A Proof that God Exists

[Ben Avraham]

A PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS.

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

From Abraham and until Aristotle God existed only for the pious who could exercise faith. For Cosmologists God had only been a probability, extremely small nevertheless a probability. At the time of Aristotle that small probability had been erased as Aristotle discovered that the universe was eternal; no beginning and no end. The pious went on with their faith but as Science was concerned, the non-existence of God had been proved. The line of thought that God's existence was depending on the universe having had a beginning lasted from about 330 BCE with Aristotle and until 1922 ACE with George Lemaitre, a Catholic priest who brought the news about the Big Bang to the whole world as the beginning of the universe.

Cosmologists throughout the world had to adopt Lemaitre's discovery as the nearest approach to the truth they had ever achieved. Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

 

[JJ50]

That isn't proof, you can't use the Bible, which is a human construction, as proof of anything.

 

[Kemosloby]

That's funny that a Catholic priest started the Big Bang theory. I suspect them for things like that, evolution too.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

A PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS.

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

You need to step through your thought process on that conclusion if you're going to want me to accept it.

From Abraham and until Aristotle God existed only for the pious who could exercise faith. For Cosmologists God had only been a probability, extremely small nevertheless a probability.

Let me get this straight: you're saying that - apart from the Cosmological Argument - there has never been sufficient evidence or argument to believe in God? This a very extreme position... much more extreme than the position that I hold as an atheist.

Personally, I'm content to just say that I haven't seen a good reason to believe myself; you seem to go a few steps further and claim that - again, apart from the Cosmological Argument - a good reason to believe doesn't exist at all.

At the time of Aristotle that small probability had been erased as Aristotle discovered that the universe was eternal; no beginning and no end. The pious went on with their faith but as Science was concerned, the non-existence of God had been proved. The line of thought that God's existence was depending on the universe having had a beginning lasted from about 330 BCE with Aristotle and until 1922 ACE with Georges Lemaitre a Catholic priest who brought the news about the Big Bang to the whole world as the beginning of the universe.

Cosmologists throughout the world had to adopt Lemaitre's discovery as the nearest approach to the truth they had ever achieved. Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

So...

- the Big Bang happened.
- therefore, __________.
- therefore, God?

Care to fill in the blank?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Its a "Told you so" argument. Maimonides was born in 1135. Kepler was born in 1571. His argument is that apparently several centuries before it was accepted by most Christians, Maimonides insisted upon a universe with a beginning. Therefore Maimonides must be right about God. That is the argument. No, it isn't a proof.

 

[Kemosloby]

Increase of doubt about God is proof of God. Assuming that people have been basically the same and equally skeptical. Increasing doubt shows that there was once less reason to doubt the existence of God, indicating God was more apparent in the world in the past.

 

[Willamena]

A PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS.

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

That's not necessarily correct, as it upholds only a particular medieval image of "God." Rather, God, as the eternal creator present in each and every moment, aware of and animator of each moment (omnipresence/omniscience/omnipotence), is still a valid image of the eternal. In this case, God's creation is coextending, equally as eternal as God.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

Doesn't quite follow, really. There is no real reason I need to exist. I just do. There is no real reason I need the grass in my yard, I just have it. Lots of things exist and others find need for them, but that doesn't make them necessary by default.

Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

Again, this doesn't really follow. We already made sex unnecessary to procreate. There will come a time when we can skip even the fertilization and go straight to mixing the genetics straight in the tube, sticking them in an emptied stem cell, and go from there. There will come a time, therefore, where you don't really have a "mother" and "father" in the traditional sense. Besides, you know how I feel about cyclical histories ...

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

Only if you're willing to accept any first cause as God, i.e., only if you're willing to accept as sufficient for God the role of Catalyst rather than Agency.

 

[RabbiO]

That's funny that a Catholic priest started the Big Bang theory. I suspect them for things like that, evolution too.

Yeah, let's use any excuse to insert anti-Catholic bias in a thread.

 

[Kemosloby]

Yeah, let's use any excuse to insert anti-Catholic bias in a thread.

It doesn't seem funny to you that the Catholic church started the big bang theory?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Increase of doubt about God is proof of God. Assuming that people have been basically the same and equally skeptical. Increasing doubt shows that there was once less reason to doubt the existence of God, indicating God was more apparent in the world in the past.

Inconsistencies between god-claims and what actually exists only arise as we learn about what actually exists.

It's hard to say that "Zeus throws lightning bolts from Mount Olympus" is implausible when you don't know what actually causes lightning.

We only recognize conflicts with the facts as we learn the facts.

 

[vijeno]

God exists because some people say so?

 

[RabbiO]

It doesn't seem funny to you that the Catholic church started the big bang theory?

First of all, the church did not come up with the big bang theory, it was an astronomer and physicist who also happened to be a Catholic priest. In his book about the big bang, science writer Simon Singh notes - It was Lemaître's firm belief that scientific endeavour should stand isolated from the religious realm. With specific regard to his Big Bang theory, he commented: 'As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question.' Lemaître had always been careful to keep his parallel careers in cosmology and theology on separate tracks, in the belief that one led him to a clearer comprehension of the material world, while the other led to a greater understanding of the spiritual realm.... Not surprisingly, he was frustrated and annoyed by the Pope's deliberate mixing of theology and cosmology.

 

[Kemosloby]

Inconsistencies between god-claims and what actually exists only arise as we learn about what actually exists.

It's hard to say that "Zeus throws lightning bolts from Mount Olympus" is implausible when you don't know what actually causes lightning.

We only recognize conflicts with the facts as we learn the facts.

Lets look at the process of forgetfullness. It starts out they knew God and who God was. Then after a while they forget Gods Identity. Other Gods take his place, hundreds of Gods of all variety. Then people start to notice those hundreds of Gods are false gods and begin to believe there is no god at all.

 

[Kemosloby]

First of all, the church did not come up with the big bang theory, it was an astronomer and physicist who also happened to be a Catholic priest. In his book about the big bang, science writer Simon Singh notes - It was Lemaître's firm belief that scientific endeavour should stand isolated from the religious realm. With specific regard to his Big Bang theory, he commented: 'As far as I can see, such a theory remains entirely outside any metaphysical or religious question.' Lemaître had always been careful to keep his parallel careers in cosmology and theology on separate tracks, in the belief that one led him to a clearer comprehension of the material world, while the other led to a greater understanding of the spiritual realm.... Not surprisingly, he was frustrated and annoyed by the Pope's deliberate mixing of theology and cosmology.

It seems about the same M.O. as all the other super huge hoaxes. The big bang theory...no proof, major hoax. Evolution, no proof man evolved from apes or a primordial ooze..major hoax. Climate Change..no proof of man made climate change..major hoax.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Lets look at the process of forgetfullness. It starts out they knew God and who God was. Then after a while they forget Gods Identity. Other Gods take his place, hundreds of Gods of all variety. Then people start to notice those hundreds of Gods are false gods and begin to believe there is no god at all.

Kind of what Ricky Gervais was getting at, eh?

Your God is the only God that exists. All other Gods are ridiculous made-up nonsense. But not yours. Yours makes perfect sense.

An alternate narrative to the one that - AFAICT - you just made up:

People start out not knowing much of anything and come up with all sorts of explanations for how things work and why the way they are.

Over time, the explanations that are exposed as obviously wrong are thrown away. We learn more and more, so what's obviously wrong keeps expanding.

 

[YmirGF]

Kind of what Ricky Gervais was getting at, eh?



An alternate narrative to the one that - AFAICT - you just made up:

People start out not knowing much of anything and come up with all sorts of explanations for how things work and why the way they are.

Over time, the explanations that are exposed as obviously wrong are thrown away. We learn more and more, so what's obviously wrong keeps expanding.

Thank you @9-10ths_Penguin for saving me much time in crafting responses to this thread. Excellent work.

 

[Kemosloby]

Kind of what Ricky Gervais was getting at, eh?



An alternate narrative to the one that - AFAICT - you just made up:

People start out not knowing much of anything and come up with all sorts of explanations for how things work and why the way they are.

Over time, the explanations that are exposed as obviously wrong are thrown away. We learn more and more, so what's obviously wrong keeps expanding.

Yet, They were coming up with explanations for things they have seen.

So it starts out people saw God and had no doubt there was a God. Then they pass the knowledge on to others and the story changes a little everytime it is told, until it become unbelievable and people forget the story altogether.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

A PROOF THAT GOD EXISTS.

According to Moses Maimonides, a Philosopher, Theologian and Medical Doctor in his book "The Guide for the Perplexed," there would be no need for a Creator if the universe was eternal, without beginning or end. In other words, God would not exist. However, if the universe did have a beginning,God by necessity would exist.

From Abraham and until Aristotle God existed only for the pious who could exercise faith. For Cosmologists God had only been a probability, extremely small nevertheless a probability. At the time of Aristotle that small probability had been erased as Aristotle discovered that the universe was eternal; no beginning and no end. The pious went on with their faith but as Science was concerned, the non-existence of God had been proved. The line of thought that God's existence was depending on the universe having had a beginning lasted from about 330 BCE with Aristotle and until 1922 ACE with Georges Lemaitre a Catholic priest who brought the news about the Big Bang to the whole world as the beginning of the universe.

Cosmologists throughout the world had to adopt Lemaitre's discovery as the nearest approach to the truth they had ever achieved. Now, since the universe had indeed a beginning, a proof had be established for the existence of God, blessed be He!

The universe doesn't have a beginning. Space always existed. We, people on earth, have a beginning, just as earth, and every single planet or star, but when you see a baby form in its womb, we usually think father and mother created the baby. The earth was created by is various bombardment of rocks as so was the moon. Just because we have a beginning doesn't mean the rest of the universe does.

It's not proof of god; just, analyzing what could be proof. They are arguments. Theories. Beliefs. Not facts.