Evidence for God from Science

I used to be searching because of the relationship I'm currently in (a catholic girl), she knows I'm an atheist, she's cool with it but in the beginning she asked me if I could give the whole God thing another try, see if I could “renew my faith”. It didn't work, but it was enough for her to see me try. It could become a problem is we decide to get married since she would like a Church wedding and I wouldn't like to do it if I don't believe. But we'll cross that bridge when we get there.

The thing is a see a lot or reasons why not but I've also found, reading different books and trough the net, that theists have some sort of answer for everything. But deep down I just don't feel those answers to be true, like I think every theist do. From things like the origin of life, good and evil, to the reason we are here, to the fact that there's something called soul and the whole reason for this topic (morals), I just don't feel, with every cell in my body, that the theist answers are right. And I don't see anything short of an actual miracle, like God slapping me in the face and saying "That's it!! It's this whats gonna take?" to make me believe in something bigger.

Manfer84 wrote: And I don't see anything short of an actual miracle, like God slapping me in the face and saying "That's it!! It's this whats gonna take?" to make me believe in something bigger.

That could be what it takes. A lot of people have personal experiences with God, or something happens to them that they know is from God, and then they believe. It's true that we don't know everything and that many things are mysteries, so many people need "personal proof."

There are several of us here who can speak after having the "slap in the face" as you call it. However, people who have had 'experiences,' have also continued to reject God.

When I had my experience with God, I wasn't demanding an experience from him.
Imagine, if I said something like this. (I know this analogy is a little absurd, but here me out.) "Unless Barack Obama appears before me and smacks me in the face, I'm not going to vote for him." Are my terms realistic? If I hope to meet the President of the United States, whose terms am I going to have to come on?

From things like the origin of life, good and evil, to the reason we are here, to the fact that there's something called soul and the whole reason for this topic (morals), I just don't feel, with every cell in my body, that the theist answers are right.

Yes, this thread is about morals. By what moral code do you live? The simplest way to explain morality as evidence for God is that every prescription has a prescriber. If I went to the pharmacy with a prescription and said, 'fill this.' And they asked, "who wrote it?" And I said, "no one." Do you think my prescription is getting filled? Nope. God has prescribed a moral ethic. Anytime we look at the good and evil in this world and define them as such, we are in fact confirming an objective standard. We are measuring. And to measure, there must be a prescribed standard. Otherwise Hitler's actions were no more or less right or wrong than Mother Theresa's.

Here we are having a conversation. Our minds our able to process these words that we have asigned value to, and we are able to consciously process this information. And if it were not for the billions of volumes of information within our cells working together this could not be possible. If we didn't live on this 3rd rock from the sun, and weren't tilted at the proper axis, or if gravity in the universe were not exactly what it was, or if we were slightly closer to or farther from the sun, or if we didn't have a moon, or if we didn't have a giant planet like Jupiter to vacumn up space debri, or if our atmosphere were slightly different, or if our solar system were not perfectly placed where it is in our galaxy, or if this and millions of other variables were not finely tuned, we wouldn't be having this conversation. The more we learn, the more we see what a statistical improbability it is that we are even here, and how many things have the appearance of being orchestrated to make it so. And yet, before we knew any of this, the scripture stated, "The heavens declare the glory of God." psalm 119:1. And it is your choice to ascribe credit for this to accident, or purpose. To say accident means you have to flush logic and reason. That origins have no originator. That time, the beginning, has no beginner. That information arrose with no programmer. And that the finely tuned order to make our converstation possible had no orchestrator.
It is like a cosmological slap in the face. Brother, it is a miracle that we are here.

Well this is gonna make me sound like a really bad person probably, but I don´t think there is a moral objective standard, I think it depends on the society you are currently living, and the requirements to live in said society. An action by itself is not good or bad, in order to determine its “goodness” or “badness” you have to see the context.
This is the part that's gonna make me sound like a monster:
So yes if I wanna be really cold about it I think that the actions of Hitler were no more or less right or wrong than Mother Theresa's (just as a dead body and a living body have the same number of atoms, thanks Alan Moore hahaha). But because of the society I´m part of I find Hitler's actions abhorrent and Mother Theresa's quite good.

Everything you said about this moment being the most improbable unless someone made it so, sound all right, but when I read it I don´t believe it.
I don´t know where everything came from, or if it even has a purpose, or if one day where gonna find out all the answers to all our questions, I just know I don´t believe in the answers your putting forth, for me they don´t seem logical, just as for you my point of view doesn't seem logical.
The biggest of improbabilities is still something possible.

Then again, just for the sake of asking something else, let's say there was a creator, what makes you think he'd care to stick around? Or it's a sentient being that loves you? Or he didn't create a thousand moments just like? Or that he died as a consequence of creating us because it took all his power to do it? Or that he cares about us?, because if his all-powerful it must have taken him the same amount of energy to create this moment as to create a grain of sand. Or any other crazy thing I could come up with about a creator.

Why does there have to be a creator, just because we don´t know what created everything right know doesn't mean a supernatural being did it.
It´s like this native tribe in the Amazon I read about (It´s an actual tribe in jungles of Peru, my country), every time the tie of the river comes up the elders of the village go to back of it and start killing pigs. Because according to them it´s the only way to stop the ties. Now many scientist have explain to them that the ties have nothing to do with the pigs, that it`s the rains and the gravity and the moon, but the elders don´t see this powers at work so they still don´t believe and continue, to this date, killing pigs every time the tie rises. For me that example kind of summarize belief in God.

WOW this is my biggest post ever!!

Manfer84 wrote:Well this is gonna make me sound like a really bad person probably, but I don´t think there is a moral objective standard, I think it depends on the society you are currently living, and the requirements to live in said society. An action by itself is not good or bad, in order to determine its “goodness” or “badness” you have to see the context.
This is the part that's gonna make me sound like a monster:
So yes if I wanna be really cold about it I think that the actions of Hitler were no more or less right or wrong than Mother Theresa's (just as a dead body and a living body have the same number of atoms, thanks Alan Moore hahaha). But because of the society I´m part of I find Hitler's actions abhorrent and Mother Theresa's quite good.

Everything you said about this moment being the most improbable unless someone made it so, sound all right, but when I read it I don´t believe it.
I don´t know where everything came from, or if it even has a purpose, or if one day where gonna find out all the answers to all our questions, I just know I don´t believe in the answers your putting forth, for me they don´t seem logical, just as for you my point of view doesn't seem logical.
The biggest of improbabilities is still something possible.

Then again, just for the sake of asking something else, let's say there was a creator, what makes you think he'd care to stick around? Or it's a sentient being that loves you? Or he didn't create a thousand moments just like? Or that he died as a consequence of creating us because it took all his power to do it? Or that he cares about us?, because if his all-powerful it must have taken him the same amount of energy to create this moment as to create a grain of sand. Or any other crazy thing I could come up with about a creator.

Why does there have to be a creator, just because we don´t know what created everything right know doesn't mean a supernatural being did it.
It´s like this native tribe in the Amazon I read about (It´s an actual tribe in jungles of Peru, my country), every time the tie of the river comes up the elders of the village go to back of it and start killing pigs. Because according to them it´s the only way to stop the ties. Now many scientist have explain to them that the ties have nothing to do with the pigs, that it`s the rains and the gravity and the moon, but the elders don´t see this powers at work so they still don´t believe and continue, to this date, killing pigs every time the tie rises. For me that example kind of summarize belief in God.

WOW this is my biggest post ever!!

Please read my post to Pros around page 11 and before - these may help you see that there is objective moral law...
-
-
-

B.W.
I read your post and it seems you say that because absolutes exist a morel absolute must exist, which I don´t seem to follow.

Manfer84 wrote:B.W.
I read your post and it seems you say that because absolutes exist a morel absolute must exist, which I don´t seem to follow.

You say a creator is not logical so please present us with your logical case for the existence of anything.

But because of the society I´m part of I find Hitler's actions abhorrent and Mother Theresa's quite good.

We are not talking about actions by themselves. We are talking about self-aware human beings consciously taking action.
I often wonder how people with this view would react if Hitler's death sqauds came knocking on their door.
As BW points out, this thread is already full with the arguments supporting objective morality.

Everything you said about this moment being the most improbable unless someone made it so, sound all right, but when I read it I don´t believe it.
I don´t know where everything came from, or if it even has a purpose, or if one day where gonna find out all the answers to all our questions, I just know I don´t believe in the answers your putting forth, for me they don´t seem logical, just as for you my point of view doesn't seem logical.
The biggest of improbabilities is still something possible.

So, you disagree with the scientific reality of these things???

The biggest of improbabilities is still something possible.

Actually no. Statistics can give probabilities, but most statistical analyst will conceed that there is a point that even though you can calculate these incredible odds, that it really is impossible. For example, what are the odds that I can dump open a box of Alphabits cereal, and have it spell out. "Manfer, how are you doing today?" You could calculate odds, but the statistical analyst will confess that this is an impossibility. If you apply this to DNA, you see what I'm talking about. And you see why folks like Dawkins say such preposterous things as, “Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” {Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1996, p. 1} And then write a whole book trying to convince you otherwise.

Then again, just for the sake of asking something else, let's say there was a creator, what makes you think he'd care to stick around? Or it's a sentient being that loves you? Or he didn't create a thousand moments just like? Or that he died as a consequence of creating us because it took all his power to do it? Or that he cares about us?, because if his all-powerful it must have taken him the same amount of energy to create this moment as to create a grain of sand. Or any other crazy thing I could come up with about a creator.

Those are all questions that have good answers. But explaining them now, would be the equivalent of explaining advanced Algebra to someone who has yet to grasp that 2+2=4. I don't mean that in a condescending way. Only that it is putting the cart before the horse.

Why does there have to be a creator, just because we don´t know what created everything right know doesn't mean a supernatural being did it.
It´s like this native tribe in the Amazon I read about (It´s an actual tribe in jungles of Peru, my country), every time the tie of the river comes up the elders of the village go to back of it and start killing pigs. Because according to them it´s the only way to stop the ties. Now many scientist have explain to them that the ties have nothing to do with the pigs, that it`s the rains and the gravity and the moon, but the elders don´t see this powers at work so they still don´t believe and continue, to this date, killing pigs every time the tie rises. For me that example kind of summarize belief in God.

This is actually the opposite of what we are talking about. You are talking about people who ignore logic and reason to follow superstition. We are saying, here are some solid logical reasons not to dismiss a creator.
Why a creator? What if I look at a building, and say, "why does this building have to have a builder?" The building is evidence that there was a builder. I don't have to meet the builder, or even see the building being built. The building in itself is evidence that a builder exists. A creation is evidence of a creator. EVERYTHING as you call it, begs the questions, "what, who, when, how?"
When, as skeptic Dawkins says, that design is apparent, why would we question, "why must the building have a builder?"

Byblos wrote:

Manfer84 wrote:B.W.
I read your post and it seems you say that because absolutes exist a morel absolute must exist, which I don´t seem to follow.

You say a creator is not logical so please present us with your logical case for the existence of anything.

I don´t have a better case than the ones that have already been used by a lot of people in this forun that you still didn´t believe, acording to what i´ve been reading.
Let me ask you this, it could sound like a personal question but it's really simple, when you look deep into yourself and ask if there is a God, your creator, is your answer Yes right?, your honest asnwer. In my case the honest asnwer is No, i just don't feel this creator to be real, that dosen´t mean I couldn´t be wrong and at the end the whole thing would blow uo in my face, it just means that for me he´s just not there, there´s nothign there.

Jlay:
If a death squad came to my house I would probably say F……. and get shot in the face, that´s it, what else would you think someone would say?

I'm not sure I understand this question: “So, you disagree with the scientific reality of these things???”

If I'm not mistaken (statistics and probabilities where my worst subjects during university) but the probability of something is always tied to the size of the sample, so even the smallest of the smallest probabilities given a big enough sample could be possible. Again I´m no statistics and probabilities expert so what I just wrote could be totally wrong.

You are right, the whole pig example is a little of, but it's the closest thing I could think of to show you my point. Which is: just because right now you don´t know how something came to be, doesn't mean some magical being did it.
Sure God seems like a cool answer for everything, but for me it doesn't feel like the right answer.

Again, sorry for getting away from the subject, but this next question is fun for me to ask because I tend to like the answers a lot (this is just to satisfy my curiosity, I think I´ve heard all the possible answers, but one more could hurt):
Why does God changes from the OT to the NT, is he bipolar? Is it possible for him to go back to the way he was? Should we expect him to do so?
Again this is just for my curiosity, don´t take it the wrong way

Manfer84 wrote:

Byblos wrote:

Manfer84 wrote:B.W.
I read your post and it seems you say that because absolutes exist a morel absolute must exist, which I don´t seem to follow.

You say a creator is not logical so please present us with your logical case for the existence of anything.

I don´t have a better case than the ones that have already been used by a lot of people in this forun that you still didn´t believe, acording to what i´ve been reading.

Which ones? I have yet to see a convincing logical case for the non-existence of a creator or for the existence of anything without reverting to the absurdity of infinite regression. If you have a case please state it, otherwise you're just trying to convince yourself of an untenable position simply because you do not want to fathom the alternative.

Manfer84 wrote:Let me ask you this, it could sound like a personal question but it's really simple, when you look deep into yourself and ask if there is a God, your creator, is your answer Yes right?, your honest asnwer. In my case the honest asnwer is No, i just don't feel this creator to be real, that dosen´t mean I couldn´t be wrong and at the end the whole thing would blow uo in my face, it just means that for me he´s just not there, there´s nothign there.

Obviously when I look inside the answer is yes, there is a creator. But it's so much more than that; there's the classical arguments from reason for the existence of a creator (i.e. cosmological, teleological, etc, see link here for a more detailed list), there's the Bible and its authenticity and fulfillment of prophesies, there's the eyewitness testimony presented in the NT, there's the personal experience and witnessing miracles. I could go on.

And what do you have exactly? Someone else's supposed logical argument that, given a reasonable rebuttal, doesn't hold up. If you have anything else, please state it but I suspect you might be content in ignorance.

The thing Byblos is that I don´t have a better argument, I just don´t think about that stuff that much to come up with one, it doesn't, in any way, affect my life.
So I'm sorry but I´m not gonna be able to give you the debate you want. I'm just a guy saying what I feel and think and learning what other think and feel.

This is probably gonna make you write one big post but I'll just say it, I think that It´s because you believe in God that the whole : “there's the Bible and its authenticity and fulfillment of prophesies, there's the eyewitness testimony presented in the NT, there's the personal experience and witnessing miracles” makes sense to you. God is the answer for your questions, I just haven´t found mine.

Manfer84 wrote:The thing Byblos is that I don´t have a better argument, I just don´t think about that stuff that much to come up with one, it doesn't, in any way, affect my life.
So I'm sorry but I´m not gonna be able to give you the debate you want. I'm just a guy saying what I feel and think and learning what other think and feel.

This is probably gonna make you write one big post but I'll just say it, I think that It´s because you believe in God that the whole : “there's the Bible and its authenticity and fulfillment of prophesies, there's the eyewitness testimony presented in the NT, there's the personal experience and witnessing miracles” makes sense to you. God is the answer for your questions, I just haven´t found mine.

In other words we have evidence for God and you don't, and yet you still insist on holding the position you hold without the slightest hint of rational thought. It's like a child who insists that the sky is purple all the while refusing to remove his hands from his eyes and looking up. But I can accept that; at least you're honest enough to admit it.

I Just have one simple question for you (to ask yourself really, no need to answer here): what if you're wrong?

Why does God changes from the OT to the NT, is he bipolar? Is it possible for him to go back to the way he was? Should we expect him to do so?

Why do you think he changes?
If you see me punishing my child for disobedience, and later see me hugging my child. Did I change? No.

I've noticed you use the word 'feel' a lot. Have your feelings ever mislead you? I can say, "i don't feel like going to work today." Or, "I don't feel like paying my bills." What do my feelings have to do with the facts? It is not unusual for people who let their feelings lead them around by the nose, to react to matters of eternity in much the same way you are.
Eternity is a long time to be wrong.

If the question is , 2+2=___. Then what is the answer?
If God is, then He is the answer to the eternal question. It isn't your 'feeling,' or what works for you, that gains the answer. It's the facts. When you dumb down the murder of 6 million Jews to preference, it is no wonder you arrive at the conclusions you do.

I'm not sure I understand this question: “So, you disagree with the scientific reality of these things???”

The fact that DNA is a coded sequence. The fact that the earth sits on a particular axis, the earth's position, and the other things I mentioned are facts. Not opinions. The reality of human existance being a statistical wonder is not just how I feel. It is the truth.

so even the smallest of the smallest probabilities given a big enough sample could be possible.

You are missing the point. If we were only talking about one factor, I could concede that. But we are not talking about one. We are talking about thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands of factors, that if changed by a mere fraction, would make our existance null and void.

My point in the death squads is you can casually say that morality is subjective. Until it comes to root at your doorstep. I doubt you would see the value of your own life so flippantly at the end of a gun. I seriously doubt you would think, "it really is unfortunate that I grew up in this society. If I had been raised differently, I wouldn't value my own life, and would have no concern for it being taken."
Consistently in human history, we applaud and revere those who stand up against injustice. Even when it is the cultural norm. And we abhor those who violate such standards.

Byblos wrote:

Manfer84 wrote:The thing Byblos is that I don´t have a better argument, I just don´t think about that stuff that much to come up with one, it doesn't, in any way, affect my life.
So I'm sorry but I´m not gonna be able to give you the debate you want. I'm just a guy saying what I feel and think and learning what other think and feel.

This is probably gonna make you write one big post but I'll just say it, I think that It´s because you believe in God that the whole : “there's the Bible and its authenticity and fulfillment of prophesies, there's the eyewitness testimony presented in the NT, there's the personal experience and witnessing miracles” makes sense to you. God is the answer for your questions, I just haven´t found mine.

In other words we have evidence for God and you don't, and yet you still insist on holding the position you hold without the slightest hint of rational thought. It's like a child who insists that the sky is purple all the while refusing to remove his hands from his eyes and looking up. But I can accept that; at least you're honest enough to admit it.

I Just have one simple question for you (to ask yourself really, no need to answer here): what if you're wrong?

It´s not that I´m refusing I have really treid to accept it, but I just can´t seem to do it.

I don´t mind answering that questions, if I'm wrong then, according to everything I've read, I'm gonna spend eternity in hell right?. That´s it I guess