This is evidence of God

Wake_jumper · 01-23-2013, 18:17

The Sun, in all its glory. Incredible.

http://www.spaceweather.com/images20..._sdo_blank.jpg

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-23-2013, 18:19

It appears to be evidence of a sun.

It is still quite awesome.

JBnTX · 01-23-2013, 19:03

Since God has no physical form, how could there ever be physical evidence of his existence?

fowl intent · 01-23-2013, 20:03

Is there any proof god has no form?

hooligan74 · 01-23-2013, 20:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

It appears to be evidence of a sun.

It is still quite awesome.

Pretty much this.

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-23-2013, 20:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by fowl intent

Is there any proof god has no form?

If there is a god, is there any proof that he is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient? How about even immortal?

Does proving one of those criteria is not present, proof that there is no god, or that man just was not good at describing him.

wingryder · 01-23-2013, 22:09

Is there ANY proof of ANY god in ANY form?

NMG26 · 01-23-2013, 22:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Does proving one of those criteria is not present, proof that there is no god, or that man just was not good at describing him????

Fixed it for you..............how do you know God is a him?

Along the same lines.

Yup.

.

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 04:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by NMG26

Fixed it for you..............how do you know God is a him?

Along the same lines.

Yup.

.

How do we know if there even is a gender. There's not really a good gender neutral singular personal pronoun in English. It could be used i guess? IIRC, "him" used to be accepted as the neutral singular version. I've been seeing "her" used a lot lately in policies and legal documents. Guess I'm dating myself.

***Geko45*** · 01-24-2013, 12:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

If there is a god, is there any proof that he is omnipresent, omnipotent, omniscient? How about even immortal?

If this being lacked any of those then could they really be considered a god or perhaps just a very advanced (but still finite) being? And if we were engineered by such a being would they really be worthy of our worship or perhaps just our admiration and gratitude? The latter possibility to both questions is far easier for me to wrap my mind around.

Quote:

Does proving one of those criteria is not present, proof that there is no god, or that man just was not good at describing him.

My (now infamous) inductive argument hinges upon this point. If it can be shown that one of the generally recognized characteristics of god is not possible (or at least highly unlikely) then doesn't that also prove that the existance of god is also not possible (or at least equally unlikely)?

***Geko45*** · 01-24-2013, 12:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

It appears to be evidence of a sun.

It is still quite awesome.

It is quite awesome.

It is also evidence of the success of science in describing the true nature of the universe. This image is not only evidence of the mechanics of stellar fusion, but also evidence that our understanding in so many scientific disciplines is correct because that understanding made it possible for us to acquire it. The bible tells us nothing about how to acquire knowledge such as this and, in fact, often discourages the practice.

Quote:

Be warned, my son, of anything in addition to them. Of making many books there is no end, and much study wearies the body.

Ecclesiastes 12:12

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 12:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

It is quite awesome.

It is also evidence of the success of science in describing the true nature of the universe. This image is not only evidence of the mechanics of stellar fusion, but also evidence that our understanding in so many scientific disciplines is correct because that understanding made it possible for us to acquire it. The bible tells us nothing about how to acquire knowledge such as this and, in fact, often discourages the practice.

Science is a very good system. The things that have been tested and proven, are very useful in determining what is. Not so sure about the why though. Big Bang vs. Big Chill is a good example. The universe is expanding. We may not be really sure why.

ETA: the bible verse. I'm not familiar with the context that is from. I'd agree that many books can make you weary, but good things can happen from reading. Have you asked the author about it?

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 13:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

If this being lacked any of those then could they really be considered a god or perhaps just a very advanced (but still finite) being? And if we were engineered by such a being would they really be worthy of our worship or perhaps just our admiration and gratitude? The latter possibility to both questions is far easier for me to wrap my mind around.

My (now infamous) inductive argument hinges upon this point. If it can be shown that one of the generally recognized characteristics of god is not possible (or at least highly unlikely) then doesn't that also prove that the existance of god is also not possible (or at least equally unlikely)?

Is there even a requirement to worship a creator?

Inductive reasoning, the more I think about it, seems to be the consideration of the sum total of what a person believes, much of that communicated to them by others, and convincing themselves of what they believe the truth to be. Considering how much there is left to learn by human kind, let alone any individual, it seems like it's not a good tool for deciding how the universe began, or changed, or just was a long long time ago.

But people use all sorts of methods to arrive at a belief, so I'm sure it's just fine for some people.

ColdSteelNail · 01-24-2013, 13:32

Yep, that's about what I thought it looked like.

***Geko45*** · 01-24-2013, 13:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

Is there even a requirement to worship a creator?

Depends, which particular mythos are we discussing?

Quote:

Inductive reasoning... Considering how much there is left to learn by human kind, let alone any individual, it seems like it's not a good tool for deciding how the universe began, or changed, or just was a long long time ago.

Not many are willing to admit it, but just about everything we think we know (even that which we decide we can't know) is arrived at through inductive reasoning. When one really considers it objectively, deductive reasoning is not actually possible because even for the most rudimentary of conclusions, one must still assume that one's own mind is sane and that our senses are delivering accurate information about the world around us (neither of which can be deductively proven).

So, like it or not, inductive is the best you, I, or anyone else ever really has to work with.

NMG26 · 01-24-2013, 17:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

If it can be shown that one of the generally recognized characteristics of god is not possible (or at least highly unlikely) then doesn't that also prove that the existance of god is also not possible (or at least equally unlikely)?

Just proves that the generally recocgnized God, might not have a certain charachteristic that we once thought.

If there is a God, it is probably mischaracterized generally, for the most part, almost always.

Kentak · 01-24-2013, 17:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wake_jumper

The Sun, in all its glory. Incredible.

Certainly. But there are even more impressive stars. Please note that the largest in each sequence is represented as the smallest in the next sequence.

Click to enlarge.

Kentak · 01-24-2013, 17:18

God also planned for obsolescence. In several billion years, the sun will enter a red giant stage, incinerating the Earth, and eventually dying to a cold remnant. Of course, mankind will be long gone by then--either having become extinct or moved on to greener pastures.

NMG26 · 01-24-2013, 17:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kentak

God also planned for obsolescence. In several billion years, the sun will enter a red giant stage, incinerating the Earth, and eventually dying to a cold remnant. Of course, mankind will be long gone by then--either having become extinct or moved on to greener pastures.

The way technology is moving, we should be ready for that..........in just a billion years.

.

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 19:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Geko45

Depends, which particular mythos are we discussing?

Not many are willing to admit it, but just about everything we think we know (even that which we decide we can't know) is arrived at through inductive reasoning. When one really considers it objectively, deductive reasoning is not actually possible because even for the most rudimentary of conclusions, one must still assume that one's own mind is sane and that our senses are delivering accurate information about the world around of us (neither of which can be deductively proven).

So, like it or not, inductive is the best you, I, or anyone else ever really has to work with.

Just about everything we can figure out is through inductive reasoning. That's cool. We all use our experiences and stuff other people told us, (much more often that most will admit) and the small amount that we have experienced ourselves to come to conclusions. Even though our lifespans are an infinitesimal amount of time when compared to the existence of the universe. Even though the most knowledgeable human in history, knew very little about what humanity knows. The amount we have traveled personally is an infinitesimal amount of distance relatively, even if you have looked through a telescope.

Like it or not, the best you, I or anyone else really has to work with, is not even close enough to claim as much knowledge as some claim. Many times, that knowledge is really belief, many times some people hold that belief for convenience or to avoid emotional distress, or even out of ignorance. It's understandably difficult to be unsure. Many people aren't able to tolerate that. It's a weakness in some, and just a lack of ability in others.

Syclone538 · 01-24-2013, 19:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cavalry Doc

...
I've been seeing "her" used a lot lately in policies and legal documents. Guess I'm dating myself.

I think that is from the movie Dogma.

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 20:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syclone538

I think that is from the movie Dogma.

1999 - 2005, I was out of the country, and missed a lot of what some people consider "pop" culture.

I've never seen dogma, and only googled it to see what year it came out. I spent a significant amount of 1999 moving to Germany, immediately deploying to Kosovo as part of the initial invasion force, and did not return to Germany, which has limited American movie and TV exposure until just before 2000.

Can you summarize? Don't worry about a spoiler.

Syclone538 · 01-24-2013, 20:39

It's one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.

It's making fun of religion, but not God. Kevin Smith is a Christian.

Have you seen any Kevin Smith movies?

Clerks
Mallrats
Dogma
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back
Clerks 2

There are a couple more, but either aren't any good, or I don't know about them.

furioso2112 · 01-24-2013, 20:52

One thing's for sure - when that sucker burns out, we're all gonna be in trouble.

**Cavalry Doc** · 01-24-2013, 20:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Syclone538

It's one of the funniest movies I've ever seen.

It's making fun of religion, but not God. Kevin Smith is a Christian.

Have you seen any Kevin Smith movies?

Clerks
Mallrats
Dogma
Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back
Clerks 2

There are a couple more, but either aren't any good, or I don't know about them.

Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, pretty sure I saw most of that one at one time or another.