The existence of God can never be proven

[solar101892]

The existence of God will never be proven because God was a man made creation much like the bible. The definition of God is creator and ruler of the universe or a supreme being. We cant prove that god exists because the existence of god is an image that is created by man's perception which is different for everyone. Science wont prove God is real because it's a perception that we create.

When it comes to science and spirituality I'm not either I have a healthy balance I'm a spiritual scientist!One cant prove the other!

[Mr Walker]

. Post Mr Walker, on 15 December .13

What I am asking, is for you to provide evidence in a scientific sense .that would have to be repeatable, observable and conducted with a program of triple blind examiners to remove potential biasing of the results. have you made such tests and had verifiable results. if so you have evidence of gods existence, if not all you have is faith

fullywired

Don't be ridiculous You do not need to do that level of testing to know your dog is real

However

Yes the observations are repeatable and have the same outcome each time

I don't need triple blind examiners. It would be better to have three who could see.

I am not sure want you mean by "tests" But if you mean testing the solidity/physicality of god, then yes. There are many ways to make such tests as one can for any real solid object. And if you mean there are other unbiased observers of those tests then again yes. But I am not 'testing" gods existence, any more than I am testing my dogs existence when I pat my dog If I can feel him and three other people observe him and his is reactions then this scientifically proves his solidity and existence. I think you are confusing the abilty to scientifically prove the existence of god with the ability to transfer the evidences to a second or third hand party. So let us suppose I take a photo of god and include signed declarations from a number of observers. This would not prove gods existence to you because you are looking for unobtainable standards of proof. I could not prove the existence of my dog to you if you had such a persistent and wilful disbelief in his existence, because there are no adequate ways to transfer proofs of his existence to you if you are sufficiently sceptical.. Not even a photo or video, a vets certificate, and a registration paper, could prove that the dog in the photo was mine unless you KNEW he was.

[Mr Walker]

. Post Mr Walker, on 15 December .13

What I am asking, is for you to provide evidence in a scientific sense .that would have to be repeatable, observable and conducted with a program of triple blind examiners to remove potential biasing of the results. have you made such tests and had verifiable results. if so you have evidence of gods existence, if not all you have is faith

fullywired

Ps. How would you know the entity tested and proven in these experiments, even if they occurred , was god?

[Leonardo]

Don't be ridiculous You do not need to do that level of testing to know your dog is real

However

Yes the observations are repeatable and have the same outcome each time

I don't need triple blind examiners. It would be better to have three who could see.

I am not sure want you mean by "tests" But if you mean testing the solidity/physicality of god, then yes. There are many ways to make such tests as one can for any real solid object. And if you mean there are other unbiased observers of those tests then again yes. But I am not 'testing" gods existence, any more than I am testing my dogs existence when I pat my dog If I can feel him and three other people observe him and his is reactions then this scientifically proves his solidity and existence. I think you are confusing the abilty to scientifically prove the existence of god with the ability to transfer the evidences to a second or third hand party. So let us suppose I take a photo of god and include signed declarations from a number of observers. This would not prove gods existence to you because you are looking for unobtainable standards of proof. I could not prove the existence of my dog to you if you had such a persistent and wilful disbelief in his existence, because there are no adequate ways to transfer proofs of his existence to you if you are sufficiently sceptical.. Not even a photo or video, a vets certificate, and a registration paper, could prove that the dog in the photo was mine unless you KNEW he was.

Ps. How would you know the entity tested and proven in these experiments, even if they occurred , was god?

And, in posting this you have demonstrated why your belief in what knowledge is, is false.

The existence of dogs can be demonstrated. Thus dogs can be known to exist - and the concept "dog" known. The existence of god cannot, however, be demonstrated. Thus god cannot be known to exist, and the concept "god" cannot be known.

You claim knowledge of god, but without being able to demonstrate that the 'knowledge' you claim is falsified. You can believe, but you cannot know.

[fullywired]

Mr Walker, on 18 December 2013

No one is asking you to prove your dog exists.only you resort to the ridiculous when you insist on bringing dogs, platypus and even your wife in to the discussion .You have said it is impossible to demonstrate the existence of God ,you do need triple blind examiners to fufil the criteria needed for proof of God .I have not set the standards of proof needed ,science has done that but because you can't meet the standards, you are trying to discredit them.You cannot accept the fact that you don't have proof only faith and whilst that may move mountains it doesn't prove the existence of God

fullywired

[Lilly]

Actually, no one is required to 'prove the existence of God'. Belief in God is about faith, not proof.

[ShadowSot]

Actually, no one is required to 'prove the existence of God'. Belief in God is about faith, not proof.

Well once we get out of the mytholgical times anyway.

[fullywired]

Posted Today, 06:31 PM by Lily

Actually, no one is required to 'prove the existence of God'. Belief in God is about faith, not proof.

==========================================================================

We know that but try telling MW that

fullywired

[andes_wolf]

IF YOU ANALYZE THINGS attempts to ''quantify''=ILLUSION ''DEDUCT''=ILLUSION ''MATERIALLY''=ILLUSION ''rationally''=ILLUSION YOU ARE IN ILLUSION ON THE FIELDS OF THIS WORLD AND NEVER CAN GET OUT OF THAT

Edited December 19, 2013 by andes_wolf

[Frank Merton]

My basic reaction is that if there is no proof God (as generally understood -- something way beyond a superman) then there is no God. Such a being if He existed would be inescapable and undeniable. Much of the Christian story is a way of trying, not very well, of avoiding this simple fact.

[Mr Walker]

And, in posting this you have demonstrated why your belief in what knowledge is, is false.

The existence of dogs can be demonstrated. Thus dogs can be known to exist - and the concept "dog" known. The existence of god cannot, however, be demonstrated. Thus god cannot be known to exist, and the concept "god" cannot be known.

You claim knowledge of god, but without being able to demonstrate that the 'knowledge' you claim is falsified. You can believe, but you cannot know.

The existence of god can be, and is, demonstrated exactly as the existence of a dog is demonstrated to me. It is the ONLY way I can know anything for certain, via physical demonstrations. The god concept is at least as well known as the dog concept, perhaps more widely so.

Again it is only the lack of personal experience in this area which prevents you from understanding or accepting this. If you had never in your life seen a dog, why would you accept another person's word that such an animal existed.?

[Mr Walker]

Posted Today, 06:31 PM by Lily

Actually, no one is required to 'prove the existence of God'. Belief in God is about faith, not proof.

==========================================================================

We know that but try telling MW that

fullywired

No I accept this absolutely My wife lives with god purely on an absolute, faith driven basis that he exists. Her whole life revolves around this prime belief. But knowing something is entirely different to believing something. I can know god exists but not follow his instructions. A pure faith driven belief compels the believer to follow his word.

[Mr Walker]

Mr Walker, on 18 December 2013

No one is asking you to prove your dog exists.only you resort to the ridiculous when you insist on bringing dogs, platypus and even your wife in to the discussion .You have said it is impossible to demonstrate the existence of God ,you do need triple blind examiners to fufil the criteria needed for proof of God .I have not set the standards of proof needed ,science has done that but because you can't meet the standards, you are trying to discredit them.You cannot accept the fact that you don't have proof only faith and whilst that may move mountains it doesn't prove the existence of God

fullywired

No Again you confuse two things. While it is impossible for me to demonstrate to you the existence of god, this is only the same as the impossibility of me demonstrating to you the existence of my dog.

However god can demonstrate his existence to an individual just as any real entity, such as a dog, can demonstrate its existence to an individual. That is why dogs and particularly platypi are very relevant to this debate They are real, but as individuals we only KNOW they are real when we encounter them. ALL else is a faith based acceptance of their reality. Early european scientists discredited/refused to believe in the existence of platypi when they were reported because such animals were outside of all known science at the time.

[Leonardo]

The existence of god can be, and is, demonstrated exactly as the existence of a dog is demonstrated to me. It is the ONLY way I can know anything for certain, via physical demonstrations. The god concept is at least as well known as the dog concept, perhaps more widely so.

Again it is only the lack of personal experience in this area which prevents you from understanding or accepting this. If you had never in your life seen a dog, why would you accept another person's word that such an animal existed.?

I wouldn't, and you completely misunderstood my statement when I said "dogs can be demonstrated, therefore the concept 'dog' can be known."

Knowing a concept is very different to knowing there is a concept, MW.

[Mr Walker]

I wouldn't, and you completely misunderstood my statement when I said "dogs can be demonstrated, therefore the concept 'dog' can be known."

Knowing a concept is very different to knowing there is a concept, MW.

A concept is a linguistic or visual representation of EITHER an object or an idea. God can be both and thus we can have concepts of constructed/ visualised gods and constructs of physical ones. This is exactly the same for any animal like a dog. There are concepts for real dogs, and for imaginary ones, like scoobie doo. So I can see a real dog and better understand a conceptual realisation of what a dog i.s. Likewise I can see a real god and better understand what a real god is. Or, in both cases I may never encounter an example of the real entity, and have to rely on entirely self constructed concepts of them.

[Mr Walker]

I wouldn't, and you completely misunderstood my statement when I said "dogs can be demonstrated, therefore the concept 'dog' can be known."

Knowing a concept is very different to knowing there is a concept, MW.

So you have personally seen a platypus? If not ,you do not believe they exist?

[Leonardo]

So you have personally seen a platypus? If not ,you do not believe they exist?

Yes.

I've personally seen elephants, hippopotami, tigers, zebras, giraffes, gnus, crocodiles (and alligators), pythons, sharks, dophins, and other animals more numerous to mention.

I have never once seen a god.

Perhaps it is something to do with natural vs supernatural. And having no baseline of experience of observation of anything supernatural, I don't see how anyone can claim to know anything they have seen is supernatural.

Natural things exist in abundance, and we do not require belief or faith to acknowledge their existence. Such is not the case with supernatural things, none of which have ever been recorded as existing in fact.

Your belief in the existence of god, even as a physical being, is no doubt pleasing to you and satisfies some need you have in your life, but please do not trumpet the existence of what you believe as a fact and as knowledge unless you can back up those claims with some form of evidence.

Edited December 20, 2013 by Leonardo

[Frank Merton]

This has all deteriorated into Mr. Walker's word games. Why bother with them? He just repeats them over and over and ignores responses.

[Leonardo]

Likewise I can see a real god and better understand what a real god is.

I'd like to pick up on this, MW.

To "better understand what a real god is", you must have had some pre-conceived notion of what god is before your "perceiving of this real god".

So, where did you pick up this notion of what god is, and how do you know that was accurate?

How do you know some entity (even yourself), knowing you have a pre-conceived notion of what god is, is not deceiving you based on that?

Edited December 20, 2013 by Leonardo

[laver]

Without wishing to push another thread on this UM site there is an important point in it on the existence of 'God'.

Long distance landscape geometry discussed on 'Crop Circles just one sign of Revelation' thread proves the existence of some

advanced intelligence at work in our world at least 4500 years ago. This geometry in its bearing lines from a location in southern Britain

to the Holy Land demonstrates alignments of ancient sites which have either been originally position to align or do so by pure

coincidence.

The geometry proves it is not coincidence by the fact that at crucial locations the designer(s) used repetitive numbers in the Latitudes,

and possibly the Longitudes, at these key locations. This could not reasonably be a matter of pure chance. Details on the other thread for

anyone interested.

Was this 'advanced ancient intelligence' a human culture ? it appears not because we know of no terrestrial civilisation that could have done it

at that time.

This is valid evidence of an 'outside intelligence' at work and is this a 'divine' intelligence ?

The geometry has come to light because many of the clues are contained in the Book of Revelations, the last book of the bible, which is said

to be from 'God' and Jesus Christ and raises the question - if, now it has been discovered, this is an 'End of Time' period ?

[fullywired]

No Again you confuse two things. While it is impossible for me to demonstrate to you the existence of god, this is only the same as the impossibility of me demonstrating to you the existence of my dog.

However god can demonstrate his existence to an individual just as any real entity, such as a dog, can demonstrate its existence to an individual. That is why dogs and particularly platypi are very relevant to this debate They are real, but as individuals we only KNOW they are real when we encounter them. ALL else is a faith based acceptance of their reality. Early european scientists discredited/refused to believe in the existence of platypi when they were reported because such animals were outside of all known science at the time.

\

There is only one confused person in this exchange

fullywired

[J. K.]

If a supernatural God exists, is it feasible to impose natural limits on Him?

[Mr Walker]

Yes.

I've personally seen elephants, hippopotami, tigers, zebras, giraffes, gnus, crocodiles (and alligators), pythons, sharks, dophins, and other animals more numerous to mention.

I have never once seen a god.

Perhaps it is something to do with natural vs supernatural. And having no baseline of experience of observation of anything supernatural, I don't see how anyone can claim to know anything they have seen is supernatural.

Natural things exist in abundance, and we do not require belief or faith to acknowledge their existence. Such is not the case with supernatural things, none of which have ever been recorded as existing in fact.

Your belief in the existence of god, even as a physical being, is no doubt pleasing to you and satisfies some need you have in your life, but please do not trumpet the existence of what you believe as a fact and as knowledge unless you can back up those claims with some form of evidence.

It has nothing to do with pleasure, need or desire, or what I wanted or want from life. God simply IS. It came into my life unwanted, unasked for, and uninvited) Like all those animals you mention, It is a natural, evolved independent entity like them and like us (It is sapient self willed and technologically advanced) and falls into the same realm. It is we who call it supernatural because we do not comprehend it.

You say you could believe in a platypus without ever seeing one, because it is a part of the same natural order. Perhaps you need to conceptualise god in the same way. Then, while you do not have to believe in gods existence, my knowledge of god might make more sense to you.

[Mr Walker]

\

There is only one confused person in this exchange

fullywired

lol I AGREE

[Ogbin]

Hallowed Be Thy Name

I'm waiting in my cold cell, when the bell begins to chime.

Reflecting on my past life and it doesn't have much time.

'Cause at 5 o'clock they take me to the Gallows Pole,

The sands of time for me are running low.

When the priest comes to read me the last rites,

I take a look through the bars at the last sights,

Of a world that has gone very wrong for me.

Can it be that there's some sort of error?

Hard to stop the surmounting terror.

Is it really the end, not some crazy dream?

Somebody please tell me that I'm dreaming,

It's not easy to stop from screaming,

But words escape me when I try to speak.

Tears fall but why am I crying?

After all I'm not afraid of dying.

Don't I believe that there never is an end?

As the guards march me out to the courtyard,

Somebody cries from a cell "God be with you".

If there's a God then why has he let me go?

As I walk all my life drifts before me

And though the end is near I'm not sorry

Catch my soul 'cause it's willing to fly away

Mark my words please believe that my soul live on

Please don't worry now that I have gone

I've gone beyond to see the truth

When you know that your time is close at hand,

Maybe then you will begin to understand

Life down here is just a strange illusion.

Iron Maiden.

Edited December 23, 2013 by Ogbin