Does God really exist?

[badger]

If we do not know, then we investigate and do not settle for whatever a Tom, Dick or Harry says.

My real name is Peter!

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yeah, you are not any Tom, Dick or Harry. I know that.

 

[EricPH]

There is no shame in not knowing.

Every one who has died so far, has died in ignorance. There is no conclusive evidence for how the universe and life could have had a natural cause. I doubt that evidence will be available in our lifetime. All we have are beliefs.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Every one who has died so far, has died in ignorance. There is no conclusive evidence for how the universe and life could have had a natural cause. I doubt that evidence will be available in our lifetime. All we have are beliefs.

That is true. I too will die without knowing the reasons. There is no possibility that we will come to know that in five years. But I do not feel sad because of it. Things cannot be expedited. They take their own time. However, there is enough information to tell us how universe or life came about. You don't believe that, that is your choice.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

Every one who has died so far, has died in ignorance. There is no conclusive evidence for how the universe and life could have had a natural cause. I doubt that evidence will be available in our lifetime. All we have are beliefs.

That is true. I too will die without knowing the reasons. There is no possibility that we will come to know that in five years. But I do not feel sad because of it. Things cannot be expedited. They take their own time. However, there is enough information to tell us how universe or life came about. You don't believe that, that is your choice.

I have now read the entire discussion on this thread. The only certain truth is that we cannot know the truth.
We are all, in fact, agnostic, both believers and disbelievers.
A disbeliever cannot experience the benefit of belief. He may try to explain the effect of prayer as something going on in our brain, but he cannot experience it. I would miss a lot without it.

 

[EricPH]

The only certain truth is that we cannot know the truth.

The creation of the universe and life is history, and you can't change history. Either God created everything, or there is no creator God. What ever anyone believes, we can't change the truth of history.

We are all, in fact, agnostic, both believers and disbelievers.

There cannot be a probable God. We can be a hundred percent right or wrong on the toss of a coin.

However, there is enough information to tell us how universe or life came about.

We are each led in the way we want to follow. From my perception, all the evidence points to God. My 2c.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The only certain truth is that we cannot know the truth.
We are all, in fact, agnostic, both believers and disbelievers.
A disbeliever cannot experience the benefit of belief.

I do not agree to that. Science does not lay down arms.
Sure, for some people belief is beneficial. I was once a believer, so I know.
But belief can land one in conflicts. I do not need that belief now.

 

[Aupmanyav]

We are each led in the way we want to follow. From my perception, all the evidence points to God. My 2c.

Yeah, I believe differently.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

There cannot be a probable God. We can be a hundred percent right or wrong on the toss of a coin.

Good image. The two faces of the coin look different. Still it's the same coin.
The way we search for the origin of all defines our perspective. This doesn't exclude that what you see from the other perspective is wrong.
The thing is that the origin of all is less observable than a coin on the ground.

 

[TheLightWithin]

The only certain truth is that we cannot know the truth.
We are all, in fact, agnostic, both believers and disbelievers.
A disbeliever cannot experience the benefit of belief. He may try to explain the effect of prayer as something going on in our brain, but he cannot experience it. I would miss a lot without it.

I do not agree to that. Science does not lay down arms.
Sure, for some people belief is beneficial. I was once a believer, so I know.
But belief can land one in conflicts. I do not need that belief now.

I thought what was meant by @talib-al-kalim was that we cannot know supernatural/religious/theological truths for certain.
I agree with that.

 

[Aupmanyav]

The thing is that the origin of all is less observable than a coin on the ground.

So, one can make any story about it (visits of Jibril)? Gaps, gaps, gaps.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I thought what was meant by @talib-al-kalim was that we cannot know supernatural/religious/theological truths for certain.
I agree with that.

You did not pay attention to what I wrote: "Science does not lay down arms."
We cannot know about things that people imagine. But truth (about existence of universe or appearance of life) will be known in its time.

 

[TheLightWithin]

You did not pay attention to what I wrote: "Science does not lay down arms."

I saw what you wrote.
I do not think it makes sense in this case.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I saw what you wrote.
I do not think it makes sense in this case.

Well, views.

 

[talib-al-kalim]

So, one can make any story about it (visits of Jibril)? Gaps, gaps, gaps.

Of course you can make a story about it as well, based on what you know or on what you mean to say.
Revelation is not a transfer of scientific knowledge, but guided thought.
God did not create the world in six days. Anyway, days didn't exist before the earth formed, orbiting the sun. The Quran already say that one "day" in the dimensions of God is a thousand years, a lapse of time that was understood huge by those who lived then, but still shorter than the real dimensions as we know it now.
The message of the prophets are guidance, not natural science.
But is it really different?
There's a coherent One principle behind all (God created the world) and all depends on this (God is the ruler of all, the Alef and the Taw). Knowing that we are dependent on all around us, we should preserve our base of existence (God made everything fine, so live in respect and modesty). Those who seek power and glory and disrespect the base of their being, nature and the constructive community work against our base of living; don't follow or support them. Understand and act accordingly (Seek above all the Kingdom of God. Who's with God is in the ere of life. Whoever is bound to the worldly powers will perish, but who respects God and His Word will be part of the ever-lasting)

Understand what I meant with the two parts of the coin: You may understand and draw the right conclusions from science and finally arrive at the same point as if you understand and draw the right conclusions from the wisdom of the prophets, be they in the Middle-East Abrahamic or in the Brahmanic or Bantu Ngai or in the Native American Manitu tradition.
I don't discard any prophet or teacher of the ancient times, nor would I discard scientific evidence or scientifically founded thesis.

There are gaps anywhere. Mind the gap and don't stumble. It's not important, in my view, from what view you act, but it does count whether you act in accordance with what is our basis or you act against it

 

[Aupmanyav]

Understand what I meant with the two parts of the coin: ..

Your views. I do not use the two sided coin. I have a plaque which says 'go with evidence'.

 

[moralorel]

There is no shame in not knowing. There is shame in not investigating or settling for false and convenient answers.
There is no evidence that there is an edge to the universe, so why should I accept it.
There is more evidence that it has none.

You SHOULD be able to explain what does exist. Or admit that you actually don't really have any idea.

You claim there is no edge to the universe AND that there is no "outside" of the universe. Could you please cite scientific papers that specifically state this as fact? Or even actual scientific theory?

I find it amazing how your definition of "evidence" drastically changes when your opinion gets involved.

 

[moralorel]

No, I do not agree to that. Weird ideas get erased by better theories. String theory or Many-world interpretations are facing such a future.

Seriously? Here are some ideas that were considered "weird" but ended up becoming scientific theory or fact.

1. The earth rotates. The idea was considered weird because we can't feel the earth moving.
2. Dinosaurs existed. Mary Anning was one of the first people to propose the weird idea that large creatures used to exist on earth. She discovered the ichthyosaur and Plesiosaurus. She was ridiculed for her "weird idea".
3. Ignaz Semmelweis was a scientist who discovered something weird and absurd. He noticed that doctors who worked in the morgue were literally killing babies when they delivered babies. He figured out that something from dead corpses was killing the babies. He was ridiculed for his weird idea that something from the dead bodies was killing the babies. He simply suggested that these doctors should wash their hands thoroughly before delivering babies. Weird huh
4. William Harvey had this very weird claim. He claimed that the heart, not the liver, pumped blood throughout the body. His claim was so preposterous that he had to go into hiding due to all the shame he suffered. So weird.
5. William B. Coley claimed that viruses could slow down cancer cells, possibly even eradicate cancer cells. Once again his weird idea was ridiculed. He seriously believed that infecting cancer patients with viruses could help cure their cancer. So weird. Yet today it is commonly practiced in medicine.
6. Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin claimed that stars were primarily made up of hydrogen. There was absolutely no evidence of such a thing and her idea was definitely considered weird. That is until it was proven a fact.
7. Galileo... you already know his weird story.
8. Alfred Wegener had this absolutely weird idea that the continents were "floating" and "drifting". This weird guy actually thought that insanely heavy continents were moving. And now we know he was completely correct.
9. The Big Bang theory. So weird and illogical. Something came from a singularity and rapidly expanded? So weird. Stephen Hawking had to come along and prove that the Steady State theory was incorrect. Logically the Steady State theory makes much more sense. But it isn't true.
10. Black holes. Science fiction became scientific fact.
11. Dark matter, dark energy...

Oh, and did I mention the weird idea that humans actually are bioluminescent? Scientific fact.

I could do this all day. There are so many weird ideas that became scientific theories or facts. Why you don't see this is beyond me! It's one of my favorite parts of scientific theory!

 

[moralorel]

There is no shame in not knowing. There is shame in not investigating or settling for false and convenient answers.
There is no evidence that there is an edge to the universe, so why should I accept it.
There is more evidence that it has none.

There is also no empirical evidence that life began on its own. But you seem to believe so. Why should you?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Could you please cite scientific papers that specifically state this as fact? Or even actual scientific theory?

There are so many pages on this in Wikipedia and elsewhere. The search engines and AI are there. Check with them. I am sort of tired in repeating them.