Existence of God

YOu cant prove hes exists or not. You can just prove overwhelming evidence that he doesnt.

El-Diablo - That's a new one on me. How does one prove that something doesn't exist?

Maybe you didn't sense the sarcasm. Still I see overwhelming evidence that he does. The beginning of life on planets, the formation of those planets, and grand scale evolution simply is only believable if given infinite time. Since scientists bind all of these claims into unrealistic time frames, I would have to be of the oppinion that there is overwhelming evidence that there IS a god. Everything I see in this world is evidence of a god.

And what or who created this God of infinite time? I think that this whole issue has a touch of a chicken/egg analogy.

Yes, it does. But regardless of whether or not you can prove his existence, it would make more sense if he did exist. Regardles of how fantastic his existence seems, it is less fantastic than saying everything came into being on its own.

P.S.--Obviously the chicken came first.

SCoates - Maybe obvious to you, but not to me.

Well I was kidding in using the word "obvious". But it makes more sense to me. However I believe there is a thread on that subject.

truth
As I said on another thread, a few minutes ago, both the egg and the chicken evolved into their present forms. It's a false issue.
And, as everyone should know--and it's a shame Phoenix has to point it out to us--it's not logically possible to prove a negative.

I don't understand how we can argue about god or no god, since to bring it to the realm of the intellect is, like Phoenix said, the chicken/egg analogy.

And since everybody is mentioning their post on this subject, I'll add mine. Alan Watts said that both the chicken and the egg came at the same time, and he suggested a simple demonstration that will befuddle most adults but be immediately obvious to children. Take a continuous loop of string; cut it in half with scissors, and ask, "which came first, the beginning or the end?"

The chicken/egg question is a western-style koan, and, essentially, so is the god/no-god question. The intellect is useless in answering these pursuits, and you just have to tell it to "shut up" and relax.

Hi Phoenix: a belated thanks for your welcome on another post that got lost in the shuffle. You always were one of the most level-headed persons in abuzz. Glad to finally catch up with you.

SCoates: The analogy doesn't really fit...

Coluber2001: Can you name a specific reason why?

Scoates: Um... uh... (starts to sweat)... it just doesn't, okay!

If an object, say A, is proved to be non-existent, it simply means that the concept of A is not thought about or talked about consistently by "human logic." But you may be able to feel something about A.

It's tricky to follow what you're talking about satt_focusable. But I understand what you mean... we're dissing Democrats, right?

SCoates..
You could have been correct if I said:

".. not thought about or talked about in the public."