Can the existence of God(s) be proven or disproven Via religion or otherwise?

"Randomness vs. Creationism" is not a correct juxtaposition. That's like saying "Wallpaper vs. Carpeting". The two are not at odds.

"Randomness vs. Creationism" is not a correct juxtaposition. That's like saying "Wallpaper vs. Carpeting". The two are not at odds.

Both take faith, considering we really don't have much evidence to support either. They're similar in that sense. Saying "randomness exists" is just like saying "God exists", while saying "neither randomness nor God are proven to exist" isn't like either, because it doesn't take faith.

I wasn't really arguing against the existence of God(s), I was just saying that people assuming something intelligent has to be behind something 'appearing intelligent' is ridiculous.  And I brought up random occurrence as one example of possible 'intelligent appearing' events, happening on their own without being set into motion by some 'intelligent being'.

I wasn't really arguing against the existence of God(s), I was just saying that people assuming something intelligent has to be behind something 'appearing intelligent' is ridiculous.  And I brought up random occurrence as one example of possible 'intelligent appearing' events, happening on their own without being set into motion by some 'intelligent being'.

I wouldn't have brought up randomness at all, as you don't even need randomness to explain gravity, the position of the earth or anything else. But it doesn't really matter.

The question is can a omni type being exist? Use humans for example. We were made in Gods image. God is supposed to have unlimited knowlage, most phycologists and scientists agree that the human brain can aquire and store unlimited amounts of knowlage. The only thing is that we will never live long enough for our brains to collect that knowlage. Can God be omni present? Yes, good old Albert Einstien proved that time is relevent. If a being of some sort can seperate itself from time than it can exist away from the boundries of time. Esencially that could make this being ageless, and also immortal, if you body or what have you is unaffected by time you could very well exist forever. Being all powerful doesnt have to be some magical explination, if you are all knowing than you esencially have the power to do anything. Religion and Science, when applied correctly with one another, can bring about theories and ideas that a person on either one side or the other could never come up with. Without the idea correctly applied to eachother, than you are simply doing nothing but limiting yourself to a universe that, quite frankly, has no limits.

Meh, define God first. No one ever said that God was an omniscient being (I think, correct me if I'm wrong).

This video answers everything.

Can the existence of God(s) be proven or disproven Via religion or otherwise?

No. Just saying. No debate from me. lol

God... A non-material being used to rule the manners of many civilizations... Whether you agree or not with God, you can't prove it's existance nor it's non-existance. Logic rules says "While it's not completely true, assume it's false", but if you assume God as false, you can't explain the things science still ignores using another way. Therefore, if you assume God as true, you can't explain why things are so different than these said by him, or his religion. It is a mere act of faith to believe, and since there's no certain proof of the existance of God, both arguments are valid. Most christian believers just use the Bible (other religions' believers just believe their God and don't complain about others') as the ultimate proof, but we're talking about a book, maybe writen by some other men. Science followers and scientist, of course, believe in the experiments and iterated results, so they have a better way of explaining and convincing people.

Summary: Believe what you want 

God... A non-material being used to rule the manners of many civilizations... Whether you agree or not with God, you can't prove it's existance nor it's non-existance. Logic rules says "While it's not completely true, assume it's false", but if you assume God as false, you can't explain the things science still ignores using another way. Therefore, if you assume God as true, you can't explain why things are so different than these said by him, or his religion. It is a mere act of faith to believe, and since there's no certain proof of the existance of God, both arguments are valid. Most christian believers just use the Bible (other religions' believers just believe their God and don't complain about others') as the ultimate proof, but we're talking about a book, maybe writen by some other men. Science followers and scientist, of course, believe in the experiments and iterated results, so they have a better way of explaining and convincing people.

Summary: Believe what you want 

Your theory is noted and rather correct. However, it seems that the topic of debate has switched to being about proof as to whether or not there is a god, and what constitutes "intelligent design", both factors being a major part of the initial question.

It has been stated by nearly everyone in the topic thus far that we cannot prove or disprove god, at least, not yet, and that we must believe whatever we wish. It has also been stated that if these beliefs lead to people with better values, than who cares if god exists, so long as the belief makes people better and more kind.

So heres what I'm told in Grade 12 physics.

Life happens to be Several small Laws of the unvierse + several accidents.

Personally, i believe the thought process that a younger scientifically less intelligent humans saw things they could not begin to comprehend.

Lighting
The sun
The moon
Weather
Birth
human cycle

Thats why before each discovery in my own opinion the previous religions said the god created that.

Before we understood things such as the sun and moon and weather, there were gods that "Looked" after those, i mean the Egyptians and others had Sun gods, Moon gods ect.

And now, one of the main questions left is how and why the universe was created, and that is what science can not prove, and other religions are there to fill that void currently.

Today's Belief is tomorrow's fairy tale

*puts away the mop and broom*

Topic removed of spam and drama. Continue your religious argument, if there's any left.

I understand that this is a necro-post to a degree, but I do have something to say.

There's a reason science is filled with more "theories" than "laws"... Today's scientific laws could be disproven by new understandings of things in the future.

Indecision is still a decision, as you have decided not to decide.  As such, "non-belief" is still a belief.  Even atheists beliefs are based in faith.  Faith that there is nothing beyond this life because they see nothing beyond it, but faith nevertheless.

I've read this entire topic, and I note that almost all references to "god/gods" are based on judeo/christian philosophies (that includes muslim, btw).  There are other religions out there, and they have vastly different beliefs.

Regardless of belief, religion tends to give people direction in life.  It gives them the ability to press forward, and in modern times, to do so with the respect of others in mind.  My personal beliefs are a bit antiquated by some peoples mindsets, but I believe that there is a divine entity out there.  I believe it is part of all things, whether we perceive these things as living or not.  Yes my beliefs do fall under the category of animist, of pagan, of reincarnationist, but they are my beliefs, and as long as I believe them, they are true to me.

**Edited to remove what offended Holkami.  The rest was still more than just viable to the conversation.**

I was into it until the "magic is real" bullshit. Let this topic die.

Can something prove that God exist ?
I don't think so, because by definition, God(s) would be something beyond us, unreachable by the human spirit (otherwise, it would something 'imaginable', and then, something 'finite', which is contradictory with god's definition).

To me, the existence of religions only prove that men need to think of something which give a meaning to their short lives : without god, nothing's forbidden, but nothing's meaningful either !

I would agree with you, but you necroposted.

That doesn't take credibility away from his argument. Stop backseat moderating, it's really fucking annoying.

Besides that, Elitist Debate tends to not really need anti necroposting rules because generally new people are just commenting on an old discussion and it can easily revive the topic.

Anyway I'n ofthe opinion that no it can't be proven or disproven at this point. will we ever be able to knowfor sure, probably not.

Specific Gods such as the Christian Gods, greek gods, egyption gods etc can easily be disproven as they are portrayed by their religions.

However a god outside of religious texts cannot be disproved or proven. In the same sense you can't prove or disprove there is a ball of seal cum floating very close to the sun that doesn't burn up because it has super heat resistant powers.

Actually, we can prove that. By looking for it. But I do get your point; for all we know there is a ball of seal cum floating around the sun.

I don't even see why existence of gods would make a difference. If they're real, they'd give you a life so you can do what you want with it. It's like when a country intervenes in another's revolution, it takes the fun out of it.

Well it depends which one is real, from the things I've read in the bible I really hope it's not the Christian one lol But yea, if there is a God, it almost definitely won't be any of the Gods man has written about imo

Homer Simpson disproved god!

But in all seriousness here are my thoughts.

I'm not a religous believer, as I don't see how a magical man in the sky or outer space can possibly exist. I do however believe Jesus existed and was crucified. I don't however believe he ever came back to life. I don't belive there is a god, but I do belive it will never be possible to prove or disprove that (s)he exists.