Sport1 min ago
Who created god?
60 Answers
How can man, a mere mortal, prove the existence of god?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Ebaby. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Well your question presupposes that an supernatural entity called god exists, rather than being essentially a construct of early societies in an attempt to explain the universe.
And man is a very very clever animal, contrary to your rather dismissive tone regarding humanity. Should there be such an entity as God, he must be able to interact with the physical evidence in order to perform these alleged miracles. We can measure those interactions - and you know what? No empirical evidence of the existence of this supernatural being - just fairy tale, myth, and a couple of storybooks that allege that God exists.
And man is a very very clever animal, contrary to your rather dismissive tone regarding humanity. Should there be such an entity as God, he must be able to interact with the physical evidence in order to perform these alleged miracles. We can measure those interactions - and you know what? No empirical evidence of the existence of this supernatural being - just fairy tale, myth, and a couple of storybooks that allege that God exists.
For me if someone has created God? This is well known argument atheists present when they are asked a very logical question that nothing comes without a creator. But one thing they do not realise that God (real God) cannot be created. However if someone can give me something, someone, somewhere who created God then for me he is God. And as few people believe that human created god then that does not make sense as all the human are gods then. The core point is that God has and will always be there. I will tell you one incident.
Once a person obviously atheist asked scholar with knowledge this same question probably the only difference was that it was for the sake of knowledge and not for the sake of fun. In other words that person had open mind. He was asked to count upto 10. Like 1,2, …..10. Scholar told him that just imagine that you have counted everything in the universe including God and now count backward. Like 10, 9, …..1. When he got to 1 he was asked what before that? He said 0 (Zero). So before God (if) there was anything it was nothingness.
////Markrae - Even if there is a heaven when we die
Endless bliss would be as meaningless as the lie////
No, Mark that is where human go wrong. Nothing is endless apart from God himself. When we talk about next life (Heaven and Hell) then eternal is a wrong word used. Because languages has limitation. Just imagine when they say “They live happily ever after”. What does that mean? Did they live forever? No. That is within the boundaries of this life forever. In other words as long as they lived. So I believe same applies to hereafter that it would be ever after and not eternal. And that ever after would have some sort of limit that right now we are not sure as we were not sure about the time limit of this life before we were born.
Once a person obviously atheist asked scholar with knowledge this same question probably the only difference was that it was for the sake of knowledge and not for the sake of fun. In other words that person had open mind. He was asked to count upto 10. Like 1,2, …..10. Scholar told him that just imagine that you have counted everything in the universe including God and now count backward. Like 10, 9, …..1. When he got to 1 he was asked what before that? He said 0 (Zero). So before God (if) there was anything it was nothingness.
////Markrae - Even if there is a heaven when we die
Endless bliss would be as meaningless as the lie////
No, Mark that is where human go wrong. Nothing is endless apart from God himself. When we talk about next life (Heaven and Hell) then eternal is a wrong word used. Because languages has limitation. Just imagine when they say “They live happily ever after”. What does that mean? Did they live forever? No. That is within the boundaries of this life forever. In other words as long as they lived. So I believe same applies to hereafter that it would be ever after and not eternal. And that ever after would have some sort of limit that right now we are not sure as we were not sure about the time limit of this life before we were born.
-- answer removed --
////Naomi - What scholar with knowledge? Think about it. Who can possibly possess such 'knowledge'? No one!///
Perhaps first time I agree with you. Because no one needs any special knowledge to know about God. As God can be found just by thinking about your own self. But few people do need knowledge to convince themselves.
Rest of it later as wife is shouting and it is shopping time.
Perhaps first time I agree with you. Because no one needs any special knowledge to know about God. As God can be found just by thinking about your own self. But few people do need knowledge to convince themselves.
Rest of it later as wife is shouting and it is shopping time.
//Perhaps first time I agree with you. Because no one needs any special knowledge to know about God. As God can be found just by thinking about your own self. But few people do need knowledge to convince themselves. //
So is that why you listen to all the fairy stories your so-called 'scholars' tell you? To convince yourself?
So is that why you listen to all the fairy stories your so-called 'scholars' tell you? To convince yourself?
Keyplus // As God can be found just by thinking about your own self.//
That is exactly what it is about. People look to their own thoughts and believe they are feeling God. Occasionally they get completely engrossed in this illusion and the become "prophets". where they think God is sending them messages for all of humanity.
In fact they are simply expressing their own prejudices.
That is exactly what it is about. People look to their own thoughts and believe they are feeling God. Occasionally they get completely engrossed in this illusion and the become "prophets". where they think God is sending them messages for all of humanity.
In fact they are simply expressing their own prejudices.
> Nothing is endless apart from God himself.
Himself? God's male, eh...?
> And that ever after would have some sort of limit that right now we are not sure as we were not sure about the time limit of this life before we were born.
A better example of "making it up as you go along" I haven't heard in many a long year!
Himself? God's male, eh...?
> And that ever after would have some sort of limit that right now we are not sure as we were not sure about the time limit of this life before we were born.
A better example of "making it up as you go along" I haven't heard in many a long year!
The existence of a 'god' or 'gods' (or other unknown 'X') is by all accounts a presumption based solely on ignorance (often wilful) of the facts. Once the nature of that which was once attributed to 'X' is understood, it is invariably found that the ignorance upon which a given 'X' was presumed to exist no longer exists and from that point on 'X' can (and should) subsequently be substituted by knowledge and understanding.
Belief in God has without exception proven to be an invocation to search for an alternative 'explanation', one that is genuine and based on that which does not contradict with but improves upon ones current understanding. If you don't understand it than there is no reason to presume it is what you think it is when you obviously do not yet know what it is you are seeking to explain with the presumption. The only safe presumption is the assumption of ignorance and the need to acquire more information sufficient to obtaining an understanding of that which lends itself to presumption.
It is unreasonable to presume any understanding is possible where the 'explanation' itself can not be explained. Achieving certainty requires a prerequisite understanding of what knowledge is and the means and methods by which it is obtained and can be verified.
Belief in God has without exception proven to be an invocation to search for an alternative 'explanation', one that is genuine and based on that which does not contradict with but improves upon ones current understanding. If you don't understand it than there is no reason to presume it is what you think it is when you obviously do not yet know what it is you are seeking to explain with the presumption. The only safe presumption is the assumption of ignorance and the need to acquire more information sufficient to obtaining an understanding of that which lends itself to presumption.
It is unreasonable to presume any understanding is possible where the 'explanation' itself can not be explained. Achieving certainty requires a prerequisite understanding of what knowledge is and the means and methods by which it is obtained and can be verified.
-- answer removed --
The fact of the matter is, in a way there definitely is a god to all of us. Without, we would not be here, we would not have food, we would not have light, we would not have warmth. I think worship has been bestowed for years upon this entity, however in more recent times we have decided to give it a human form.
