We only know about 1% of all there is, in the other 99% we dont know,is there room for proof of Gods existen?

Question

existence? NO one knows everything. I only ask for an open mind that creation may have a creator.

Darwin said himself "To suppose the human eye could have been formed by natural selection seems, I freely confess, absurd to the highest degree."

Acid Zebra---I have given you credence in my posts tonight for your insightful answers----now its my turn--Darwin also suggested that women were inferior in descent to man in everything such as imagination and use of the senses. He also stated that the black race was indeed inferior. He was both chauvinistic and racial. Which proves that his science was not pure. Women are just as intelligent as men if not more.
And you will never convince me that any race is inferior.

Answer 1

"For his invisible [qualities] are clearly seen from the world’s creation onward, because they are perceived by the things made, even his eternal power and Godship, so that they are inexcusable; "

Answer 2

Sure, creation might have had a creator. Anything is possible.

But if anything is possible, can you also agree that that creator doesn't automatically have to be God. It might just as well have been Zeus. Or Ra. Or some god we don't know yet. Or an entirely different higher power. There is nothing that links God to Creation. Except for one book, and that book is proven to be false. We have evolved, which means the literal Adam and Eve story is false. It's as simple as that.

Darwin was the first to write about evolution. His other ideas have no importance to me. Evolution has stood the test of time, has been tested for over 150 years now, the theory has even improved over all those years. It's solid.

I don't believe in creationism, I'm an atheist. I honestly don't know how we came to existence. Neither do you. I wish everybody would be so honest to simply admit that we all simply are too small to know.

There are over 50 billion planets. We are like 6 billion bacterias sitting on a grain of sand on a beach in Hawaii, wondering how the beach came to existence. It's rather silly.

An answer like "God did it" stops the search for any possible real answer. If we all would admit that at this point in time "I don't know" is the only possible answer, we'd all have a bigger chance of some day finding a real answer.

Answer 3

Let us put the context around that Darwin quote:

"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of Spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei ["the voice of the people = the voice of God "], as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, should not be considered as subversive of the theory."

Answer 4

Well that's nice - on the one hand you claim validation for your ideas from Darwin's words, and a paragraph later you're condemning his other statements as racist and chauvinist.

What's it to be?

Just for clarification: the statements used (by such as answersingenesis) to condemn Darwin as a racist are classically taken out of context. At one point he theorised that races other than white might eventually be wiped out by those whites, in the sort of territorial conflict he had witnessed in other animals. AND HE EXPRESSED REGRET.

For a person of his time and his culture, this was actually surprisingly liberal of him. In those days black people were seen as little more than smart gorillas. Far worse remarks would have been attributable to almost any white person of distinction at the time. Check out Abe Lincoln on the subject...

Let's face it: your 1% v 99% is a guess - we don't know how much we don't know.

But what we do know is that in all the things science has uncovered there has been not a single sign of *anything* supernatural - even in those areas formerly thought to be part of God's job, like causing and healing disease, rainbows, or keeping the sky from falling.

Everything science finds obeys natural laws and physics. Even quantum superposition - perhaps one of the weirdest things we've discovered - has not a trace of divinity.

The universe is perfectly capable of being wonderful without magic. And deities are magical fantasies that don't belong in a rational appraisal of the fabric of reality.

CD

Answer 5

Saying that we know 1% of what there is, is assuming to know what 100% of knowing is. How you know we don't know say 70% or only .0001%? Aside from that fact that you faulted on, you assume that the knowledge we have isn't in fact all the knowledge necessary to know (or strongly suggest) that there is no god. Finally, your argument could be used to justify fairies, unicorns and any deity postulated; ergo, based on its many flaws and limitations, your argument is worthless.

Don't quote out of context: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound."

For Darwin's time, he was in fact very tolerant and anti-racist. You'd probably find no person that was more tolerant and anti-racist. Even if you say all his science was dirty, you lose. His theory has been revised and proven through hundreds and thousands of scientists since him that you cannot acuse of any racism or mysogyny. Darwin was simply the first one to speak it. Again, you fail at this argument.

Answer 6

THE PROOF IS, THE HOLY BIBLE,KJV.
Scripture given by inspiration of God
2Tm:3:16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
2Tm:3:17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.
GOD IS A SPIRIT,WE ARE TO HAVE GODS UNDERSTANDING AND NOT MENS.FIRST WE MUST
BELIEVE.

Answer 7

Faith is required for all things. Nothing is certain. Those who say with conviction they know about the birth of the universe and everything in it, are deluded, for they cannot go far enough back to find the answers. Our earth is dependant on so many variables, it would boggle your mind.

Answer 8

There is room for proof of the existence of your god just as much as room for proof of the existence of Allah, Zeus, goblins or orcs.

And I've heard christians say their god's existence can't be proved because that would rob folk of their free will to believe or disbelieve.

Answer 9

Obviously there could be a God just like there could be a celestial teapot orbiting a distant planet but given the lack of evidence no one needs to believe there is.

Answer 10

We know nothing actually. We are living in a fools paradise.

Unless we know our antecedents, what are we claiming to have known actually?