God's Evidence

[Marie5890]

This is so true. Better to approach it from the aspect of objective truth; the fact that something never comes from nothing; that everything in our world has a cause, and therefore, there must ultimately be an “Uncaused Cause”. As others have said, there are many philosophical arguments you can present (just don’t call them philosophical arguments). But I agree, feelings and emotions prove nothing in the end.

Much better approach…

 

[FabiusMaximus]

If I see a Ferrari along the side of the road, my first conclusion would not be that it appeared out of nowhere. In fact, I’d probably entertain the thought that the CIA planted it there for the sole purpose to spy on me before I’d believe that it came out of nothing.

No one would believe that it came out of nothing.

Therefore, to believe that the Earth and the universe, much more brilliant and complex than a Ferrari, could not be intelligently designed by a supernatural being is absolutely insane for me.

 

[Reuben_J]

Actually the chaotic universe and the immense number of stars is a reason for me to remain an atheist, this isn’t a good idea, you have to show them evidences outside the beauty of existence, because as much as there is wonderful things, there is awful things, and none of these prove a god or gods, so how then about a specific god?

I agree with this. Nowadays, there is nothing that science cannot answer or does not have an answer to. So it is not a good idea.

I am sceptical about giving proof of God simply because God does not operate that way. Even if He does, it is not the ideal but more of an exception. Thus one cannot proof God in that manner, at least not to the satisfaction of one who does not believe in the first place.

I could however be persuaded if I have to, to use the creation argument to justify God because ultimately after tracing where everything seen and unseen come from, that there must be a creator. If one see a chair, there must be a carpenter who assembled it, and the carpenter was born by his parents and his parents’ parents and so on until it must reach a point that you have to ask where the original parents came from. I would go along with the argument that they could not have made themselves but was made by others until it comes to a point that ultimately we have a Being that is not made and created but exist which has no beginning and end, an attribute that applies to God.

Of course, a better example would be the sun and the moon and the stars and the universe instead of the chair on the porch. It is easier to trace the universe to the knowledge that we already known like the Big Bang. But instead of saying it was the Big Bang that was responsible for what we have today; a curious mind would ask, what then before that? And that would lead to a question where there is no answer other than to say, it was so.

But this kind of argument is by no means conclusive especially if you talk to a non-believer and especially if the fellow is a good talker who could out-talked you and gives better argument.

Perhaps the best means available to prove God is by the changes you undergone by knowing Him – changes for the better. If it makes you a better person than you were before, it would be appreciated by most people even atheists who know goodness when they see one. But they do not necessary attribute it to God. From my experience however, usually parents or children who experienced this transformation would not mind to live a Christian life in Christian environment instead of attending psychiatrist or therapist clinics or clubs that may give similar transformation and changes.

 

[Miriam1947]

Anthony Flew, lifelong atheist.

telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/culture-obituaries/books-obituaries/7586929/Professor-Antony-Flew.html

DNA convinced Flew that there is a Creator.

. . . After months of soul-searching, Flew concluded that research into DNA had “shown, by the almost unbelievable complexity of the arrangements which are needed to produce life, that intelligence must have been involved”. Moreover, though he accepted Darwinian evolution, he felt that it could not explain the beginnings of life. “I have been persuaded that it is simply out of the question that the first living matter evolved out of dead matter and then developed into an extraordinarily complicated creature,” he said.

 

[reb108]

Or…just have them look and the birds, the trees, the sky, the stars, etc. God has provided us with nature.

One day I thought about a bird’s nest. I asked, how did this nest come about? I dismissed the obvious reason to search for other possibilities: a little whirlwind picked up everything and settled all the twigs, strings, etc. in one concise spot in a tree. No, that didn’t seem right. The only thing that made sense was that a bird made the nest. Then I thought, if it is so obvious that a bird created the nest, then what about the bird? Who made the bird? So for me, in a rather unsophisticated way, this pointed to God, the creator.

 

[SteveVH]

One day I thought about a bird’s nest. I asked, how did this nest come about? I dismissed the obvious reason to search for other possibilities: a little whirlwind picked up everything and settled all the twigs, strings, etc. in one concise spot in a tree. No, that didn’t seem right. The only thing that made sense was that a bird made the nest. Then I thought, if it is so obvious that a bird created the nest, then what about the bird? Who made the bird? So for me, in a rather unsophisticated way, this pointed to God, the creator.

Very astute observation. Everything in the universe has a cause. We have mountains because of the tectonic plates crashing into each other. We have a tree because it grew from a seed that was dropped by another tree, and so on. Since it is self-evident that something never comes from nothing, but is always “caused” by something else, there must, at some point be an “Uncaused Cause”. That is who we call God, the author of all creation, of everything that exists or has ever existed.

 

[marymary1975]

All the evidence you need is in my video about when I “died” and went to Heaven and heard God’s voice tell me that it was not my time because He still has work for me to do. Then I saw my husband who told me I had to go back, but that he would be waiting there for me. I didn’t want to come back. I felt the greatest love, peace, and joy I had ever experienced. Now I will do anything He wants me to do. I will go anywhere He wants me to go. Now I tell everyone I meet in person or online that God is Real! Heaven is Real!Here is the link:

youtube.com/watch?v=DV_IeRlIWVU

If you want more documentation, search for “near death experiences” on YouTube. There you will find children, atheists, and agnostics who tell of their experience when they “died.”
Some went to Heaven, some went to Hell, but all of them came back believing in God.

May God bless you and keep you in His loving arms today and for the rest of your life.

With all my love as your sister in Christ.

I had a classmate at the university who was full atheist (didn’t believe in God, devil, bell or heaven), he only believed in what you see and in the now and HR was living let’s say, quite a sinful life. He had a near death experience which I thought it was amazing, as many people argue that near death experiences are the products of what the brain beliefs (in his case it couldn’t have been a product of his beliefs as he siento believe in god or the devil). He did go to hell and encounter a huge monster with red eyes who told him “you are coming with me” he panicked and started running away, he says after being running and chased by this monster he saw a huge abyss that no human being could ever jump. When he saw that abyss he screamed “if it is true that there is a God in this universe please help me.to jump over this abyss” instantly he was capable to crowd the abyss and he ended up surrounded by a massive light. Long story short he came back, converted to catholicism and became a priest and he does preach a lot to atheists and non catholic. To me.his experience is a total evidence as I knew him before he had his accident (the experience was the result of a deathly car accident) and I would have never thought that such a radical atheist like him could ever become catholic, little less a priest.

 

[hansard]

ClearWater wrote:
Plus, of course, you have St. Thomas Aquinas’ 5 proofs of the existence of God.

Aquinas, for all his medieval genius, was writing in an age before there was any understanding of science. None of the Five Proofs are proofs at all. They are all hypotheses at best. Why is God the conclusion for each hypothesis? Why, simply because Aquinas argues in that direction.

My mother said she always thought the existence of God was “obvious”!

No disrespect, but this is hardly a credible source.

 

[Judas_Thaddeus]

I’m not really well equipped to answer what evidence there is OF GOD, but let me bring up this analogy:

In the Future, a man will be able to create on his computer a virtual world inhabited by
artificial intelligences who interact with each other. Now as long as these intelligences
are bound to the limited virtual world, they will never have absolute evidence that their
creator or his world even exist, but does that mean he or his world doesn’t exist?

It’s not much, I know, sorry, but it’s a thought.

 

[Robert_in_SD]

I like the argument from Beethoven. It goes something like this: The music of Beethoven exist… There is a God. (You either get this one or you don’t)

You can share Peter Kreeft’s 20 arguments for the existence of God here

These are all good philosophical proofs. I don’t think you can present scientific proof of God’s existence because as we understand God (as Christians), His existence is apart from His creation. perhaps you can say that there is evidence of God’s existence from creation (which by it’s very name implies a creator), but that’s not the same as empirical proof.

Peace,
Robert

 

[SteveVH]

I like the argument from Beethoven. It goes something like this: The music of Beethoven exist… There is a God. (You either get this one or you don’t)

You can share Peter Kreeft’s 20 arguments for the existence of God here

These are all good philosophical proofs. I don’t think you can present scientific proof of God’s existence because as we understand God (as Christians), His existence is apart from His creation. perhaps you can say that there is evidence of God’s existence from creation (which by it’s very name implies a creator), but that’s not the same as empirical proof.

Peace,
Robert

When one sees a painting it is not unreasonable to assume that there was an artist, even if you never saw him create the painting.

 

[Emese]

There is no evidence.
But my favourite argument is that there’s no evidence to prove that God does NOT exist either. So if your classmates want proof from you, you could also ask them to prove their side too. And point out that atheism is a belief system the same way as any other religion, because you can not know for certain so you have to believe that God does not exist in order to be a " true " atheist.