Proof of God

A friends question

[Sungirl]

I'd like to ask this question to Freepers to get some answers. A friend of mine will often say she doesn't believe in God....but, I think she is fishing for a reason TO believe. Today she sent me a note from her other friend who states the theory of evolution and that people who believe God put us here are 'brainwashed'. She tells her.... 'Evolution has PROOF...where is the Proof of God?'

Personally, I think evolution has made man evolve....but I also think that the earth and all its resources are not here without a reason and a purpose. There are just too many coincidences to think that it is not planned. Just my thought.

[Sungirl]

So...my question is...what can I say to her to at least try to make her question the existence of God? Is it just Faith? What would you tell her?

[Bommer]

Wheres the proof of evolution?

[americanusa]

i wish i had an answer. my faith or lack of faith has been really tested. i am very angry at god - so if u find an answer let me know

[FormerLib]

So, if it is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, your friend would then believe? Where is the faith in that?

A man raising from the dead was insufficient? Perhaps these folks would consider it if God would come and perform several miracles on demand for them?

Faith goes beyond the capabilities of human thought.

[BigWaveBetty]

Does she have any children? That's proof enough for me.

In addition, where's the missing link? (that one always gets the scientists) ;-)

[Eternal_Bear]

Here is the real question: If God exists; who created God? Answer that please. If you say God has always existed; you could say that about the universe as well:-)

[Husker24]

The universe is filled with planets, planets are made of gas and dust, What created the gas and dust?

[garycooper]

I will think about this more, but here is one thing that I would tell her: "There are lots of things that we believe in that science simply cannot prove."

Here are a few examples:

1-Science cannot prove that you love someone.

2-Science cannot prove that something is beautiful.

3-Science cannot prove that something is funny.

4-Science cannot prove that you miss someone.

5-Science cannot prove that something is noble or inspirational.

6-Science cannot prove why something makes you sad.

7-Science cannot prove what makes us happy.

There are lots of things that we believe in life that science cannot adequately explain. Clearly we do not say to our loved ones, "I don't love you because love can't be proven."

So it's probably a bad idea to disbelieve in God just because we lack air-tight scientific proof of His existence.

[Sungirl]

I thought AlGore was the missing link.

[OldFriend]

You bet, if you have ever seen a baby born you know there has to be a g-d. Man alone could never have created such a miracle.

[WarPaint]

Nothing you can say. It takes a desire to know God and cultivate a relationship. Then, comes the proof, the miracles, the joy, the peace. God believes in us, it's we who need to find belief. You can pray that she hears God's still voice, and let her be.

That's my experience.

[El Gato]

Wheres the proof of evolution/ Well proof might be too strong a word, but there is plenty of evidence for evolution. Of course there need not be any conflict between evolution and the existance of God. God can do what He wants whatever way He wants, can he not? Certainly "and God said, let there be light", sounds very much like current theories of the big bang. My understanding is that there is evidence that the "days" spoken of in Genesis are not the same as todays 24 hour days created by the rotation of the earth. Perhaps someting more like "periods" or "epochs" or somesuch.

[Endeavor]

Hey Sungirl,

That's a challenging question, but appropriate for a Sunday.

There are two books that have been very helpful to me in my own search. While this isn't a specific answer, they might be helpful to you in clarifying your faith and therefore at some point helpful to your friend as well.

They are: "Mere Christianity" by C. S. Lewis, and "Letters From A Skeptic" by Dr. Gregory A Boyd and Edward K. Boyd.

"Letters From A Skeptic" takes a father's (the skeptic) letters to his son (the Christian) and the son's responses and does a neat job of addressing the questions a lot of people have about the existence and relevance of God. It is easy to read.

"Mere Christianity" was a bit tougher for me to get through because Lewis' sentences are somewhat convoluted and take a lot of "thinking through." But I love his writing. It just takes me longer to read him.

Lastly, I haven't found it productive to get into arguments over the existence or relevance of God, so I'd stay away from discussions on evolution. Not because I'm afraid of them, but because they tend to get both participants distracted from the initial point, which is, "Is there a God?", If so, "What is his nature?" and "How does that relate to me?"

Warmest regards,

Endeavor

[dep]

by definition there can be no proof of god, because then faith would be easy, and our free will would be compromised. however, if your friend were to read c.s. lewis she would find some powerful arguments for belief.

my favorite, drawn fron aquinas and kant, has to do with the fact that we have a sense of right and wrong, of goodness and badness. this is not based on that which is easiest or that which produces specific results, but for some other reason. if there is no god, what would it be? (there are arguments to refute this, but they do not hold up.)

there is also, again from aquinas (and following through thomas jefferson and indeed clarence thomas), the notion of "natural law," as in "we hold these truths to be self-evident." the idea that there are metaphysical laws that are as inviolate as the physical laws of the universe demands a higher order of organization -- strong evidence that all this didn't just happen.

a little more difficult to argue for, and the locus of most religious dispute, is the relatively minor points of just what god's up to. to the extent that we might learn what active role god takes, we encounter a whole lot of background noise, extending from the tinfoil-mitred revelation-thumpers to the latter-day seers of many sorts. but there is something of which we can be certain, and that is that prayer does work. i have seen it time and again, as would your friend were she to watch for awhile. this isn't to say that god is some kind of cosmic santa claus delibering everything for which we ask -- bill buckley famously wrote that "certainly god answers all prayers, but sometimes the answer is no," which is i think accurate but a little stark. i much prefer the formulation that alan keyes uses, "sometimes god does the right thing in his way rather than my way."

while i do not take the stock that many do in the bible (there has been way too much opportunity for it to have been corrupted over the millenia), there is one thing in it that i think cannot be doubted: "seek, and ye shall find." if your friend genuinely seeks god, she will not be disappointed.

dep

[Happygal]

My mother died recently. I thought I'd be angry at God, but the whole sad experience has strengthened my faith. Because I know I will see her again.

I don't know how I know. I just know it. I don't need any scientist to explain it to me. I know.

[WillaJohns]

Maybe Whose Deck is It? will be of help.

[D-fendr]

It would depend upon where you start. First, you'd have to find some agreement on what "God" meant, how she is defining God.

There isn't any quick comeback that is effective in answering a question involving deeper meaning; it can however be the topic of an ongoing discussion. That can be good too.

[billybudd]

Those are two different things really. God is not an object in the universe, so cannot be proved/disproved using a materialistic standard of proof. Because God is defined as the cause of existence, it is by the nature of existence that he is proven. In other words, God is, because existence is. Of course, this is a matter of definition. If you define God as a "being" in the universe, then you will have problems, i.e., where does this "being" live? Anyway, the traditional view of God is that God is beyond existence. But positive proof is not relevant, because nobody claims to positively define God. We simply know that God is that which or whatever it is that causes existence. Therefore, he is negatively defined, and negatively proved by virtue of existence itself.
Now, about evolution. I don't see what evolution has to do with all of this. If you're talking about physical evidence pointing to a biological process of natural selection, then of course it exists. Evolution is really the best theory we have to explain the process of creation. What I can never understand is how fundamentalists or atheists could believe that the theory of evolution is somehow in conflict with Genesis. It's utter nonsense. Genesis even hints at an evolutionary process by describing that first the form of the planet was created, then plants, then animals, and finally man. That's essentially what evolution says. The people who wrote Genesis did not have access to the scientific tools we have today, and therefore weren't able to make the kind of detailed historical analyses we can make. So, they didn't try. They simply wanted to convey the cause of creation, not its specific mechanical process.

[dubyajames]

Well, for someone who does not want to believe there will always be adequate reasons to reject God. However, if your friend is truly curious, there are a few routes you might want to go down in talking to her about it.

First, there is the evidence from the complexity of even the simplest organisms. Our entire molecular and genetic makeup is in effect information, and it has yet to be proved that there can be an ultimate source of information outside of some intelligent agent. The probability of this seems to indicate intelligent design, which supports (though it cannot irrefutably prove) the existence of a Creator.

Second, there is the evidence from the uniform cross-cultural experiences very different people claim to have when their lives were changed by Christ. This involves a degree of subjectivity and is imperfect also. But I think anyone who has an open mind will find such testimony compelling.

Third, there are the arguments in support of the reliability of the Bible. The smallest, easiest to read volume that defends Christ and Scriptural reliability is Josh McDowell's "More Than a Carpenter," but there are many lengthier volumes than that one.

I wish I had more time to go into detail. But for every flaw she can point to in the evidence for God, it is equally easy to point to the flaws in citing the "proof" of evolution as "proof" there is no God.

[tpaine]

I think you should ask yourself why you are posting this to free republic, "a conservative news forum".