Proof for the existence of the Abrahamic god?

[Walter Russell]

This would be more convincing if Jews and Muslims used those names in their own languages, but they don't.

I don't disagree but symbology and numerology are important to these religions and truthfully if they wanted to make easy for us, they could have been more forthright in their text but instead we have to navigate parrables, allegories, symbology and numerology. But I guess thats what makes it all so interesting.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

1. No anecdotes (personal events)
2. No long commentaries.
3. Use scientific evidence.
4. Preaching is not evidence, but simply restating your claim.
5. No circular logic. (Bible is true because it says so.)

There is no proof or even evidence for any "revealed" God or supernatural event. The only thing offered by any of them is hearsay, and ancient hearsay at that. Yes, there's a lot of history associated with such religions, but such history has never verified said hearsay, except to show that said hearsay existed and is old.

 

[viole]

If you disallow personal experience and revelation and holy scripture which provides eye witness accounts of God and his Son, how could one possibly prove God's existence? God does not want to be proven through science. If he did, he would simply show himself to humanity and easily demonstrate that he exists and that he is all powerful. This is not God's plan and requires no faith, for which we came to earth to develop.

If scriptures provide eye witness accounts of God, then the Odyssey provides witness accounts of Poliphemus, son of Poseydon.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Scott C.]

If scriptures provide eye witness accounts of God, then the Odyssey provides witness accounts of Poliphemus, son of Poseydon.

Ciao

- viole

Except the Bible accounts are true.

 

[viole]

Except the Bible accounts are true.

Are you really sure?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Scott C.]

Are you really sure?

Ciao

- viole

Yep

 

[viole]

Yep

And what you make you so sure that the accounts on the Odyssey are not true, too?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Scott C.]

And what you make you so sure that the accounts on the Odyssey are not true, too?

Ciao

- viole

It would be cool if they were, but I doubt they are. I always loved the part when Odysseus came home and dressed as a beggar. I also like the Sirens.

 

[viole]

It would be cool if they were, but I doubt they are. I always loved the part when Odysseus came home and dressed as a beggar. I also like the Sirens.

Why do you doubt the veracity of the stories told there?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Scott C.]

Why do you doubt the veracity of the stories told there?

Ciao

- viole

I have no reason to believe they are true.

 

[viole]

I have no reason to believe they are true.

Same here. I have no rason to believe that Bible's stories are true.

Ciao

- viole

 

[YmirGF]

1. No anecdotes (personal events)
2. No long commentaries.
3. Use scientific evidence.
4. Preaching is not evidence, but simply restating your claim.
5. No circular logic. (Bible is true because it says so.)

The Abrahamic god most certainly exists in the minds of the believer. Beyond that, not so much...

 

[Scott C.]

Same here. I have no rason to believe that Bible's stories are true.

Ciao

- viole

I don't see the point of the thread. It asks those who believe in God to prove it scientifically. It can't be proven scientifically. But that should come as no surprise. This has been debated over and over and over here on RF and throughout the world and for thousands of years. So why even ask? I wasn't invited to share why I believe, in fact that was explicitly excluded from the list of allowable evidence.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

I don't see the point of the thread. It asks those who believe in God to prove it scientifically. It can't be proven scientifically. But that should come as no surprise. This has been debated over and over and over here on RF and throughout the world and for thousands of years. So why even ask? I wasn't invited to share why I believe, in fact that was explicitly excluded from the list of allowable evidence.

Which one......or all?

 

[popsthebuilder]

Pardon.

It only shows there is a maker from the perspective and interpretation from the believer.

For example, I know this cell phone has s creator not because it says, say "made in China", but because I undertand how you can take certain material, wires, whatever they use works together to create a phone. I know gravity exist because when I drop the phone, it falls. However, if we were born in space and not on earth, we'd have no sense nor belief that gravity exist And it does.

Creator-belief is not like my cell phone example.

If a creator exist, he would not just have created the origin but hed continue to create (without our help) babies, growth of plants, etc.

Yet, he only stops at our origin.

We create babies
We water plants to grow
Etc.

God does nothing. If he did, we wouldnt need sperm/egg nor water and mulch. Wed just say "hey god. Make it happen" and poof, creation.

God of Abraham cant be prooven outside of the list the OP gave. This commentary and observation can not be proven by science nor be shown point blank. We know by "personal" experience.

How do I know its human interpretation of god of abraham existence and not fact?

Gravity is universal all around the world
Math is universal all around the world
Proven science (not theory) is universal

And so on.

God of abraham is Not universal. A lot of people dont even know Muslim, Judaism, and/or christianity exist (taking out generizations that everyone should know)

Therefore it cannot be proven by evolotion. Only in the minds, hearts, and experiences of believers.

Why are believers trying to proove their god is real by science when religion isnt based on science?

I'm confused. Are you saying we are the cause of continued existence? As in we cause water and Sun?

 

[popsthebuilder]

I did not make it impossible. Unless god can only be proven through subjective reasoning. I want scientific evidence, is that too much to ask?

Indeed it is as science is simply the explaining of observable phenomenon, and only applicable to the material which is readily observable.

Can you literally observe the conscious? Is material actually matter or is it outside the bounds of our complete understanding.

You ask for scientific proof of GOD. I ask for a single all encompassing scientific theory that works within all branches of science. If we had one we might have the other. But seeing as how science is still now only ununified theories, how can you expect it to explain, in full, a singular creative force?

 

[popsthebuilder]

But personal experience is subjective. If I was a Muslim, I could say the same things for Allah.

And Allah translates simply to GOD. It's just a name based in culture, and not a different creator GOD.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I'm confused. Are you saying we are the cause of continued existence? As in we cause water and Sun?

Yes. If God did create the earth, he would be the origin. If he continued to create, like the earth, he wouldn't need two people to make a baby, water to make a plant grow, etc. According to many Christians, Jesus/God walked on water. Yet, if we tried do so, we'd drown. The acts he would do would not be "common sense" like, we cant say "god created man and woman to create children." Most the world knows that and half havent even heard of the god of abraham. He would still "walk on water" and other miracles that some how stopped short a little more than 2,000 years ago.

If creation continued to exist miracles wouldn't top 2,000 or some odd year ago. That is actually kind of weird. 2,000 years want that far ago. A little further back, Jesus was walking on water and waking the dead. Isn't that odd that if Jesus and God existed today, these things would be part of everyday life and we would be able to see continued creation, miracles, etc as before? God would be doing the same as he did with Moses, etc and bring people together by his actual voice rather than have us run around trying to define faith?

If the creator exist, he would be the origin. Watching the grass grow etc I dont see a creator. Its not like Moses and Jesus who actually talked to their Father.

According to Abrahamic religion, there is a huge huge gap in time where things happened magically and now we stopped short.

Why is that? And how can you see the creator in the grass growing while another person cannot? Little more than 2,000 years ago, no one questioned whether Jesus woke the dead. They knew by their faith. No one questioned how Jesus walked on water, he said he did by faith.

There is a serious conflict between one time period and the next. That probably why people cant see god in creation. "God" stopped talking.

 

[paarsurrey]

Yes. If God did create the earth, he would be the origin. If he continued to create, like the earth, he wouldn't need two people to make a baby, water to make a plant grow, etc. According to many Christians, Jesus/God walked on water. Yet, if we tried do so, we'd drown. The acts he would do would not be "common sense" like, we cant say "god created man and woman to create children." Most the world knows that and half havent even heard of the god of abraham. He would still "walk on water" and other miracles that some how stopped short a little more than 2,000 years ago.
If creation continued to exist miracles wouldn't top 2,000 or some odd year ago. That is actually kind of weird. 2,000 years want that far ago. A little further back, Jesus was walking on water and waking the dead. Isn't that odd that if Jesus and God existed today, these things would be part of everyday life and we would be able to see continued creation, miracles, etc as before? God would be doing the same as he did with Moses, etc and bring people together by his actual voice rather than have us run around trying to define faith?
If the creator exist, he would be the origin. Watching the grass grow etc I dont see a creator. Its not like Moses and Jesus who actually talked to their Father.
According to Abrahamic religion, there is a huge huge gap in time where things happened magically and now we stopped short.
Why is that? And how can you see the creator in the grass growing while another person cannot? Little more than 2,000 years ago, no one questioned whether Jesus woke the dead. They knew by their faith. No one questioned how Jesus walked on water, he said he did by faith.
There is a serious conflict between one time period and the next. That probably why people cant see god in creation. "God" stopped talking.

Is all that one said from the religion or the science?
Regards

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Is all that one said from the religion or the science?
Regards

Actually, I don't know. I don't believe in a creator; so, what I said is more it is illogical to assume god exist just from, say, looking at a tree grow. That, and I was pointing the illogical point of god doing miracles and creating 2,000 years ago but for some reason not even that much later it stopped.

As for science, I don't know how that is in the equation, really for a religious topic. What I said assumed a creator existed to point out what I said directly above.

In my personal belief, I see divinity in creation in and of itself. It doesn't need a source. The Spirits of creation is what it is: life. So, how we interact within life is how creation originated and how it continues. It makes more sense. I wouldn't say scientific because I am an animist; so, all living and things have Spirits.