Guys, stop trying to prove whether or not God exists. It is not possible, just like it'snot possible to prove evolution. Both God and evolution are something you must believe in to be sure they are true.

shmibs didn't try to prove that God didn't exist but on the contrary, he was like you saying that there was no point trying to prove that he exists and that all proofs were no proofs at all

Guys, stop trying to prove whether or not God exists. It is not possible, just like it'snot possible to prove evolution. Both God and evolution are something you must believe in to be sure they are true.

I disagree with you there. There is proof, and I believe that what flyingfisch gave is sufficient proof for an honest person to acknowledge a God.
For now, I'm just going to stick to his first proof, which some people ridicule here for being contradicting. If you are not acting biased you would see the point trying to be made and not take it so literal.

Everything that is in motion is set in motion by something that is set in motion itself. However, it's very logical to think that something must have started it all. And because that is not possible in our "limited" world, it must have been magically started, which brings us to a God who is not limited to any rules of time and physics.

Also aeTIos, according to the Bible there even is proof(Romans 1:20) so you shouldn't say there isn't.

I created a topic here for those that wish to continue the discussion of religion.

@pimathbrainiac: I like how you liken existence that way-- it is an interesting way to look at it and I wonder if we can derive anything further from that.

First we'd have to define existance to know at all what exists and what not......

First we'd have to define existance to know at all what exists and what not......

Of course, without definitions, we cannot say anything with information. But on the other hand, how do humans define things? They define words with other words, which are themselves defined with words. So it's a vicious circle. But what if there was an only solution to the equations' system of the dictionnary? Each equation is a definition. I don't think there could be only one solution because we don't say in which mathematical set we solve the system.

Maybe a definition moves the problem on several words to define, even though we precise a bit what we think.