• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Your Best Argument for God's Existence

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Theres both kinds of evidence for God. Theres design and spiritual experiences

Design isn't evidence of god; that is a matter of individual perspective.

Can you demonstrate how you can see god as fact so when a non-believer looks at the same thing, he will see the god of abraham?

Facts cannot depend on you nor the believer; it stands alone. It should not be a product or described by your belief.

Can you explain the connection without considering the rest of us blind for not seeing what you see?
 
Design isn't evidence of god; that is a matter of individual perspective.

Design is not direct proof of a God. It IS EVIDENCE of a God. It sure is. Information from what we KNOW always comes from a mind. Design and information is not an argument from ignorence, its an argument from what we know of the world.

Can you demonstrate how you can see god as fact so when a non-believer looks at the same thing, he will see the god of abraham?

That would require PROOF. That i cannot give. Proof and evidence are not the same.

Also you mentioned the God of abraham. In Intelligent design you dont have to believe in any one particular God to adhere to intelligent design. Why? Because its akin to seeing a car, you know its designed, but you dont know WHO designed it.

Well, theres theists, deists, pantheists, polytheists, even people who believe aliens made us. All these folks can adhere to intelligent design and information.

Facts cannot depend on you nor the believer; it stands alone. It should not be a product or described by your belief.

Thats right. But, since so little is proven in this world, we go by evidence, inference, logic or philosophy.

Can you explain the connection without considering the rest of us blind for not seeing what you see?

Well, the OP put it well. Information in the DNA. Also complexity in the world. Also spiritual experiences. Like NDEs.
 

sealchan

Well-Known Member
Here's mine:
Proof God exists is SUPER EASY for anyone to understand (sadly, the stubborn denier is the exception):

1) Each DNA contains 100 million pages worth of instructions to build the entire body. Do instructions write themselves? Nope. Instructions don't write themselves. Behind every instruction is an 'instructor' who authored it. Carl Sagan said: "The information content of a simple cell has been established as around one trillion bits, comparable to about 100 million pages of the Encyclopaedia Britannica."

2) Every genome is written as a quaternary molecular digital code: "All present life is based on digitally-encoded information." (American Academy of Sciences). Do digital programs write themselves? Nope again.

3) Each cell contains hi-tech miniature organs (organelles - nucleus, golgi bodies, mitochondria, chloroplasts, etc.) - none of which are naturally found elsewhere - hence no natural explanation for their existence.

4) Who can write a 100 million pages worth of instructions and then stuff it into every cell of our body? This hyper-intellect is who we will face on Judgment Day.

With item (1) almost every reasonable person acknowledges that they have never seen nor heard of instructions writing themselves. This is common sense to most people although not all.

Some argue they see all the above occur in nature when cells reproduce. However, there is still no explanation how the very first living cell came about with all those instructions in its DNA, and although some theorize that organelles were first formed by bacteria invading a host 'cell', we've never seen organelles produced by such a mechanism nor has such a mechanism ever been DEMONSTRATED and VALIDATED by any study.

Anyway, I would like to hear your argument for God's existence. Thank you.

Careful...you are begging the next generation of computer technology to surpass God...
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
Please don't shout. I read everything.

Can you find evidence and with that evidence prove that design leads to an creator?

If you can demonstrate the connection between the evidence of design and creator, than I'd understand what you're talking about. I'm not an evidence wanting person. I'm just asking you to use what you consider as evidence and demonstrate how design leads to a creator apart from your belief.
Design is not direct proof of a God. It IS EVIDENCE of a God. It sure is. Information from what we KNOW always comes from a mind. Design and information is not an argument from ignorence, its an argument from what we know of the world.

Please. Not with the caps and nit picking. It throws off the conversation.

There is evidence of god in design, okay. Don't prove god exists, just demonstrate how design shows god.

Yes. It comes from the mind. It's an experience. DNA doesn't come from the mind. How did you get DNA show god? What's the connection outside of your mind?

Yes. We know the world, but god is not part of the natural world; so, that statement does not work in this conversation.

That would require PROOF. That i cannot give. Proof and evidence are not the same.

I can careless about proof and evidence. If I rephrased it....

Can you demonstrate the evidence you have in your mind is proof that DNA is related and caused by god?

Drop the evidence and proof. Can you demonstrate how the structure of DNA means god?

Also you mentioned the God of abraham. In Intelligent design you dont have to believe in any one particular God to adhere to intelligent design. Why? Because its akin to seeing a car, you know its designed, but you dont know WHO designed it.

But the design of DNA doesn't show me a creator. If you were to explain to me how it does, how would you start?

Well, theres theists, deists, pantheists, polytheists, even people who believe aliens made us. All these folks can adhere to intelligent design and information.

I know in RF pantheist and polytheist don't think that way. It varies. Probably deists. Not all theists. That's a broad stroke there.

But, can you explain how these people as a group see the "intelligent design" outside their mind?

Facts arent dependent on a person's theological stance.

Thats right. But, since so little is proven in this world, we go by evidence, inference, logic or philosophy.

What is the evidence that the design of DNA shows a creator?

Well, the OP put it well. Information in the DNA. Also complexity in the world. Also spiritual experiences. Like NDEs.

I can't argue experiences don't lead and prove the evidence of god is valid; that's a given. What doesn't make sense is the OP using the design of DNA (and any design) to prove god. I'm not questioning evidence of god's existence. Do you know how the OP got design DNA to show a creator?

I see design, yes. Intelligent? That makes no sense. Creator? That depends on the person. There is no creator. Everything shapes, evolves, and creates within itself. However, my question is how does DNA design show a creator?

Can you demonstrate how? (You don't have to use physics just logic of how you got to that conclusion)
 

Trip Bapho

Member
Here's mine:
Proof God exists is SUPER EASY for anyone to understand (sadly, the stubborn denier is the exception):

1) Each DNA contains 100 million pages worth of instructions to build the entire body. Do instructions write themselves? Nope. Instructions don't write themselves. Behind every instruction is an 'instructor' who authored it. Carl Sagan said: "The information content of a simple cell has been established as around one trillion bits, comparable to about 100 million pages of the Encyclopaedia Britannica."

2) Every genome is written as a quaternary molecular digital code: "All present life is based on digitally-encoded information." (American Academy of Sciences). Do digital programs write themselves? Nope again.

3) Each cell contains hi-tech miniature organs (organelles - nucleus, golgi bodies, mitochondria, chloroplasts, etc.) - none of which are naturally found elsewhere - hence no natural explanation for their existence.

4) Who can write a 100 million pages worth of instructions and then stuff it into every cell of our body? This hyper-intellect is who we will face on Judgment Day.

With item (1) almost every reasonable person acknowledges that they have never seen nor heard of instructions writing themselves. This is common sense to most people although not all.

Some argue they see all the above occur in nature when cells reproduce. However, there is still no explanation how the very first living cell came about with all those instructions in its DNA, and although some theorize that organelles were first formed by bacteria invading a host 'cell', we've never seen organelles produced by such a mechanism nor has such a mechanism ever been DEMONSTRATED and VALIDATED by any study.

Anyway, I would like to hear your argument for God's existence. Thank you.

So.. Who created the creator?
Beginningless, right?
Why does that make more sense than just a beginningless energy?
Just because you use materialistic words such as "pages of paper"..That's not the reality. Its a system that as only one unconscious intent.. Life. It can very well do all the things you mentioned because its not like it happened in perfection all at once.. It has an beginningless infinite chances to do so seeing how its beyond time.
 

Hawkins

Well-Known Member
Thats messed up. You have to use a different method. Using the same old method such as nature patterns makes us blind. Don't blind us with repeats. Not all of us see proof from without. Try within.

Trying to find god outside of you is a waste of time.

God is a testimony not DNA
All About GOD Testimonies

Bible is full of testimony not facts.

Testimony remains the most fundamental way for humans to get a truth of any kind! At least that's the way how our history is written.
 

Trip Bapho

Member
Trying to show evidence to a stubborn atheist is like trying to show and explain a tree and beauty of the sun to a blind man.
Its actually the opposite. Instead of just believing what my parents told me was true I went and did my own search. Its not stubborn to simply not believe in something that appears unnatural & immoral. Ill highly consider any possibility thrown my way with an open mind. Where as.. A lot of religious people simply dismiss any info that doesn't jive with their God or whatever without even thinking about it. So who's stubborn?Within my experince inner peace came when losing religion so why should I think what someone else thinks just bc they say its better?
 
Its actually the opposite. Instead of just believing what my parents told me was true I went and did my own search.

Yea, and one of my parrents (dad) told me there was no God. The parrents that told me there was, ok, whatever. I did also my own research and i concluded God is real.

Its not stubborn to simply not believe in something that appears unnatural & immoral.

When the evidence and logic for a God is overwhelming, then i concluded the rejectors of it are stubborn deniers.

Ill highly consider any possibility thrown my way with an open mind.

If you are already aware of design and information in nature and yet still reject it, then your mind is blind.

Where as.. A lot of religious people simply dismiss any info that doesn't jive with their God or whatever without even thinking about it.

Thats false because i think about it alot. And i know alot of others that do too.

So who's stubborn?

You are and everyone like you is too.

Within my experince inner peace came when losing religion so why should I think what someone else thinks just bc they say its better?

Liberty has a sense of peace. But, youl never be free of God. Hes got you by the balls buddy.
 

Trip Bapho

Member
Yea, and one of my parrents (dad) told me there was no God. The parrents that told me there was, ok, whatever. I did also my own research and i concluded God is real.



When the evidence and logic for a God is overwhelming, then i concluded the rejectors of it are stubborn deniers.



If you are already aware of design and information in nature and yet still reject it, then your mind is blind.



Thats false because i think about it alot. And i know alot of others that do too.



You are and everyone like you is too.



Liberty has a sense of peace. But, youl never be free of God. Hes got you by the balls buddy.

At least I'm not here saying you and everyone like you is some type of way.. Ill continue on as is whether or not your god is playing with my balls.
 

Unveiled Artist

Veteran Member
No can anyone prove any evidence of any meals you ever eaten!

Bad example.

Take two lovers both girlfriends who love each other and no one can separate them. If, one day, one girlfriend passes away, does that mean she no longer existed?

While we have her pictures and family, we only have the family's word of mouth to a complete stranger. That stranger also sees "someone" in a photo album but takes the family's word for it that she is who she is or do they need to know them theirselves.

How can you prove one's experience insofar that that experience is concrete evidence for the experience of love of the other's deceased girlfriend?

All you have is your experiences, and the testimonies of family, friends, and strangers that crossed the other's path while she was alive. However, many people say "my condolences" because they didn't know her.

No one can expect a person to experience the love of the girlfriend nor ask her friends and family about that love so that they can experience it the same way as the family. Either they can get to know the family and, as such, experience their pain through them as a good friend or, they don't need to know the family because they have love within their own family, loved one, and mate.

To anyone who says they should be part of their family to experience love doesn't make sense. That's like telling a stranger in order to experience my imaginary deceased girlfriend's love, you must get to know her (and me), if not, you're blind.

Kinda see why atheists are a bit confused over this logic?

Edit: Assuming the girlfriend was cremated and her ashes were scatted years ago.
 
Last edited:

ChristineM

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.
Premium Member
Here's mine:
Proof God exists is SUPER EASY for anyone to understand (sadly, the stubborn denier is the exception):

1) Each DNA contains 100 million pages worth of instructions to build the entire body. Do instructions write themselves? Nope. Instructions don't write themselves. Behind every instruction is an 'instructor' who authored it. Carl Sagan said: "The information content of a simple cell has been established as around one trillion bits, comparable to about 100 million pages of the Encyclopaedia Britannica."

2) Every genome is written as a quaternary molecular digital code: "All present life is based on digitally-encoded information." (American Academy of Sciences). Do digital programs write themselves? Nope again.

3) Each cell contains hi-tech miniature organs (organelles - nucleus, golgi bodies, mitochondria, chloroplasts, etc.) - none of which are naturally found elsewhere - hence no natural explanation for their existence.

4) Who can write a 100 million pages worth of instructions and then stuff it into every cell of our body? This hyper-intellect is who we will face on Judgment Day.

With item (1) almost every reasonable person acknowledges that they have never seen nor heard of instructions writing themselves. This is common sense to most people although not all.

Some argue they see all the above occur in nature when cells reproduce. However, there is still no explanation how the very first living cell came about with all those instructions in its DNA, and although some theorize that organelles were first formed by bacteria invading a host 'cell', we've never seen organelles produced by such a mechanism nor has such a mechanism ever been DEMONSTRATED and VALIDATED by any study.

Anyway, I would like to hear your argument for God's existence. Thank you.


It appears you are taking evolution which is shown and observed to be a natural occurrence and saying "God dun it".

Oh and the "no explanation"
Life's First Spark Re-Created in the Laboratory
Explained, DEMONSTRATED and VALIDATED by doing it.
 

Willamena

Just me
Premium Member
What is the inspiration behind the statement that "God that can be described is not God?" I don't understand where that comes from.
It comes from apophatic theology.

There's no basis for it. It seems to me that nothing in any definition of any god, or, if you insist, God (seemingly a strange and precarious insistence to be made, especially by an agnostic or atheist) is without such a prerequisite. So it seems to me, and probably to many theists, that it's just another way of saying any God you can think of doesn't exist.

But I guess that's the nature of apophatic theology, isn't it? Link
The early Greek notion of "God" was of a transcendent reality. The Seventeenth Century "Enlightenment" came to a similar conclusion with the notion of noumenon (to contrast with phenomenon), although that may have been informed by the ancient Greek notion. Many people today believe in a firm divide between the world as we know it, translated into thought by the brain, and the world beyond that (e.g. "Matrix" theory).
Noumenon - Wikipedia

It's more a way of saying any God that you think of isn't God that is "out there."

...And thus when all philosophy has dissolved in relativism, and can make fixed sense of the universe no longer, isoldated “I” feels miserably insecure and panicky, finding the real world a flat contradiction of its whole being.

Of course there is nothing new in this predicament of discovering that ideas and words cannot plumb the ultimate mystery of life, that Reality or, if you will, God cannot be comprehended by the finite mind. The only novelty is that the predicament is now social rather than individual; it is widely felt, not confined to the few. Almost every spiritual tradition recognizes that a point comes when two things must happen: man must surrender his separate-feeling “I,” and must face the fact that he cannot know, that is, define the ultimate.

These traditions also recognize that beyond this point there lies a “vision of God” which cannot be put into words, and which is certainly something utterly different from perceiving a radiant gentleman on a golden throne, or a literal flash of blinding light. They also indicate that this vision is a restoration of something which we once had, and “lost” because we did not or could not appreciate it. This vision is, then, the unclouded awareness of this undefinable “something” which we call life, present reality, the great stream, the eternal now—an awareness without the sense of separation from it.

The moment I name it, it is no longer God; it is man, tree, green, black, red, soft, hard, long, short, atom, universe. One would readily agree with any theologian who deplores pantheism that these denizens of the world of verbiage and convention, these sundry “things” conceived as fixed and distant entities, are not God. If you ask me to show you God, I will point to the sun, or a tree, or a worm. But if you say, “You mean, then, that God is the sun, the tree, the worm, and all other things?”—I shall have to say that you have missed the point entirely.

~The Wisdom of Insecurity, Alan W. Watts
 
Last edited:

Quintessence

Consults with Trees
Staff member
Premium Member
Mine's pretty simple. It's also personal. It's for me, not for you or anyone else, as it stems from my life experiences and background.

First, some premises:

  • Let "gods" designate that which is worthy of worship.
  • Let "worthy" designate any qualities that merit recognition, attention, respect, or value
    • Examples: having abilities I do not, being something I depend on to exist, being fundamentally greater, being awe-inspiring or fascinating
  • Let "worship" designate expressions of gratitude, adoration and/or reverence, especially with a ceremonial or ritualistic context
Next, some observations about myself:
  • I'm one of those lucky people who managed to never loose their child-like fascination and wonder at everything.
  • As such, I find everything to be worthy. I'm able to recognize everything has unique gifts, and that all threads in this tapestry we call the world support me and are greater than I am as an individual.
  • While I'm pretty bad about ceremony and ritual, I like to engage in small gestures to say thanks to the world for being so awesome.
Therefore:
  • Since I attribute something as worthy and enjoy making worshipful gestures towards those things, my world is full of gods.
 
Top