Can you proof the existence of God without using Bible verses?

thekidflash 2010/03/16 05:34:52
Addendum: Bible Verse, or any other religious document will not count as proof of god in this question. You need to show empirical evidence.

In May of 2007 Kirk Cameron and Ray Comfort attempted to do so using SCIENCE. Creation science that is.
All they really did was criticize evolution as if somehow that would vindicate their religious and dogmatic beliefs over mountains of evidence for evolution.
Their main argument was that: Creationism is true because Evolution is Impossible.
There are no Transitional species. (Dimetrodon, Archeopteryx, Australopithecus don't count?)
You don't see one kind of animal turning into another kind of animal. (which doesn't happen anyway since Evolution only permits an organism to change into a modified version of whatever it's ancestors were.)
They closed the televised debate by resorting to emotional pleas, quoting the bible, and listing a bunch of age old scientists who were christians, (but probably wouldn't have been if they understood evolution or other branchs of science that were up till their times were not understood.)
So, Sodaheads, Comfort and Cameron failed miserably in demonstrating their scientific proof of god because they walked in with no evidence and merely criticized the opposition hoping they could prove their position by default,
Can you do better?
proof god walked evidence criticized opposition hoping prove position default
1 You cannot use any form of scripture to support your points.
2 Do not copy paste things that you didn't write yourself without citing a source. (syrs biznis)
3 If you want to debate Evolution, at least figure out how it works from a scientific viewpoint. AronRA on Youtube has Excelent videos and I recommend the following Video to review before you start debating.
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest

  • true american 2010/03/25 17:01:53
    true american
    Since this is pointless ,can you explain where the first atom came from?
  • thekidf... true am... 2010/03/25 19:52:20
    It's not pointless.

    As I already described the whole point of this was to offer other people a chance to do what Kirk and Ray tried to do and failed.
  • ☆Hitler was a community org... 2010/03/25 16:56:20
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    if you found a watch on the moon...you wouldn't think that it evolved there
    Scientist say that the earth is 4.5 billion years old and that equals 1,409,330,000,000,000,000 seconds= 1.40933 x 10 to the 13th power. human DNA has 1.3 x 10 to the 39th power of possible combinations, so if my math is correct, in order for evolution to
    produce a human it would have to eliminate roughly 9.2244376640e+25 combinations per second for the ENTIRE 4.5 billion years. and if that doesn't make evolution ridiculous enough, scientist will tell you that 250 million years ago an asteroid collided with the earth and killed 90% of the DNA on earth, which is a basic do over of evolution.
    so if 100% of today's DNA is evolved from that surviving 10% it did it in 250 million years which is screaming fast in evolutionary terms, and if true we should be seeing numerous examples of higher evolved or evolving species, and we don't
    funny how change over time is important until your running out of time, then we just skip to the end

    as far as I know this is all my own except for the Idea of "probability" and I have no idea who originated that...maybe God
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 19:54:44
    Can you rearrange that so it's halfway coherent?
  • ☆Hitler... thekidf... 2010/03/25 20:17:42
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    1+1=2 ?

    there is not enough time in evolution for natural selection to stumble onto the correct sequence for human DNA
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 20:30:26 (edited)
    You mean 3000 million years wasn't enough time?

    So maybe it is improbable, but it happened, otherwise we couldn't be here talking about it. In fact I agree it was unlikely. But not impossible. We have the evidence to demonstrate it.

    But then again, it doesn't matter what the other side is saying.
    I'm asking you to provide proof of your god without criticizing the other side and using the bible or any other sacred text.
  • ☆Hitler... thekidf... 2010/03/25 20:43:51
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    sorry, common chromosomes only mean a common designer, as all life on the plante share DNA.
    Recent research shows just 2.5% of DNA is different between people and mice, and only 1% different from a chimpanzee.6 A UK chief scientist said, "We share half our genes [DNA] with the banana

    sorry, again you dont know what you are talking about its 3.56 billion with a B...and no it isnt long enough
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 20:56:17
    Absolutes are only in math and logic.

    You say ONLY as if there is no other option.
    Except that there are other options and God doesn't necessarily fit into them all. Even if we were commonly designed we still evolved. I'm no going to dispute whether or not that happened because that's a completely different issue.

    Again. Prove god without criticizing your opposition.

    You're wrong. Nothing is impossible, just highly unlikely.
  • ☆Hitler... thekidf... 2010/03/25 21:19:23
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    macro evolution does happen, all dogs are a descendants of Canis lupus
    if you wish to call that evolution fine...but evolving from an amphibian to a mammal did not happen and can not be demonstrated...but what can be demonstrated is that no mutation that has ever been observed, can be called an "improvement" or has attributes that have an advantage for the betterment of that species. (frogs with added legs, cow with two heads etc.)
    in fact if evolution was true there would be numerous "attributes" that are present in "lower" evolved species...like an electric motor found on a bacterium that is so advanced that mankind didn't reinvent it until the late 80s...talk about an evolutionary advantage to the species, that evolution allowed to dwell in obscurity for billions of years ignoring the laws of evolution by not building upon that advantage
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 22:52:27
    if you wish to call that evolution fine...but evolving from an amphibian to a mammal did not happen and can not be demonstrated.

    Of course not.

    The farther you go back the similar and more generic eveyrthing appears to be.

    You have Chordates, (the generic name for anything with a spinalcord and everything more avanced then that. IE: Fish, Reptiles, Birds and Mammals.

    Then you have the division between fish and tetrapods, anything with four limbs.

    Tetrapods remain semi aquatic "Amphibians" But also diversify into three different sets, identified by the number of holes in the skull. Anapids, turtles and tortoise. Diapsids: what we call reptiles and later birds, and Synapids who all become the mammals.

    Synapsids looked very similar to dinosaurs for a while before adapting other ways of dealing with the environment, eventually becoming endothermic and adapting insulation like Fur. Kind of how Dinosaurs developed insulating feathers which turned out to be alot more efficient at keeping an animal warm.

    Reptile is a meaningless term because otherwise we'd be reptiles by decent.
    Instead we're classified by our common traits.

    We shouldn't use words like Amphibian or reptile when discussing this because they're colloquial terms, not scientific ones.
  • ☆Hitler... thekidf... 2010/03/26 14:17:28
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    (The farther you go back the similar and more generic everything appears to be.)
    that is an assumption, based on wishful thinking you cannot demonstrate that
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 22:54:28
    http://www.talkorigins.org/fa... There's a list of beneficial mutations here.

    I'm not gonna bother reposting it.
  • ☆Hitler... thekidf... 2010/03/26 14:47:21 (edited)
    ☆Hitler was a community organiz☆
    yes I have seen those before...but that doesn't mean that they are correct conclusions
    I have heard that space junkies in order to understand space travel consider themselves to be stationary and space moves past them.
    so in my theory, DNA is constant ( with in tolerances /-) and the environment changes.
    keep in mind that nowhere can it be demonstrated the changing of DNA (for the better) in fact, it is deteriorating (the gene pool is getting shallow)
    species are ending due to the failing of the environment all the time, but species are being discovered all the time only because we haven't been able to look for them (deep ocean exploration) until recently...how much more would we have found only 50 years ago with today's technology?
  • thekidf... ☆Hitler... 2010/03/30 02:00:20
    Where's your data to support that?
  • Javimendo ☆Hitler... 2010/03/25 20:33:13
    Exactly my friend! He still will not get it... the propellor on his head must be broken. friend propellor head broken
  • Tiffany 2010/03/25 16:51:02
    Prove otherwise!
  • thekidf... Tiffany 2010/03/25 19:53:09
    I didn't make any statements regarding whether or not god is real. All I did was ask you guys to provide evidence for your god.
  • Tiffany thekidf... 2010/03/25 20:21:33
    And all asked was for to offer proof that He doesn't exist. Btw, in regards to, " Bible Verse, or any other religious document will not count as proof of god in this question. You need to show empirical evidence.".....I beg to differ. Those of us who believe have faith. Therefore, I WILL post a verse.

    Hebrews 11:1-3 (New King James Version)

    By Faith We Understand

    1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2 For by it the elders obtained a good testimony.
    3 By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.
  • thekidf... Tiffany 2010/03/29 05:19:47
    All which just shows that you don't have anything at all to show for your faith. Nothing. And you never did.
  • Tiffany thekidf... 2010/03/29 14:32:09
    Says you. And your opinion doesn't exactly matter in the grand scheme of things.....
  • thekidf... Tiffany 2010/03/29 21:04:58 (edited)
    Neither does yours when the chances are there is no grand scheme.
  • Gracie ~Gun Totin' Gracie~ 2010/03/25 16:39:42
    Gracie ~Gun Totin' Gracie~
    We don't have to prove anything,,,,,,You prove that he doesn't!
  • thekidf... Gracie ... 2010/03/25 19:54:06
    The whole point of this thread is for you guys to show empirical evidence of your god. If you can't then leave it at that.

    In this post the burden of proof is on the believer, not the skeptic.
  • Gracie ... thekidf... 2010/03/25 22:19:26
    Gracie ~Gun Totin' Gracie~
    The whole purpose of your poll is BS!
  • thekidf... Gracie ... 2010/03/29 05:20:03
  • Phoenix Gracie ... 2010/03/26 03:09:38
    That's a good point! There are psycics to prove that!
  • shadow 2010/03/20 21:28:36
    I believe you need to prove beyond all doubt that God does not exist.....
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/21 01:47:35
    Can you prove beyond all doubt that the flying spaghetti monster, Godzilla or the invisible pink unicorn do not exist or did not at one point exist?

    That's a fallacy. You can't disprove a negative.

    You can however support an assertion.

    If you make an assertion as fact than you had better be able to support it with evidence.
  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 00:27:45

    You sound like a young college enthusiast who is listening to too many instructors points of view.... Get a grip and use your own head... It is not just a hat rack you know....

    Get back to me when you grow up....
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 03:42:07
    I'm in between colleges so I've had alot of time to reflect on what I've learned.

    You realize that's just an ad hominem attack on your part that doesn't dispute my point in the least?

    What I'm saying is, because there is no evidence for your god outside of the bible, over any other god or any other religion, there's no reason to believe he exists or that any other exists.

    You can't disprove God, and you also can't disprove the invisible pink unicorn.

    However you can kind of make a case of the likelihood of something existing or not.

    The only honest answer you can say is "I don't know." But you can believe whatever the hell you want.
  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 16:11:57
    I still need you to PROVE that God does not exist for me to believe your theory.

    Go ahead, I am still waiting... You still have not learned what is most important.
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 17:01:04
    I already explained to you that you can't disprove that something does not exist.

    You can't disprove godzilla. Why should I believe he doesn't exist in some way or form?

    Plus my disproving God is not the purpose of this post, it's for you theists to post proof of god without using the bible. So far nobody has done anything but criticizes my position which is exactly that made Comfort and Cameron fail so hard when they tried to do the same thing.

    Can you do this thing I ask you to do or will you avoid it?
  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 20:51:27
    I have already done so. Why must I continue to do it again and again?

    Put what you have been "told" aside for awhile. Begin reading many and various books, scientific, religious, fact, fiction, etc. on many subjects. Enlighten your dark closed mind. Let light and air enter so that you are able to have the widest of all views with which to make a knowledgeable statement. Stop repeating what others have told you. That is their knowledge base and their opinion.
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 20:55:21

    I have. I do.

    Hell, I read tons. Mostly nonfiction. All of my fictional input comes from movies and TV, actually.
  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 21:25:22
    And you still have not been properly enlightened. Pity.
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 21:28:38
    Enlightened to a book which contains things that can only be believed on faith that you assert with absolute certainty is the absolute truth?

  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 21:38:15
    That would be hard for even me to assert as truth since you have not named a book, but you might start with The Ancient Library of Qumran... good reading if you are the least scholarly...
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 21:56:31
    Dead sea scrolls. Nice.

    All I ever asked was for you to show me some evidence that supports your position without using religious texts, or the bible.

    Religious texts can't count as evidence because they're subjective material. If there were other documents written at the same time from other sources in the same area, from other peoples, then maybe you'd have something.
  • shadow thekidf... 2010/03/22 22:01:53
    No... No... You said "Bible verses"... and since there are hundreds of "bibles" I do not rely on such as solid information by which to form a belief.

    The Ancient Library of Qumran is just that. The writings state facts as to dates, births, deaths, events, etc. Would you deny your brith certificate and all that is written upon it?

    Be agood little girl and get educated. Make an effort to widen you depth of understanding of the world around you.

    I have a vast and extensive education... I suggest you get busy and get learning...
  • thekidf... shadow 2010/03/22 22:06:14
    Don't get caught up in what I said. You know what I mean.

    ANY religious text of any kind. It doesn't matter. Use empirical evidence.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.


2016/02/09 07:55:39

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals