
Until there's proof of a god, then it's logical to say that there's no god
NileRivers says2018-04-10T18:13:48.2794775Z
Pascal's Wager...Look it up, it convinced me.
reece says2018-04-10T18:25:48.4867821Z
@NileRivers How about Reece's Wager? Do you really want to bet your life on not entering The Great Pasta Bowl? Would you really want stale beverages and stripper STDs?
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-04-10T22:02:49.4791821Z
@Zombieguy835 I suggest you look at my first comment.
ladiesman says2018-04-22T16:22:57.2647275Z
@HaveNoStringsOnMe God is a live option. Whether you are a theist or an atheist is going to make a practical difference to your life.
TKDB says2018-05-01T12:52:11.9513999Z
Why do some of (the anti religious individuals) seem to go out of their way to apparently hassle religion with science ? If you are a religious individual, do you go out of your way to hassle science?
Mister_Man says2018-05-01T21:34:44.6388610Z
@TKBD - ....Yeah....? You know the amount of religious people who shove their faith into everyone's face and blatantly ignore science? The reason atheists push science on everyone is because it's the most factually backed information, so if a religious person makes a ridiculous claim, we prove them wrong by citing scientific studies etc.
Sophisto says2018-05-02T09:06:51.7535990Z
Stalemates require originality to end in deadends.
TKDB says2018-05-02T13:16:33.9719020Z
Mister_Man: "You know the amount of religious people who shove their faith into everyone's face and blatantly ignore science? The reason atheists push science on everyone is because it's the most factually backed information, so if a religious person makes a ridiculous claim, we prove them wrong by citing scientific studies etc." Mister_Man: Can you share one factual article written by a non anti religious individual that goes into detail about a religious individual who shoved shoved religion into someones face? Mister_Man: Ignore science? How many venues of science are available for the public consumption? The Hubble Telescope, how many satellites have been launched into space to study the universe around us, the ISS, the privatization of space travel?
SHARINGISCARINGg says2018-05-08T15:46:16.9510166Z
You are not God, believe it or not.
Mister_Man says2018-05-09T21:53:12.1137653Z
TKDB - Street preachers. You know how many times they've yelled at people and said they're going to Hell etc? Or different church groups, the "God hates fags" guys, etc? There are multiple groups and people who shove religion in everyone's face. Also, the amount of religious people who deny science and claim the Earth is 11,000 years old, or that dinosaurs didn't exist, or that the universe was created in six days etc.
youngtimmy says2018-05-21T20:52:56.3272396Z
1. Cosmological argument; science tells us the universe had a beginning, the bible has told us far prior to science that the universe had a beginning. Since the universe had a cause, there must have been a cause that was timeless, spaceless, and immaterial since none of that came into existence until the big bang, God is timeless, spaceless, and immaterial. 2. Teleological argument; the bible says the heavens declare the glory of God, science tells us that the universe is so fined tuned that it seems that there is design to it. The factors that have been set from the big bang are so precise that if any had change by a fraction of a number then life would not exist, nor the universe. It's fine tuning seems to show that a mind was behind the creation of the universe. 3. Moral argument; we as humans all believe in absolute moral law, for example, all know that what Hitlers actions are absolutely wrong, this isn't based on societal constructs but based on how we as humans are made in God's image, meaning we know right from wrong. If morality is not absolute, then the holocausts, rape, murder, and so on are merely a matter of opinion and personal preference. If there is a moral law, there is a moral law giver.
Mister_Man says2018-05-23T02:55:51.5804182Z
@YoungTimmy - 1.) According to the second law of thermodynamics, energy can not be created or destroyed, and as therefore always existed. Quantum fluctuations are proven to take place in absolute energy states with no other matter or force in the area. Therefore, quantum fluctuations are a more probable cause for the universe than something that hasn't been proven to exist (God). 2.) You can't insert God because you can't understand how the universe came into being. It's all random chance that we got lucky enough to grow into what we are today after billions of years (not eleven thousand), but scientists have discovered hundreds of other planets throughout the universe in the Goldilocks Zone (habitable area for a planet in a solar system) which can potentially harbour life like ours, and millions that cannot. So nothing is fine-tuned, as we're simply a one in a billion planet in a universe with trillions of others. The odds are against us, but this doesn't prove that God exists. 3.) Hitler disagrees with you, therefore morality is not objective. Even if everyone agreed on the same thing, that simply means that they care for other humans and don't want bad things happening to our species, it has absolutely nothing to do with God.
KristoMF says2018-06-07T10:05:20.5582075Z
Hm, maybe I should have voted "yes, He exists as a concept in the mind of believers and religious texts".
ChickenNugett says2018-06-08T14:24:26.8385458Z
Me go me chicken NUGETT
Amine_Lagwag36 says2018-06-11T22:09:51.1842340Z
The universe is a great system,But the people don't know There is a lot of evidence about the existence of the Creator,and from these evidence is you,look to yourself,you are protected from the most powerful protection of God if you want to know more learn the stages of digestion And also the natural barriers of man against microbes,maybe you will cry if you think another thing This picture is so stupid God is not a human being and nothing like Him.
Mister_Man says2018-06-11T22:39:31.5137941Z
@Amine - Are you saying that because the human body was designed so "perfectly," it MUST be a creator? That's not only an appeal to ignorance fallacy, it's just wrong. If our bodies are created so perfectly, why are the tubes we use to eat with and breathe with right next to each other? Why do more than five thousand people die every year from choking? That doesn't sound perfect to me.
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-06-17T10:18:02.5381965Z
Mister_Man 1.) Your argument that quantum physics makes more sense than God in terms of the creation of the universe because God is not proven is illogic since quantum theory is still not proven. In fact I'd say God more ore logical since there is no evidence against God and some evidence against quantum theory. 2. Even in the goldilocks zones we still have not found a single planet even close to habitable for us. Also when you state that the odds are against us you seem to say that as if it was 1/1000 odds. Let me explain the type of odds we're facing here: if the big ban had one qantillianth of a different in the way it exploded than life would not exist anywhere. If the matter created by the assumed event of the big bang was one millionth a measurement of density more or less malleable than life would not exist. If the explosion was a hundredth of a mile an hour slower or faster than it was than the difference in the distance of planets would likely be enough that gravity alone would make us too feeble to survive or too heavy to grow into advanced species. It is literally (and I mean this as an absolute certainty) more likely that you would take a one billion piece Lego set, shake it in a bag, and the entire set is made absolutely perfect; than for the big bang to create advanced life. If I see the statue of David I don't assume that it was made by natural movements (which by the way is still FAR more likely than the big bang making life), I assume it was made by a sculptor. 3.) I'd say most religions acknowledge that humans can be fooled into believing falsehoods. Especially Christianity. How many people choose not to follow what is believed to be God's law? That does not change wether morality is objective or relative.
KristoMF says2018-06-17T13:19:13.2265965Z
@Spiffy_Gonzalez - How can there be evidence AGAINST God when it is such a vague concept we cannot test to disprove? Could you be the first to give some method as to how to do this? What is He made of? Exactly where does He inhabit? How do His powers work? As far as we know, to be conscious you need a physical nervous system, but God is "immaterial"—whatever that means—and everywhere, so we have no reason to believe He would be conscious. That is, if He really existed, which we don't even know to be POSSIBLE, let alone true. And if the universal constants would be slightly different we would not be here. Sure. So what? Maybe something else would be here. The fact that life may have not existed does not prove a God. If this God did exist, however, He would be a clumsy tinkerer, whose objective was to create life but instead created a universe apparently devoid of it, where its existence is so scarce.
Mister_Man says2018-06-19T04:10:51.2556222Z
@Spiffy - 1) MORE evidence for God than quantum mechanics...? Many Christians admit belief is all there is for God (which I can respect as an answer), but even without them, there is literally zero evidence supporting the existence of an infinitely powerful and knowledgeable being. Evidence for quantum fluctuations has been "indirect," yet is significantly more than "zero" - http://science.sciencemag.org/content/350/6259/420 -. The evidence against God is the very fact that there is no evidence FOR God to begin with. 2) Not a single planet even close to habitable? Here's seven - http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/7-earth-like-planets-discovered-1.3992156 - orbiting one star. There are hundreds, if not thousands of potentially life-harbouring planets in the universe. Just because it's unlikely doesn't make it impossible, especially while the universe has a diameter of about 92 billion light years to search through. Nobody is saying the Big Bang "created life." It was the starting point to the creation of all the pieces to later come together to form life in some areas. There's also a difference between natural growth, like trees and rivers and mountains and planets and stars - and man-made objects like statues, buildings, bridges, and so on. 3) I agree, Christianity took advantage of gullible people to trick into believing in something and worshipping in something (some for good reason, and some not) that has not been proven to exist. Unfortunate.
Mister_Man says2018-06-19T04:11:40.8636222Z
@Spiffy - This is getting a bit lengthy, can we switch to PM's or a debate on this? Debating in comment sections is tedious, lol.
Busyashell says2018-06-23T20:51:28.6759693Z
Which god do you people think is real? Is it the one you were told about by your parents? Why that one? Why not one of the thousands of other "gods"? Why do you believe in the god that you were told to believe in by your peer's? Why if there is only one god is their not just one god?
Spiffy-Gonzalez says2018-06-30T23:45:00.5313565Z
@busyashell so you're ignoring all the people who believe in a separate God than the one they were raised to believe or is popular in their culture?
KristoMF says2018-07-01T20:58:09.5142191Z
@Spiffy-Gonzalez - That's a valid point. People can change religion, or worship a different God than their parents, but still, that is irrelevant to the truth of their beliefs.
asta says2018-07-01T22:05:07.8558191Z
I don't believe in the bible because it contradicts its self.
ultranoobt40 says2018-10-22T13:43:36.6635867Z
Naw dawg
obada_zakaria says2019-03-05T16:11:50.8276101Z
He exists, And his name is Allah.
Bubbles2311 says2019-07-04T05:44:02.0174647Z
A God who would sentence you to an eternity in a fire for not believing in him, Yet refuses to provide unambiguous, Tangible evidence of his existence is not a God. It's a Myth.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.