There Is a God. Prove Me Wrong.

The universe and everything inside it could not have been created had not there been a God to do so. Think about it. Nothing comes from nothing. Much more likely than this huge universe coming from nothing would be if a piece of tender roast beef appeared from nowhere right in front of my eyes. Now, most will argue that if nothing comes from nothing then how did God come from nothing? He must have had a creator too if nothing truly does come from nothing. This is not the case however. For example: If you have an army with 500 soldiers and they are all standing in a straight line. The soldier on the far right of the line gestures to the person on his left and tells him, "You start." And this continues throughout the line until the last person is told to start. Is it possible, then, for the soldiers to launch an attack at all? If no one is willing to start? The only possible and logical explanation for this perfectly balanced expanding universe, then, is an entity that is all powerful and is the creator of all things and one that is not bound by time and space. One might consider that the fact that God created time and space means that he is not bound by them and thus he does not exist. This mind set is wrong. He is not bound by the laws of man and this universe. That is the only way there could be a God, because if God were bound by his own creation, then what kind of a God would he be? Trapped in the very things that are sustained by him alone. Impossible.

There is a god. Prove me wrong.

 

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/burden-of-proof.html

Look at the example C.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

This will probably be locked anyways.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proving_a_negative

We can't prove you wrong anymore than anyone can prove I'm not a bear.

 

Your titling the thread "There is a God. Prove me wrong." seems to suggest that it is our burden as atheists to prove that theistic claims are false. As an atheist, it is not my burden to prove that no gods exist, just as it is not my burden to prove that dragons, and fairies do not exist. Bertrand Russell illustrated this point quite well with his celestial teapot. Russel basically said this: if one were to make the claim that a teapot is in orbit around the sub between earth and mars, this claim cannot be disprove, however the absence of a disproof of this claim is not positive evidence for its existence. I cannot prove you wrong, all that I can do is show that you have not your burden of proof and show that existence of gods is implausible.

You've basically attempted to avoid any type of rational discussion with this statement; to say that god is not bound by any laws of this universe implies that we cannot even discuss his existence, as existence is a property of material things. To say that god is not bound by the laws of this universe is to say that he can do the logically impossible; he could make 2 + 2 = 5, or construct a square circle; how can the existence of a being be discussed in terms of logic, when you are claiming the the being himself does not conform to logic?

 

if you actually read halfway through the original post you would realize that your question has been dismissed from the "valid post category". besides that you offer no aide to the progression of the thread which resides in a section for intelligent discussion.

on topic: what kind of god exactly do you believe it is that exists then? The thought of a god that actually has concerns with the fates and actions of human beings is rediculous. To me, the thought of organized religion is also quite laughable. the religious teachings about god and the like that people acquire from birth, are no more believable or credible than santa claus. people dismiss this analogy often without seeing how truly applicable it really is. If i had a child and created a seemingly unreal (to us) deity (for example lets say the "unicorn of greatness") that i could consistently expose him to and "teach" him to believe/worship him as the creator and then get all other humans he comes in contact with to support the same belief (assuming this is a controlled experiment), then he would truly believe it. The same way anyone truly believes god is the creator, or jesus is their savior, etc.

 

I don't think this is against the rules, since the OP did attempt a reasoned argument. However, behind the wall of text was the simple argument of "The universe cannot exist without 'God'."

However, it is a fairly weak topic to debate because, as almost all of the previous posters have noted, this is a Argument from Ignorance fallacy (aka, Burden of Proof, proving a negative, etc.). Your logic does not hold up to the rules of a logical debate. Just because we can't prove OP wrong does not mean that our argument (that god does not have to exist) is wrong.

I'd also like to point out, as Jimmy already did, that the OP also set up any dissenting argument to fail by arguing that the god which he is defining is not bound by any law, concept, or idea that we can throw out there. No matter what we say, OP can argue that his god doesn't have to follow any rule.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inductive_reasoning

The statement I should be saying is "there is no God, prove me wrong"
You couldn't. You can't prove anything is impossible, you can only prove things are possible. Neither of us have proof, so let's go on believing what we believe and stop arguing, k?

tl;dr: unwinnable argument from any side until proof is derived

 

You want proof? Look at the miracles around you. The sky, the earth the water and the soil. Look at yourselves! DNA in you is extremely complex and couldn't have appeared by chance. One of the worlds leading athiest scientists Anthony Flew renounced athiesm about 3 years ago due to his study of microbiology. He examined DNA and concluded that it could never have been created without a Divine entity to shape it. But since most reject these proofs as far as I have seen then I have no argument with you, for argument would be futile as nothing will sway a set minded person. But we may as well continue to discuss it in a friendly manner as I would like to know more about the athiest point of view myself.

A famous little story for kids on God:

There were two fish that grew up hearing about the legend of water. The fish were skeptical about its existence because they claimed that they could not see it and there was no evidence of it. So they spent years (Its a story, please do not lecture me about the life span of a fish) searching for water but their attempts were futile because they just couldn't find it. Then, one day, they went to a wise fish who was hundreds of years old. They asked him about the famous legend of water and if it really existed. He answered them by saying: "Water is all around you, it is what you breathe, what you swim in, what sustains you, and anywhere you go, there will be no shortage of it. If you open your eyes to see it then surely you will see it. But if you dismiss is as a fable and fairy tale then you will never know water till the day you die.

God is like this water. He sustains us and is all around us. In the sky, the Earth, the water in the sea. Everywhere. If we do not try and find him and embrace him we will live in blindness for the rest of our lives. Proof is what you want? There it is. Now I cannot, and will not, force anything upon anyone, but I for one strongly believe in God, because imo there is no other rational explanation on how everything came into place. You decide.

“And We are nearer to him than his jugular vein" [Qaaf 50:16]

Nay, here are Signs self-evident in the hearts of those endowed with knowledge: and none but the unjust reject Our Signs. [Ankabut 29:49]

 

The only reason you choose to believe in religion, is your scared theres nothing 'else' after this life.

 

If God always "existed" without being created, then why is it so hard to accept that the first atoms that led to the gradual synthesis of an entire universe could have always existed as well?

There, I proved you wrong. Now prove me wrong. Infinite loop = sploshion.

 

Because atoms are not intelligent. They cannot come from nothing. As i mentioned earlier, it is just as likely that atoms existed without a creator as it is a piece of bread materializes out of nowhere right in front of your eyes. Not likely eh? The only possible explanation is an intelligent, omnipotent God that created all.

You can tell me why I believe something, but I am pretty sure that I know better than you why I believe what I do. The prospect of "We came from nothing and are going nowhere" seems just a tad absurd to me. This is why I believe in religion among the many other signs that God does, in fact, exist. Please do not try to tell me, or any other person for that matter, why they believe what they believe in. They know better than you about their own selves.

 

you say atoms are not intelligent? thats funny. so you KNOW god is intelligent? you still have not defined what god you believe. it is ignorant that you could believe in an intelligent god but not even think about the possibility that those atoms could be intelligent (not saying they are, just making a point). as far as you and i know, the word "intelligence" and its definition are manmade. Intelligence is earthly and originates in the brains of life forms. are you saying your god has a brain? so he is some intelligent guy floating around out there? oh wait, he defies time,space, etc. so no matter what i say does not matter. as other people have said, you dismiss all rational thought by saying that.

as far as the atheist who renounced his atheism because the dna was too complex to not have been created by a divine entity...thats also funny. This is the very basic reason why humans created religion in the first place...because they could not explain these things around them themselves and need some excuse to satisfy their need for explanation and purpose. the universe has been around for such an unfathomable amount of time and is so infinitely expansive that it is factually impossible that a dna molecule like that did not eventually exist.

and also your comment about not telling you or anyone why they believe what they believe is very ignorant and insulting. Please tell me then the point of a psychologist? a teacher? etc? they tell you things you do not know. You believed in santa claus when you were little because your parents and the people around you convinced you so. the same way i believed in god when i was young, because my parents and the environment around me enforced catholicism upon me. Other people do not actually know why they believe in the religion...mostly because they believe it is real...so yeah....others CAN tell you why you truly believe what you believe. you probably wont even read this as you did not even read my last post...

 

You claim that my comment towards that guy was insulting when I told him not to tell me why I believe what I believe. He is not a psychologist. I do not tell him that he does not believe in god because he does not want to be tied down by the morals and ethics that comes with accepting him. In my opinion, his comment was far more insulting than mine. I know the reasons that I am committed to my faith, and I do not need an atheist to tell my why I do believe what I believe.

I am trying to explain what I mean by saying 'Intelligent' God is all-knowing and all-wise. His bounties have no limits, but I was merely trying to explain my point by using the word 'Intelligent'


"Proteins are the essential constituents of all living cells, and they consist of the five elements, carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen and sulphur, with possibly 40,000 atoms in the ponderous molecule. As there are 92 chemical elements in Nature, all distributed at random, the chance that these five elements may come together to form the molecule, the quantity of matter that must be continually shaken up, and the length of time necessary to finish this task, can all be calculated. A Swiss mathematician, Charles Eugen Guye has made the computation and finds that the odds against such an occurence are 10 ^ 160 to 1, or only one chance in 10 160, that is, 10 miltiplied by itself 160 times, a number far too large to be expressed in words."

 

Basically exactly what I was going to type.

The only possible logical explanation of our universe is that it is controlled by an entity not bound by laws of this universe? Please explain how that makes any sense.

 

This is a bad argument. It's pathetic how there is actually replies to a thread like this, myself included. You can't disprove Christianity and you can't prove it either. Live your life how you want, when you die you'll be proven wrong/right.

Edit: I'm Christian.





...and an Anarchist

 

The only possible and logical explanation of the *existence* of our universe is that it was created by an entity not bound by its laws. Not very hard to understand tbh.

 

no pic no proof, nothin more to talk about.

 

DO you know the reasons that you're committed to your faith? do you truly not need an atheist to tell you why you believe what you believe?

guess what. the only reason you believe what you believe (about your faith), and know what you know, is because someone else, or some other factor/stimulus in your environment told you why/how to believe what you believe. You convey your inability to be openminded by dismissing an idea that your own life/beliefs prove to be true.

as i said in my previous post, the universe is so unfathomably large/old and ever-expanding that it is impossible for something like that (even with odds that seem preposterous) to not have happened/occured.

 

lol luke

"All masses are found to attract one another with a force that varies inversely as the square of the separation distance between the masses. That, in brief, is the law of gravity. But where did that "2" [square] come from? Why is the equation exactly "separation distance squared"? Why is it not 1.87, 1.92, 2.001, or 3.378; why is it exactly 2? Every test reveals the force of gravity to be keyed precisely to that 2. Any value other than 2 would lead to an eventual decay of orbits,—and the entire universe would destroy itself."

There are so many more things about the universe that could NOT have happened by chance, no matter the time available for them to take place.

The whole article is here: http://www.quranandscience.com/know-your-god/144-the-delicate-balance-in-the-universe.html

You can look at it if you like.

There are also miracles in the Quran about science that no human had the technology or resources to discover 1400 years ago. Yet, they are in the book which has not been altered at all since its revalation. This is seemingly not possible. The Quran has many more miracles. It mentions the Big Bang Theory, for one, when no human could ever have guessed the way in which the universe started all those years ago. Yet it took 1300 years for scientists to find out what was lying right under their noses the whole time. The truth.