There is a lot of evidence that the Bible is true. But if you want proof of God ( I think you might already have it ) comes from God. He gives proof of Himself through His Spirit. That way He can control who gets the proof.
I have the proof as well. I can tell people about the proof, but they have to get it themselves from Him.
2007-12-18 13:43:38
·
answer #1
·
answered by Christian Sinner 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Too many to list here.
Just for starters, ever seen a spider web? Know how the spider spreads the glue down the strands? The spider lays a continuous bead of glue, gets to the end, reaches back with a leg and "plucks" the string. Natural harmonics of the string separate the long strand of glue into droplets.
How did the spider learn about harmonics? Do YOU understand harmonics? Do you really think a spider does? None of the spiders I've talked to seemed that smart. But knowledge of harmonics would do no good unless the web spinnerets and glue secreting organs developed AT THE SAME TIME as the instinct did. And the part of the spider's brain needed to handle the instinct. So to believe in evolution one must have faith that the spinnerets, glue manufacturing organs, and instinctive knowledge of what to do must have all just "accidentally" happened at the same time, in the same species of animal, totally by "accidents" of mutations, caused by "bullets" of atomic radiation striking its DNA supposedly miraculously improving it instead of damaging it the way they normally do. That would require a lot of faith.
And any partially "developed" organs would actually be in the way and thus would be eliminated by natural selection.
Fifty years ago, someone asked another pertinent question. If the spiders' use of webs evolved, how did the spider get its food before it had webs? And if it already was able to get food, why evolve spinnerets? And the spider doesn't even know any of this...
to be continued...
Ever tried to swat a fly? Not necessarily easy, yes, no? Know why? It has to do with the fly's navigational system. It has a single vibrating rod in its abdomen, and as it changes direction in flight, it senses the changes in the vibrations of that rod and is able to dodge you, fly and land upside down and backwards.
How did the fly manage to evolve such a system? Even if it evolved the vibrating rod, what good would it be without the section of the brain to interpret the signals? And the nerves connecting the rod to the brain? And the correct instructions to interpret them? And the correct instructions to the part of the brain that controlled the wings as to what to DO about those signals? All AT THE SAME TIME. Wouldn't that be a remarkable coincidence? Could YOU sit down, right now, and write the code for such a set of instructions? And if your ten billion trained neurons put together can't do it, how do you think that a stupid fly did it by itself?
The fly has a complete navigational system that is self-constructing, self-reproducing, self-programming, self-correcting, that can fly upside down and backwards, avoiding dangers and locating and recognizing fuel (food), that requires even MORE entire, completely developed systems that even large groups of highly educated humans cannot or are only now beginning to be able to copy (and only by intelligent design), all microminiaturized into a space smaller than the head of a pin, with the code for it in characters that are the size of molecules (I wonder how many characters per inch that works out to?).
In your experience, how many complete flying and navigational systems do you know of that have happened completely by accident, with no intelligent thought or design? Ever read the story of all the thought and work needed to design a flying machine, as told by the Wright brothers? So how scientific is it to say that it just happened by blind accidents in the case of the lowly, incredibly complex fly?
On a higher level, when you are amused at a puppy or a kitten playing, enjoy a beautiful sunset, unselfishly help someone else, there is no "survival" value in that. Why do we have these innate abilities and inclinations that have nothing to do with "survival of the fittest," but only serve for our enjoyment or the benefit of others?
(This is only to give evidence of the existence of a God. It does not defend the immoral and often unscientific things that often-mistaken humans have done and taught in the name of God...)
For more information, please see: http://www.watchtower.org/e/20020608/article_01.htm , "Reconciling God and Science."
Best regards,
Mike
2007-12-18 15:08:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mike M. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
To Pope Leo "the great"
Thomas Aquinas's proofs are so easily refutable, its ridiculous. They don't even make sense!
The first two are easy: If God is the first mover, who moved God? And if God is the first cause, who caused God?
The rest can be examined at this website: http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/philosop/pudding.htm
It also gives the other 'proofs' such as the 'mystical experience' proof and the 'moral argument'.
You can't prove God exists. You just can't. He may exist, but the fact is there is a lot more proof for his non-existence than for his existence.
2007-12-18 13:50:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
You are proof of God's existance,,,your world is proof....the very air you breath is proof....can science make a cell of life without the aid of God? Can science make air without God? Can science even tell which came frist, the chicken or the egg? Can science make food from nothing?
Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? God asks Job. Tell me, if you have understanding. Who determined its measurements? Surely you know. Who stretched the line upon it? To what were its foundations fastened? Or who laid its cornerstone when the morning stars sang together and all the sons of God shouted for joy? (Job 38:4-7)
2007-12-18 13:53:12
·
answer #4
·
answered by dreamdress2 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
I really suggest you watch "A Case For Christ".
Its about an atheist who sets out to scientifically disprove the existance of God and disprove the Bible. Instead he comes up with overwhelming prove of His existence.
It should be available at most Blockbusters.
2007-12-18 13:52:55
·
answer #5
·
answered by Juicy Fruit 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Romans 1:20. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:
2007-12-18 13:43:21
·
answer #6
·
answered by See the Light 4
·
0⤊
1⤋
LOL.
Sorry, love.
But at this point in time, it's impossible to prove or disprove science and / or "God."
We don't have the technology nor the intellect, yet.
Maybe someday, we will.
Until then, everyone's different, and we should be okay with that.
:]
2007-12-18 13:41:52
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋
Example?
2007-12-18 13:41:49
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
3⤋
Existance of YOU and ME!!!
2007-12-18 16:43:18
·
answer #9
·
answered by senthil r 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, I feel nothing.
2007-12-18 13:44:33
·
answer #10
·
answered by Sliceathroat 3
·
0⤊
1⤋