Science gives proof of God. - Page 2

quote:

---

NATuralMan,

You missed the point, tho I've a feeling you did so on purpose.

---

I did not miss your point,

what I did was directly contradict it,

and yes of course I did that on purpose.

quote:

---

NATuralMan,

How about some proof there, sparky.

As I stated above, Creationism/ID requires the proof of a creator god first.

---

I actually did list physical proofs outside of the Bible in my posting.

And that claim of proving God first is nonsense and it goes against many scientific procedures, like we found the "Big Bang" based on evidence and no one ever saw it, and we still can not see a "Black Hole either but the evidence points the way.

Thus the evidence of "intelligence" and "ID" is the physical proof per established scientific methods.

As I explained in my previous post - people get God mixed up with religion.

God lives, and it ( the thing we call God) in not in religion.

One can argue that religion is in God but God is not in religion, and not in the Books either.

It lives.

quote:

---

= MugenNoKarayami

Booky I really like that you made a thread like this because we're coming to a time in our evolution that we have to renew our ideas of what religion really is.

I highly doubt the ones responsible for upholding these beliefs took into account of how advanced we would become. People in ancient Greece were completely convinced of Olympian Gods but were proven to be nothing more than scientifically proven natural occurrences. Religious leaders cannot honestly believe that they can lie to an entire civilization of intelligence and reasoning.

People today want to see proof of the things we perceive around us.

---

I very much agree that organized religions are teaching untruths and unreal nonsense, and I agree that many religious people appear to be "lying" about their faith.

But I object to throwing out God and the assorted scriptures just because religious people are so full of nonsense.

Particularly striking to me is the very idea that some people in the first Century could have faked or dreamed up the 4 Gospels because that would be giving way too much faith and credance to things like lies and deceptions from that 1st Century.

I find it far more reasonable based on research and logic that Jesus (Yesu) Christ was a real person rather than to believe that some person(s) faked such a diverse and controversial lie, and such a successful lie too.

That would mean there were great people or great liar(s) that wrote such a fable of a "Messiah" that was so peculiar and so unOrthodox by their own standards.

Considering the "Synoptic problem" http://virtualreligion.net/forum/complete.html alone, then that would make both the Gospel of Mark and the "Q" source as being the root or beginning forgery and that is way to hard to accept or believe because they are brillient.

That "Synoptic problem" would mean that the other three Gospels of "Matthew, Luke and John" would have had to copied and plagerize from a fake Gospel of Mark and that would be an absurd and illogical reasoning. One fake would not copy from another fake unless they thought the other was true, or not a fake.

Claiming that "Jesus" was not God or not "son of God" or His miracles were exagerated or never happened is a believable and logical reasoning to me, but not claiming some person(s) made up the story as a lie because that is giving way too much praise to the art of a liar, and giving far too much credibility to lies and lying.

An inspired deception would be an absurd conclusion.

Holy sh**, You made scince an ally of god. That is tottaly wrong. I think science has proven that god isnt real so many times, instead of proving that he is.

Below are a few ideas I have on life, ininite life and the Universe and beyond.

Maybe the egyptians were aware of the fact that one day in the future man would be able to bring them back, maybe they didn't know how this would happen but it could well be possible to do this using DNA, that is why they tried to preserve their bodies in order for there to be some DNA still available to do this, they also tried to keep all of their treasure with them so that they would be rich when they return.

With man now reaching the point that eternal life is no longer an impossibility, we are considering religion much differently, maybe God does not exsist and we are able to create what most people call heaven here on Earth and other planets in ours and other universes.

Most people say that they do not want to live forever as the Earth would become over populated, that is simply because we still do not understand how we can move on to other planets in a fast enough time to make it viable for anyone to make the trip, but if you consider the work being done in Switzerland and try to imagine what possibilities this might open up it is only a matter of time until we are able to travel to new Worlds in very short spaces of time, this would mean that all of a sudden we would realise that we are no longer at the end of time but at the very beginning.

Imagine that our Universe is one of many, that these are in many ways the same as the Earth, that if you could pull away from our Universe it would look like Earth (or a planet) and this could mean that an atom is the outer shell of another Universe and that because millions of atoms sit alongside each other that Infinity does not only go deep, but Wide. This would also explain why that when you split an atom it causes such an explosion, as inside these atoms are millions of Universes side by side and deep, there is no reason to consider ourselves at the beginning or end of the chain, we could simply be in the middle or at any point along the chain, in fact if it is infinite then we we none of these, we simply are one of that infinite chain.