Scientific Proof of God

[WordofGod]

---

sorry blocked ang youtube dire.

I know what ID is but rejecting that idea and accepting other hypothesis is not an attitude of a scientist. Kay wala pa may gyuy irrefutable evidence nga wala ang ID then its safe to say nga part ni sa ato search...

For me ang pinaka idea ani is your searching for the truth. Now kung ma diskobrehan nga walay Ginoo based sa imong study and irrefutable evidence then fine kay at least ang truth maoy importante.

bro, truth remains unchanged even the passing of millions of time! The word of God, the bible, holds it true. as it is written, heaven and earth shall pass away, but God's words will never pass away.

YouTube - ‪Ravi Zacharias: An Evangelical Understanding of Postmodernism 1 / 4‬‏
YouTube - ‪Ravi Zacharias and William Lane Craig answers questions about Christianity (Part 2 of ‬‏
YouTube - ‪Is There Meaning in Evil and Suffering? (7 of 11)‬‏

[WordofGod]

I agree that it's a problem and will continue to be a problem. The hypothesis of the existence and non-existence of an Intelligent Design are equally probable, meaning there are only two options here --- either he EXIST or he DOESN'T. And of course I'm in the position to admit that I don't entirely eliminate the idea that ID might exist, but again it presents a bigger question to the argument --- who created the creator?

bro before you were born, your question has been the subject for all who come to seek the truth of God...and all throughout the ages, man failed to discover it. Bisan unsa pa imong masulod sa huna2, diha rana kutob sa imong ulo...you have no capability to fathom God's existence, unless you will come to understand what he did for us on the cross of Jesus Christ.

YouTube - ‪Ravi Zacharias Answers Stephen Hawking - Part 1‬‏
YouTube - ‪Ravi on How do you know there is a God?‬‏


mas lisud i-explain bro ang universe ni exist without GOD, who is the intelligent designer. He is the uncaused being who bring these things into existence.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYLHxcqJmoM

[pinoy_09]

bro before you were born, your question has been the subject for all who come to seek the truth of God...and all throughout the ages, man failed to discover it. Bisan unsa pa imong masulod sa huna2, diha rana kutob sa imong ulo...you have no capability to fathom God's existence, unless you will come to understand what he did for us on the cross of Jesus Christ.

YouTube - ‪Ravi Zacharias Answers Stephen Hawking - Part 1‬‏
YouTube - ‪Ravi on How do you know there is a God?‬‏

There is a limit to man's intelligence. So we really don't know all the answers to many questions including God's existence (if he ever exist). With that said, I would rather say "I don't know" than bank on absolutes.

[WordofGod]

dili man gani nimo ma prove sa bible nga si Lucifer mao ang satan how much more i connect nimo ng lucifer sa imo nakita sa youtube.

okay, show us any reference books bro aside from the bible that proves Lucifer is a good being. bahalag occult nga books.

hahahaha. Nituo ka ni alberto Rivera nga considered as fraud...

dili nana bag-o nga style bro! basta mobisto sa sekreto then fraud dayon ang i label anah.

Tuo diay kag bakak ug ilad wordofgod.?

as i've known, Satan/Lucifer is the greatest deceiver bro.

part ba na sa inyo teaching nga dili mo examine sa source?
I don't think so kay matod pasa mga sola scripturist nga test the spirit if its from God or not di ba?

yes, that's why we've known truth from deceit!

[WordofGod]

There is a limit to man's intelligence. So we really don't know all the answers to many questions including God's existence (if he ever exist). With that said, I would rather say "I don't know" than bank on absolutes.

nice bro. that's why God in his great love for his creations...sent Jesus to incarnate in the human form to tell us about the fulness of God and lived a perfect and spotless life.

why not try to listen to his words?

YouTube - ‪How Can a Suffering Christian Stay Close to God? - Dr. Ravi Zacharias‬‏
YouTube - ‪RAVI ZACHARIAS powerful message‬‏

[pinoy_09]

nice bro. that's why God in his great love for his creations...sent Jesus to incarnate in the human form to tell us about the fulness of God and lived a perfect and spotless life.

why not try to listen to his words?

YouTube - ‪How Can a Suffering Christian Stay Close to God? - Dr. Ravi Zacharias‬‏
YouTube - ‪RAVI ZACHARIAS powerful message‬‏

Wa man koy dag-anan nimo permi bro. Coz everytime I try to start an exchange with you, you slap me with Bible verses, Youtube links, and religious non-sense.

[ketllac]

@pinoy_09

The double standard is created by the same people who atheists criticize. The confusion arises when one starts questioning God. To the Christian mind, when one argues against the presence of a supernatural, it automatically denotes a hard stance that God cannot possibly exist.

I agree and let us not apply judeo/christian God here because ID per se might be the God in Islam religion, satanism, wiccans etc.. what I am referring to about the double standard is the idea that why ID hypothesis is less valid hyphothesis compared to infinite/close universe theory in Physics. Now if we apply scientific method of causality to infinite/close looping universe we can say that ID doesnt violate the method applied in science considering the principle of causality than the idea that universe doenst have a cause and doenst have an end (infinite universe). After all science can be only considered credible way of discovering the mystery of the universe because of it's method which is empirical. Since all of these are just theories and hypotheses that haven't been proven yet using the empirical method then it really holds the same weight.

On the contrary, the atheist stance is more of there is no substantial evidence to support that a God exist.

I understand but even in theoretical physics that uses a mathematical model has a conjecture similar to the hypothesis of ID. In science there are so many methods to arrive a conclusion. It doesn't have a uniform method BTW. You can probably choose the atheist stand that God doesn't exist until proven or choose the inductive reasoning method. The difference here boils down the method used in science which is inductive/deductive.

Therefore to us the evidence that a God might exist still remains within the realms of science. And as such, I would disagree with your statement that the ID theory holds the same weight as with other scientific theory. Why? Because there's a very fine line between what's reality (as what the evidence presents) to what's fantasy (as what's written in the Bible).

I agree and let us not apply judeo/christian God here because ID per se might be the God in Islam religion, satanism, wiccans etc. In other words ID is applicable to all religion who believe in deity. and I am not bringing my religion here especially in discussing about science. Let us leave that discussion within the realm of faith because agnostic atheism as an attitude doesn't pass any judgment on religion , it only questions.As what Pullman who is an agnostic athiest say " But I know that all the things I do know are very small compared with the things that I don't know". The idea here is we are searching for the truth. Now if we arrive to a point that that God really exists or not based on the method that we are using then that is the time we can accept and reject the hypotheses that we formulated.

[ketllac]

@wordofgod

okay, show us any reference books bro aside from the bible that proves Lucifer is a good being. bahalag occult nga books.

did I say or claim that Lucifer is a good being? Since ikaw ang ni claim nga lucifer is a satan mao ng nangayo ko nimo verse sa bible nga ma connect nimo si lucifer ni satan. di ba claim ka sad nga bible alone is the only authority?
Ang burden of proof naa nimo wordofgod. Sorry ha nga I have an impression nga di nimo kaya ang logical discussion kay ako man hinuon ang pangayoan ug proof nimo nga ikaw man ang nag claim in the first place. usa pa dili ko membro sa occult, katoliko ko.

dili nana bag-o nga style bro! basta mobisto sa sekreto then fraud dayon ang i label anah.

sorry imohang reasoning ang questionable kay wala kay ika back up nganong naka sulti ka ana. dili na sad na bag- on nga style bro kung ma refute imo istilo mo resort ka sa logical fallacy. simpleton hehehhee. Tan awa kuno ako naay ika back up sa akong gi claim compare sa imong gisulte. Kinsa nato ang nahulog nga nag tomo tomo ug nag butang butang? bad na ha dili na kristiano nga kinaiya.

as i've known, Satan/Lucifer is the greatest deceiver bro.

give me a verse in the bible that Satan and Lucifer are one.

yes, that's why we've known truth from deceit!

sa unsang pamaagi bro?
daan ko pa dili ka capable ug logical discussion kay tanan info nga imong nadasmagan sa youtube murag sakto na sa imo. gi tan aw ba nimo ang source? credible ba ang source. maka support ka bag lain source with scientific evidence and logical bases and supported with credible authorities and experts on this matter. Basta anti catholic sakto na na nimo. kung i follow nato imo logic pwede sad ko moingon nga anti-born again sakto na tanan na sad di ba? again try harder.

[pinoy_09]

I agree and let us not apply judeo/christian God here because ID per se might be the God in Islam religion, satanism, wiccans etc.. what I am referring to about the double standard is the idea that why ID hypothesis is less valid hyphothesis compared to infinite/close universe theory in Physics. Now if we apply scientific method of causality to infinite/close looping universe we can say that ID doesnt violate the method applied in science considering the principle of causality than the idea that universe doenst have a cause and doenst have an end (infinite universe). After all science can be only considered credible way of discovering the mystery of the universe because of it's method which is empirical. Since all of these are just theories and hypotheses that haven't been proven yet using the empirical method then it really holds the same weight.

Yes, ID still remains a hypothesis but that doesn't make it more PROBABLE. I think using the term "LESS" is quite misleading as it suggests that the idea that ID is impossible. The term probable/probability is more appropriate. To be able to arrive at a hypothesis, scientist should dissect the smallest possible pieces. So to invoke singularity by stating Intellectual Design must have designed something, it would then be safe to say that what we all see today was designed by a single creator. But the process of Natural Selection can outright debunk this theory (Natural Selection is a FACT, as supposed to a theory). This is also the reason why I said it doesn't hold the same weight.

I understand but even in theoretical physics that uses a mathematical model has a conjecture similar to the hypothesis of ID. In science there are so many methods to arrive a conclusion. It doesn't have a uniform method BTW. You can probably choose the atheist stand that God doesn't exist until proven or choose the inductive reasoning method. The difference here boils down the method used in science which is inductive/deductive.

As I've mentioned above, the scientific process requires examining the smallest possible details---of course this could also mean examining things in the atomic or sub-atomic level. Suppose that Intelligent Design exist, it would have to be very complex and unexplainable. Fact of the matter is, there is no evidence to support such hypothesis. As you may have guessed, creationists love to ask scientists to document every fossil record to arrive at such a conclusive stance like Evolution. If you study science you'd know this is impossible. We might as well ask the creationists to present a cinematic record of how ID created the universe. And of course, they cannot present something other than a piece of literature telling them how the world was created.

I agree and let us not apply judeo/christian God here because ID per se might be the God in Islam religion, satanism, wiccans etc. In other words ID is applicable to all religion who believe in deity. and I am not bringing my religion here especially in discussing about science. Let us leave that discussion within the realm of faith because agnostic atheism as an attitude doesn't pass any judgment on religion , it only questions.As what Pullman who is an agnostic athiest say " But I know that all the things I do know are very small compared with the things that I don't know". The idea here is we are searching for the truth. Now if we arrive to a point that that God really exists or not based on the method that we are using then that is the time we can accept and reject the hypotheses that we formulated.

We are constantly searching for truth. Religion practices the opposite since it teaches the absolutes. The author of Genesis, for instance, has managed to create an unrealistic view of the origin of the universe. What bugs me the most is that people ACTUALLY believe in the events of Genesis. It is better to say "I don't know" than say "we are very certain that God created the earth in 7 days".

[kit_cebu]

Ei wordofgod, before we we're born, there was no god...it was introduced by our parents... And that is a constant in all races...

Why did I even have to say that... Ughh....