Evidence for God from Science

Jac3510 wrote:

qqMOARpewpew wrote:Well if you had read my posts I did already say that I believe absolute truth exists. I was also saying, I'm not perfect, my perception of the world IS flawed, I simply don't claim that what I believe IS THE absolute truth. Parts of it could be, maybe I know the secret to the universe, I bet you'd agree with me that that is doubtful.

Our clearly different perspective on the two words 'personal truth' basically proved to me my point about person truths, i thought i was silly too.

I was responding to your argument that you didn't need evidence for your ideas about the universe, because it was your own personal truth. You then went on to argue that you can't know things objectively, hence my point.

Now, first, I assume you are backing off your claim that you can't know things objectively. That is good, because it is evident that you can. Second, I hope you can see that "personal truth" is a self-contradiction. Something is either true or it isn't. If we can have "personal truth" then, to go back to my over-the-top illustration, I can take everything you say in an absurd manner and that could be my "personal truth." I would apparently need no more evidence that it is really true than you do for your multiverse. Of course, you would object to that, which is precisely why I am pointing all this out to you. If you have no evidence for your "personal truth" with reference to the multiverse, then you have nothing but blind faith. I, for one, am not a fan of blind faith . . . if we can believe that, why not believe that there is a giant, invisible spaghetti monster orbiting the earth that brings presents to all the kiddies on Christmas? Don't bother with evidence. Personal truth, right?

So, as TC pointed out, this is all rather silly. Would you like to have an actual discussion about WHY we should believe what we do--be it in God or not, creation or evolution, Christianity or any other religion, etc.--or would you rather just ignore reality and insist on "personal truth" and all the while be inconsistent when in that you expect people to take your statements, not as "personal truth," but as real truth?

You're making an awful big deal out of this. Again did you read what I have posted? I said personal truth is EXACTLY opinion. We each see Reality, but we are all biased and view the world differently. I clearly should have used another word besides personal truth as your opinion of it is very different from mine, again showing that we view the words we use to communicate differently.

Take my beliefs and you can believe that I believe they are absolute truths, but I am telling you they are just how I feel. I also believe all the absolute truths you believe are your opinions and aren't necessarily reality.

What evidence do you have (ie evidence that you can show) of your beliefs (im going to assume you believe in god, in souls, in an afterlife)? Since apparently we need evidence in order to believe things, even if we don't claim them to be an ultimate truth.

So then you admit you could be wrong?

What evidence do you have (ie evidence that you can show) of your beliefs (im going to assume you believe in god, in souls, in an afterlife)? Since apparently we need evidence in order to believe things, even if we don't claim them to be an ultimate truth.

Holy cow, where do I start? I start by affirming that you are right--we should NOT believe things without evidence. And I don't. Consider it the skeptic in me . . . but I have LOTS of evidence for Christianity.

I have the evidence of a finite universe, which requires a beginning, which requires an external, eternal cause. I have the evidence self-determination, which requires the ability to think, which requires that some part of me exist outside of the laws of physics (lest those impersonal laws of nature determine my "thoughts"). I have the evidence of objective morality--whether I am correct about whether something is right or wrong, it is clear that some things really are right and some things really are wrong, regardless of what anyone thinks about it (i.e., slavery, child rape, fairness, generosity). I have the evidence of design in the fine tuning of the universe, of the chicken-and-egg systems in protein synthesis, of the specified complexity inherent in DNA and many other types of biomolecules. I have the historical evidence that Jesus physically rose from the dead. I have my own personal experience, which though not evidence to anyone else, is certainly evidence to myself so long as it does not contradict objective reality.

I could do this all day . . .

The more important question is what evidence you have that Christianity is FALSE? What evidence do you have that atheism is actually true? What evidence do you have for your worldview beyond your opinion?

ageofknowledge wrote:So then you admit you could be wrong?

Did I not say this 3 or 4 times over the last two pages?

Anyway, yes, in fact I'm pretty certain my beliefs are nothing more than the way I feel the universe is.

qqMOARpewpew wrote:Not to people who believe everyone will live forever either (in some eternal aftelife), they believe that physical death is certain, but not spiritual death, and since we are really just spiritual being trapped in these physical forms its not death. Or that's how I view it.

I believe death is certain and final.

Death is inevitably certain no matter what one believes or how one believes…

We all must face this absolute definite outcome that transcends all notions of relativism…

Therefore, absolute Truth exist as do Absolutes
-
-
-

B. W. wrote:

qqMOARpewpew wrote:Not to people who believe everyone will live forever either (in some eternal aftelife), they believe that physical death is certain, but not spiritual death, and since we are really just spiritual being trapped in these physical forms its not death. Or that's how I view it.

I believe death is certain and final.

Death is inevitably certain no matter what one believes or how one believes…

We all must face this absolute definite outcome that transcends all notions of relativism…

Therefore, absolute Truth exist as do Absolutes
-
-
-

I mean physical death is certain but for those who believe in eternal life, death is no more than a moment? Am i wrong here?

Truths definitely exist, but we could be in a matrix I could be a dream character for you. Absolutes do exist but I dont think you or I grasp truth as an absolute.

Jac3510 wrote:

What evidence do you have (ie evidence that you can show) of your beliefs (im going to assume you believe in god, in souls, in an afterlife)? Since apparently we need evidence in order to believe things, even if we don't claim them to be an ultimate truth.

Holy cow, where do I start? I start by affirming that you are right--we should NOT believe things without evidence. And I don't. Consider it the skeptic in me . . . but I have LOTS of evidence for Christianity.

I have the evidence of a finite universe, which requires a beginning, which requires an external, eternal cause. I have the evidence self-determination, which requires the ability to think, which requires that some part of me exist outside of the laws of physics (lest those impersonal laws of nature determine my "thoughts"). I have the evidence of objective morality--whether I am correct about whether something is right or wrong, it is clear that some things really are right and some things really are wrong, regardless of what anyone thinks about it (i.e., slavery, child rape, fairness, generosity). I have the evidence of design in the fine tuning of the universe, of the chicken-and-egg systems in protein synthesis, of the specified complexity inherent in DNA and many other types of biomolecules. I have the historical evidence that Jesus physically rose from the dead. I have my own personal experience, which though not evidence to anyone else, is certainly evidence to myself so long as it does not contradict objective reality.

I could do this all day . . .

The more important question is what evidence you have that Christianity is FALSE? What evidence do you have that atheism is actually true? What evidence do you have for your worldview beyond your opinion?

Well I believe that energy at its simplest is an organism, some sort of life, and the universe is very extra small in the big scheme of things and I have no evidence for this, so I actually disagree that we need evidence for it.
'
I do not see the universe as expanding as evidence for it being finite, even if we found the edge of the universe (which as far as I know we have not) Even if the universe is finite that doesn't mean there isn't more outside of our universe.

What is this evidence that the universe is finite?
What is this evidence of self-determination?
What is this evidence of objective morality?
What is your evidence of design/fine tuning of the universe? If there have been an infinite universe before this of course our universe/planet will appear to be fine tuned. But if there have been an vast number of universe or planets life would only support itself on planets/in universes that appear to intelligent life to be fine tuned.
What is your physical evidence (outside of the bible) that shows that jesus lived, let alone rose from the dead?
Can I ask what personal evidence you have experienced?

I have no more evidence that christianity is false than you have that taoism is false, only a feeling.
I consider myself an atheist only because I have not seen any evidence that there is a god, whether it be your god or no religions god. If there is a 'god' I don't think it is omnipotent, simply an alien with super advanced technology. (yes this is a serious statement)
I don't have any evidence for my world view beyond my own opinion (personal truth) that is exactly why I called it a personal truth (opinion).

Hahaha... oh I'm wiping tears of laughter away here at that first paragraph. Ok, straight face again.. hahaha..

ageofknowledge wrote:Hahaha... oh I'm wiping tears of laughter away here at that first paragraph. Ok, straight face again.. hahaha..

Cool? I guess. Did you not read what he quoted, I said apparently we need evidence, as in I didn't think so but apparently he does.

Well I believe that energy at its simplest is an organism, some sort of life, and the universe is very extra small in the big scheme of things and I have no evidence for this, so I actually disagree that we need evidence for it.

Let's see. Jac explained to you that we shouldn't believe without evidence. You challenged him. He provided evidence. Then you say that your belief system has NO EVIDENCE. None, and that it is apparently something you have concieved in your own mind. Interesting.

Is the universe finite? There is a LOT of discussion and science on this matter, and has been for years. Some really interesting stuff. What is interesting is that the statements the universe is finite or the universe is infinite seem impossible on the surface. They both present problems. That doesn't mean the problems don't have solutions. It is just that we haven't the means to prove. In other words we can't go outside the universe and measure it.

But this is an interesting concept if you really stop to digest it. And it is a very good argument for God. Science is pretty well established that the universe did have a beginning. We could go into plenty of science about this such as big bang, 2nd law of thermodynamics, etc. There is also science to explain that the universe is expanding.
But where is it expanding? How can something expand into nothing? However, if the creation account is true, and God created everything we know from nothing, then an expanding universe is completely feasible. In fact it would point to a God outside of space and time. It would point to a measurable event of a creation event, and the creator. It is interesting that the bible speaks of God spreading out the heavens. It is also interesting that the bible says that God measures the span of the universe in his hand.

What is your evidence of design/fine tuning of the universe?

Our having this conversation is one evidence. It is incalcuable how many variables have to align perfectly, not just on our planet, not just in our solar system, not just in our galaxy, but in the entire universe for life to exist here on this little spec. If you just consider what it requires to sustain life right at this moment it would boggle your mind. To even fathom that life could originate out of an accidental, meaningless, purposeless, random event is close minded if nothing else. One of the most ardent opponents of creation wrote a book about how we must not be fooled by all things in our universe that appear to have design.

A good example. If you had never heard or seen of Mt. Rushmore and you happened by it, what odds would you place on it happening by non directed, random acts of nature over millions of years? Are there any odds that four known human faces would form on a mountainside by chance? Yet, you can look at your own face in the mirror. A living face. One that can produce speech. Has ears to hear, eyes to see. Has a brain inside to apprehend and comprehend all this vision, smell and sound. And you see a product of non-direct, random acts of nature over millions of years.
You are truly open minded my friend.

jlay wrote:

Well I believe that energy at its simplest is an organism, some sort of life, and the universe is very extra small in the big scheme of things and I have no evidence for this, so I actually disagree that we need evidence for it.

Let's see. Jac explained to you that we shouldn't believe without evidence. You challenged him. He provided evidence. Then you say that your belief system has NO EVIDENCE. None, and that it is apparently something you have concieved in your own mind. Interesting.

Is the universe finite? There is a LOT of discussion and science on this matter, and has been for years. Some really interesting stuff. What is interesting is that the statements the universe is finite or the universe is infinite seem impossible on the surface. They both present problems. That doesn't mean the problems don't have solutions. It is just that we haven't the means to prove. In other words we can't go outside the universe and measure it.

But this is an interesting concept if you really stop to digest it. And it is a very good argument for God. Science is pretty well established that the universe did have a beginning. We could go into plenty of science about this such as big bang, 2nd law of thermodynamics, etc. There is also science to explain that the universe is expanding.
But where is it expanding? How can something expand into nothing? However, if the creation account is true, and God created everything we know from nothing, then an expanding universe is completely feasible. In fact it would point to a God outside of space and time. It would point to a measurable event of a creation event, and the creator. It is interesting that the bible speaks of God spreading out the heavens. It is also interesting that the bible says that God measures the span of the universe in his hand.

What is your evidence of design/fine tuning of the universe?

Our having this conversation is one evidence. It is incalcuable how many variables have to align perfectly, not just on our planet, not just in our solar system, not just in our galaxy, but in the entire universe for life to exist here on this little spec. If you just consider what it requires to sustain life right at this moment it would boggle your mind. To even fathom that life could originate out of an accidental, meaningless, purposeless, random event is close minded if nothing else. One of the most ardent opponents of creation wrote a book about how we must not be fooled by all things in our universe that appear to have design.

A good example. If you had never heard or seen of Mt. Rushmore and you happened by it, what odds would you place on it happening by non directed, random acts of nature over millions of years? Are there any odds that four known human faces would form on a mountainside by chance? Yet, you can look at your own face in the mirror. A living face. One that can produce speech. Has ears to hear, eyes to see. Has a brain inside to apprehend and comprehend all this vision, smell and sound. And you see a product of non-direct, random acts of nature over millions of years.
You are truly open minded my friend.

Jac explained that he believes we shouldn't believe without evidence, I decided to tickle his fancy and see what evidence he has for the big questions.

He didn't provide any evidence, all he did was say he had evidence of this and that, without even saying what the evidence was. :/

As I said before (at least I thought i said it before), I don't believe we need evidence for our beliefs. I haven't seen any evidence that points away from my beliefs however.

I believe the universe is finite, and expanding. I also believe it is very small compared to the rest of existence (whatever that might be). I don't have a reason anything to exist rather than not. But I also believe reason is an invention of man, we like it, it makes us feel special. You folks want a predetermined reason for existence, because, I'm guessing you think life would be meaningless without it. I see things differently.

Even if an expanding finite universe was an argument for god it would not be an argument for a christian god, simply some sort of deity, it wouldn't even need to have conscious and without consciousness its not even a god, simply a energy force from which all things came. I would buy into that, and still consider myself an atheist because a energy flow is not a god.

As for fine tuning, would you mind not ignoring this: If there have been an infinite universe before this of course our universe/planet will appear to be fine tuned. But if there have been an vast number of universe or planets life would only support itself on planets/in universes that appear to intelligent life to be fine tuned.

I don't believe in accidents, or in random... not random and not accidents doesn't to me at least mean on purpose with something having an intent. A leaf falls on the ground, where it lands is not random, its not an accident, but did not fall there with a purpose to do something, it didn't have any sort of meaning. The only way that falling leave would have purpose or meaning is in the mind of an intelligent creature who conjures some sign or meaning out of a natural event.

jlay wrote:But this is an interesting concept if you really stop to digest it. And it is a very good argument for God. Science is pretty well established that the universe did have a beginning. We could go into plenty of science about this such as big bang, 2nd law of thermodynamics, etc. There is also science to explain that the universe is expanding.
But where is it expanding? How can something expand into nothing? However, if the creation account is true, and God created everything we know from nothing, then an expanding universe is completely feasible. In fact it would point to a God outside of space and time. It would point to a measurable event of a creation event, and the creator.

Not sure I follow you hear jlay - how do you jump from expansion and a beginning to a creation (specifically by god) and emerging from "nothing"?

Not sure I follow your question.


We know that our universe is not colliding with other universes. Because we are here. We are alive, not destroyed.
In general science agrees that the universe is expanding. It is also in a quandry as to where. These are not my ideas, I could link you to several articles from secular science on this matter. I can also link you to articles where some are trying to explain that the universe could have originated out of nothing. I mean come on, let's be intellectually honest here. Everything known thing originated out of nothing?

God is THE THING. The eternal, uncreated thing. The "I am."

cslewislover wrote:qq, you're in a sad state if you think that there's is no truth, or true God, because you can't prove any false (I bet a person can, and I'm going to re-look into that)!!! That is just not logical. So then you make up things that are fantasy; I used to do that some because I was not raised in any religion and after a while I started thinking of those things. Everyone does. I looked into Eastern religions too. There is indeed evidence - not like God can be reproduced in a petri dish - but there is still evidence enough that can lead to belief based on a rational choice.

Again, you seem extremely unopen on this board. If you want to know something, ask. Is evidence for Christianity and proving other religions false what you want? What is it that you want here? Just a place to set forth your opinions? There are plenty of places on the internet to do that.

You wrote that last post as I was writing. Your last paragraph doesn't seem to make any sense. Nothing is random . . I guess the alien controls that??? The leaf falling is NOT random, yet it has no meaning . . .

I do believe there is a truth, I just don't believe you or I know it. My signature says: You don't look out there for god, something in the sky, you look in you. It says that for a reason. I don't believe in a creator, I believe what you call god is in the heart of all (wo)men.

Haha fantasy. I just think everything is natural, and energy is related to life, and the universe is small. You might call it fantasy but to me anything supernatural seems like fantasy.

As for why I am here I have anwsered this before. I am sorry if I seem unopen.

I'm even more sorry that you can not see how a leaf falling is not random, and does not have purpose. I truly believe nothing is random I don't know how else to explain it better than I already did.