Have you ever seen or heard a theist prove that there is a God?

Answer 1

Yes all the time
Which one do you want?

The Ontological Argument The Causality Argument The Kalam (Time) Argument
The Contingency Argument The Cosmological Argument The Design Argument
The Miracles Argument The Moral Argument The Religious Experience Argument
The Teleological Argument The Prima Facie Argument

Answer 2

to the individual is had been proven or hasn't. I know He lives, the reason that I could share with a person who just wants to deny Him altogether will never get it, without the help of the Spirit of God. He that come to God first must come believing that He is. You'll never see the power of God in your life doubting and cutting Him out altogether. I'm not trying to push religion on you, or anything like that. I see your questions that you ask everyday. But God has been proven to those who want Him to be. You can't write the Creator on a piece a paper, but you have to live the Creator. He's love and you've experience God in your life already, He made man in His own image. He loves you even though you don't acknowledge Him. You would do soo much with God in your life. Not religion, but the love of God operating in you. Living for God is not religion. Don't worry a lot of chrisitians won't make it either. Why? They have the wrong motives and not God's motives

Answer 3

Proof is a tall order. IMHO, there is no proof outside pure mathematics.

What I have seen is theists presenting cogent cases for the reality of something appropriately called "God." Usually the cogency of the case is inversely proportional to the orthodoxy of the God concept in question.

Answer 4

I see that the prove is all around you.

Have you ever seen Atheist or Agnostic to prove that there is no God. Faith needs to start at one point. : )

Answer 5

If it was ever proven that there was a God, then there would be no atheists. It hasn't been proven that God does or does NOT exist.

Answer 6

Yes, I have heard and seen proof that the living God exists. He seeks a relationship with not only me but you too.

He loves you and wants to hear from you.

Answer 7

Actually PROVE? no.

TRY and fail miserably... oh yea! Like every day!

Answer 8

Arguments for the existence of God
The Cosmological argument argues that there was a "first cause", or "prime mover" who is identified as God.
The Teleological argument argues that the universe's order and complexity shows signs of purpose (telos), and that it must have been designed by a Being with properties that only God could have.
The Ontological argument is based on arguments about a "being greater than God can not be conceived".
The Pantheistic argument defines God as All and is an argument similar to monism and panentheism.
The mind-body problem argument postulates that it is impossible to grasp the relation of consciousness to materiality without introducing a divinity.
Arguments that some non-physical quality observed in the universe is of fundamental importance and not an epiphenomenon, such as justice, beauty, love or religious experience.
The Anthropic argument focuses on basic facts, such as our existence, to prove God.
The Moral argument argues that objective morality exists and that therefore God exists.
The Transcendental argument for the existence of God argues that logic, science, ethics, and other things we take seriously do not make sense if there is no God. Therefore, atheist arguments must ultimately refute themselves if pressed with rigorous consistency. By contrast, there is also a Transcendental argument for the non-existence of God.
The Will to Believe Doctrine was pragmatist philosopher William James' attempt to prove God by showing that the adoption of theism as a hypothesis "works" in a believer's life. This doctrine depended heavily on James' pragmatic theory of truth where beliefs are proven by how they work when adopted rather than by proofs before they are believed (a form of the hypothetico-deductive method).
Arguments based on specific historical events or personages. The most prominent of these are listed below.

[edit] Arguments from historical events or personages
Judaism asserts that God intervened in key specific moments in history, especially at the Exodus and the giving of the Ten Commandments, thus demonstrating his special care for the Jewish people, and a fortiori his existence.
The argument from the life of Jesus. This asserts that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, that in this he was either deluded, deceitful or truthful, and that it is possible to assess Jesus's character sufficiently from the accounts of his life and teaching to rule out the first two possibilities. C S Lewis put forward this argument (the Trilemma) and it is followed in the widely adopted Alpha Course.[11]
The argument from the Resurrection of Jesus. This asserts that there is sufficient historical evidence for Jesus's resurrection and that this vindicates his claim to be Son of God and a fortiori God's existence.[12] The claim that the resurrection validates Christianity dates from the earliest records, and it is common ground between theists and atheists that if the resurrection occurred substantially as described in the Bible then Christianity is substantially true: non-Christians simply dispute the premise.
Islam asserts that the life of Mohammed and especially the giving of the Koran by an Angel similarly vindicates Islam.
Mormonism similarly asserts that the miraculous finding of the Book of Mormon vindicates Mormonism.

[edit] Inductive arguments (for)
Inductive arguments argue their conclusions through inductive reasoning.

Another class of philosophers asserts that the proofs for the existence of God present a fairly large probability though not absolute certainty. A number of obscure points, they say, always remain; an act of will (i.e. faith) is required to dismiss these difficulties. This view is maintained, among others, by the Scottish statesman Arthur Balfour in his book The Foundations of Belief (1895). The opinions set forth in this work were adopted in France by Ferdinand Brunetière, the editor of the Revue des deux Mondes. Many orthodox Protestants express themselves in the same manner, as, for instance, Dr. E. Dennert, President of the Kepler Society, in his work Ist Gott tot?. [13]

[edit] Arguments from testimony (for)
Arguments from testimony rely on the testimony or experience of certain witnesses, possibly embodying the propositions of a specific revealed religion. Swinburne argues that it is a principle of rationality that one should accept testimony unless there are strong reasons for not doing so.[14]

The witness argument gives credibility to personal witnesses, contemporary and throughout the ages. A variation of this is the argument from miracles which relies on testimony of supernatural events to establish the existence of God.
The Majority argument argues that the theism of people throughout most of recorded history and in many different places provides prima facie demonstration of God's existence.

[edit] Arguments grounded in personal experience
The Scotch School led by Thomas Reid taught that the fact of the existence of God is accepted by us without knowledge of reasons but simply by a natural impulse. That God exists, this school said, is one of the chief metaphysical principles that we accept not because they are evident in themselves or because they can be proved, but because common sense obliges us to accept them.
The Argument from a Proper Basis argues that belief in God is "properly basic"--that is, similar to statements such as "I see a chair" or "I feel pain." Such beliefs are non-falsifiable and, thus, neither able to be proved nor disproved; they concern perceptual beliefs or indisputable mental states.
In Germany, the School of Friedrich Heinrich Jacobi taught that our reason is able to perceive the suprasensible. Jacobi distinguished three faculties: sense, reason, and understanding. Just as sense has immediate perception of the material so has reason immediate perception of the immaterial, while the understanding brings these perceptions to our consciousness and unites them to one another.[15] God's existence, then, cannot be proved--Jacobi, like Kant, rejected the absolute value of the principle of causality--it must be felt by the mind.
In his Emile, Jean-Jacques Rousseau asserted that when our understanding ponders over the existence of God it encounters nothing but contradictions; the impulses of our hearts, however, are of more value than the understanding, and these proclaim clearly to us the truths of natural religion, namely, the existence of God and the immortality of the soul.
The same theory was advocated in Germany by Friedrich Schleiermacher (died 1834), who assumed an inner religious sense by means of which we feel religious truths. According to Schleiermacher, religion consists solely in this inner perception, and dogmatic doctrines are inessential.[16]
Many modern Protestant theologians follow in Schleiermacher's footsteps, and teach that the existence of God cannot be demonstrated; certainty as to this truth is only furnished us by inner experience, feeling, and perception.
Modernist Christianity also denies the demonstrability of the existence of God. According to them we can only know something of God by means of the vital immanence, that is, under favorable circumstances the need of the Divine dormant in our subconsciousness becomes conscious and arouses that religious feeling or experience in which God reveals himself to us. In condemnation of this view the oath against Modernism formulated by Pius X says: "Deum ... naturali rationis lumine per ea quae facta sunt, hoc est per visibilia creationis opera, tanquam causam per effectus certo cognosci adeoque demostrari etiam posse, profiteor." ("I declare that by the natural light of reason, God can be certainly known and therefore His existence demonstrated through the things that are made, i.e., through the visible works of Creation, as the cause is known through its effects.")

Answer 9

no.