Can anyone prove the existence of God?

[Emil]

I would like to analyze the likelihood of God,irrespective of religion.
That's why I ask you,which are your arguments to prove God's existence.
Those who believe in evolution, are welcomed with their arguments.
The two theories are mutually exclusive?
They are the only theory that explains formation of the Universe and Humanity?

 

[Cris]

The merit of any answer would depend on how God is defined. If it is the Deist style god then such a god and evolution would not be mutually exclusive. Even Catholicism has formerly accepted that evolution is valid. Perhaps your concept of God is one that is responsible for starting life. SO we could assume the Judeo/Christian/Islamic god, although the 30+ thousands of sects and cults that comprise those religions still have great difficulty agreeing on what God is or does.

Even though God is an imaginative fantasy it is almost universally accepted by the main religions that it does not exist in our material world. However, we have no understanding of what something non-material might be. So right from the outset we have little idea on where to start to prove God exists.

The Klingons from Star Trek fame are also born from imaginative fantasy, but at least they are of a material nature and hence it seems far more likely that we could prove they exist long before we could prove God exists.

 

[clusteringflux]

God himself can prove his existence to you. Just ask with an open heart and be patient.

The best physical evidence of god IMO is that as science gives us the ability to explore the most miniscule properties of life we find that chance is all but lost as an explanation of the processes that would've been required for "life" to begin. Even evolutionists have come to simply say "something happened". Of course it did, but what?

The best anecdotal evidence comes from near death experiences and young children like this one born to atheist parents with an undeniable gift (yes, gift) of art and insight.
http://www.artakiane.com/home.html

 

[Emil]

I do not want to talk instead of believers, but I think life is easier for them because of their faith.
For me it's vice versa.
I can admit that "someone" is responsible for all injustice in the world.
It's easier to believe that this is the nature, likelihood, and it happens.
If it were "somebody" who do these things consciously, I would be very mad at him.
And I could not admire him.

 

[Emil]

..... have great difficulty agreeing on what God is or does.

...... we have no understanding of what something non-material might be. So right from the outset we have little idea on where to start to prove God exists.

Yes, this is also my misunderstanding.For that I have asked those who believe.But I asked and those who believe in evolutionism.

 

[Doreen]

I would like to analyze the likelihood of God,irrespective of religion.
That's why I ask you,which are your arguments to prove God's existence.
Those who believe in evolution, are welcomed with their arguments.
The two theories are mutually exclusive?
They are the only theory that explains formation of the Universe and Humanity?

In philosophy there is something called the problem of other minds. How can we be sure other people are experiencers like we are. We seem to have no direct access to their consciousness. There really is no way to 'prove' that inside all those other people is someone experiencing things like we experience things. Perhaps they are more like machines. The odds seem against such a scenario, but with the verb 'prove' can we be sure.

How much more so for 'God'.

It seems to me the various religions offer practices through which one can get closer to God. Sure many religious people think they have proofs of God, but frankly, even if they did somehow, would it really be convincing? Don't we tend to believe things via experience best.

As far as the theory of evolution and religion: 1) no they are not mutually exclusive 2) the theory of evolution does not explain the formation of the universe. There are theories in physics that go back at least very early in the formation of the universe and there are hypotheses about even the beginning. But evolution has to do with living forms on earth.

 

[Lori_7]

God can prove his existence. He did for me.

 

[lightgigantic]

I would like to analyze the likelihood of God,irrespective of religion.
That's why I ask you,which are your arguments to prove God's existence.
Those who believe in evolution, are welcomed with their arguments.
The two theories are mutually exclusive?
They are the only theory that explains formation of the Universe and Humanity?

its not clear how evolution renders god obsolete (assuming one isn't including abiogenesis in the evolution package) or how it pertains to the formation of the universe (or more specifically, to the host of explanations that surround our current understandings on perhaps how the universe was formulated - or even if it has always retained some sort of constant element)

Its also not clear whether you are insisting that god be proven through these assumptions about evolution, the formation(s) of the universe, etc (which would be kind of spurious since there is a lot that surrounds these ideas that are firmly relegated to the category of theory or supposition)

As for proving god to one's self, that is much the process we would apply to proving the existence/nature of any superior person. For instance suppose we were asking "how do we prove the (direct) existence of the president?" (so via mediums like newspaper articles, second hand accounts, video and photos, etc are not acceptable).
What do you suppose would be the first issue of directly proving "the president" to one's self?

 

[Medicine*Woman]

God can prove his existence. He did for me.

*************
M*W: Then you are definitely the exception. How can you be sure it was the same god other 'christians' believe? The reason I ask is that when I was a 'christian,' it always seemed to me that other 'christians' in my circle were experiencing god when I was not... or not in they way they experienced god. How do you know other than "god said...?"

 

[NMSquirrel]

*************
M*W: Then you are definitely the exception. How can you be sure it was the same god other 'christians' believe? The reason I ask is that when I was a 'christian,' it always seemed to me that other 'christians' in my circle were experiencing god when I was not... or not in they way they experienced god. How do you know other than "god said...?"

ah..read my tag MW..

you were raised with god in a box..of course you will have a tendancy to keep him there..

 

[Emil]

God can prove his existence. He did for me.

Lori, I think what you say is good faith.
But that is not enough for me to believe in God,because you would be wrong.
There were many things more simple, which I believed.But proved wrong, and had to change my mind.
It is a great responsibility, to ask people to believe you, only on your personal experiences.

 

[Doreen]

Lori, I think what you say is good faith.
But that is not enough for me to believe in God,because you would be wrong.
There were many things more simple, which I believed.But proved wrong, and had to change my mind.
It is a great responsibility, to ask people to believe you, only on your personal experiences.

I don't know, but did she really ask you to believe in God based on her experiences. I thought she said something else.

 

[Doreen]

God can prove his existence. He did for me.

See the post above. Were you actually suggesting Emil should believe in God because of your experiences? I said I don't think so, but perhaps you were.

 

[Emil]

its not clear how evolution renders god obsolete (assuming one isn't including abiogenesis in the evolution package) or how it pertains to the formation of the universe (or more specifically, to the host of explanations that surround our current understandings on perhaps how the universe was formulated - or even if it has always retained some sort of constant element)

Its also not clear whether you are insisting that god be proven through these assumptions about evolution, the formation(s) of the universe, etc (which would be kind of spurious since there is a lot that surrounds these ideas that are firmly relegated to the category of theory or supposition)

As for proving god to one's self, that is much the process we would apply to proving the existence/nature of any superior person. For instance suppose we were asking "how do we prove the (direct) existence of the president?" (so via mediums like newspaper articles, second hand accounts, video and photos, etc are not acceptable).
What do you suppose would be the first issue of directly proving "the president" to one's self?

It is hard to understand you.
If I understood well you can not prove God's existence.
And your conclusion is? Is God, not God or I do not know?
I have not found the right word to include both the formation of the universe, earth and life on earth.
Therefore I used "evolution" which, I admit, is incorrect.

 

[Emil]

I don't know, but did she really ask you to believe in God based on her experiences. I thought she said something else.

Adlliteram, you're right.
But the main question was "can prove God's existence"
And her answer was: can not prove but God exists because God spoke to me.

 

[Emil]

Were you actually suggesting Emil should believe in God because of your experiences?

Can you show me how you concluded that?

 

[baftan]

If you prove an illusion, it is not an illusion any more, is it? Equally if one does not see something as an illusion, it is necessarily "the reality" for this person.

If God's existence was something provable, everybody would accept it. If someone says that "God exists because of my own belief/experience/feeling/etc. that can not be proven to others via common/acceptable methods", you must take his/her word: Asking a proof will not make any sense, because there is no way to prove it.

 

[Doreen]

Adlliteram, you're right.
But the main question was "can prove God's existence"
And her answer was: can not prove but God exists because God spoke to me.

Well, her answer was

God can prove his existence. He did for me.

Here she asserts that God can prove his existence. If by saying this she assumes you should be convinced, she is claiming that she can prove God's existence. Something she did not say.

 

[Doreen]

Can you show me how you concluded that?

I'm not sure what you mean here. I was asking her to weigh in. Perhaps you were right, that that was what she meant, so I asked her just in case.

Perhaps she did mean God convinced me and now that I am telling you that you should be convinced also (even though it is only me convincing you and not God).

I doubt it, but I wanted to make sure.

 

[Emil]

I'm sorry but I do not think it's true"God can prove his existence. He did for me."