Year 12s: what will be the first way you research your future options? >>

If you could prove God, would you?!

Scroll to see replies

Reply 20

Peachykeen09

no and then i'd feel awesome because i'd be keeping a huge secret from everyone
:cool:

Reply 21

sam1am

If you could prove god, and you knew that you could, then you would already know the proof, so you would have already proved him? You can't suddenly decide to ignore the proof once you know it. And it would be stupid to reject the truth if it could be clearly demonstrated, even if you have spent most of your life previously ranting about how God probably doesn't exist.

Reply 22

Miss Anonymous

Original post by JustinDerek

If you could prove God, and not be against God, would you?

If I prove that God exists... then it becomes a FACT. Not a BELIEF... so nope :smile:

Reply 23

Serentonin

Original post by Aphotic Cosmos

I think this sums it up:

Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything [babel fish] so mindboggingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as the final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:
`I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, `for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing.'
`But,' says Man, `The Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.'
`Oh dear,' says God, `I hadn't thought of that,' and promptly vanished in a puff of logic.

Proof of god invalidates the blind faith that is a pre-requisite of all religions and paradoxically disproves the existence of god.

You get rep for quoting hitchiker.

Reply 24

SoulfulBoy

Original post by The Cornerstone

There is a lot of god threads popping out today...

We are in Christmas, aren't we.

Reply 25

The Cornerstone

Original post by SoulfulBoy

We are in Christmas, aren't we.

Actually it's been five days since christmas :fyi:

Reply 26

mrsholdencaulfield

Original post by gummi_bears

Wouldn't that defeat the whole purpose of religion in the first place?

You're right, religion is based on trust. But I still would.

Reply 27

SoulfulBoy

Original post by The Cornerstone

Actually it's been five days since christmas :fyi:

I meant Christmas period. :cool:

Reply 28

gummi_bears

Original post by mrsholdencaulfield

You're right, religion is based on trust. But I still would.

True true, but what would that achieve? :confused:

ohmygod alkjfd;lkdsajf. I know this is going to make me sound really shallow, but this reminds me of the movie Da Vinci's Code. You know, in the end, where Sophie finds out she's a descendant of Jesus and it's up to her whether she should let the world know and how she decides not to in the end.....yes?

yeah....this discussion just reminded me of that :rolleyes:

Reply 29

defrule

I watched a video on youtube with Prof Michio Kaku referring to two Gods. One is the God of prayer, the personal God in religion and stuff. The other is the God of harmony, the God that says why things are the way they are.

I recommend his videos, he is absolutely brilliant at explaining physics in everyday language that you average joe can understand. How the entire universe could just be a symphony of vibrating strings and stuff, it's amazing.

Reply 30

joey11223

I'm not sure exactly what would count as proof but I would. I mean for example if I found some sort of signature or artificial message printed onto part of human DNA I'd certainly tell the world about it. Obviously it could be proof of a more advanced species which has experimented on us, not necessarily an all-powerful deity, but that would be up to people to decide for themselves.