: : What would be a good way to go about proving the existence of God?

: Well, I would start with the currently accepted cosmology. The fact that the universe had a beginning. If I have a proper understanding of the Big Bang theory (I trust you or someone else will be happy to correct me) energy was converted into matter. The first sentence of Genesis states that God created the heaven and the earth. Next the writer says that the earth was without form and void. Now, would not the matter (or energy if you will) that forms the earth be present at the instant of creation? Next, I believe God said "Let there be light". If I am correct, energy is not converted directly into matter, but goes through a plasma phase. One of the properties of a plasma is that it is dark, so that an observer would see nothing at this stage of the Creation. However, as the plasma is conveted into matter, it would produce an immense quantity of light. I beleive this process of releasing light from plasma is referred to in physics as "decoupling". And God divided the light from the darkness. I could go on. It would seem rather fortuitous of some Bedouins thousands of years ago to so aptly describe the first moments of Creation.

:: Ok. I suppose we could start with the various creation mythologies of different societies down through the ages.

My favorites are the Hindu and Native American ones. The Hindu one even accounts for cycles in the universe as if it had already concieved of the Big Bang, followed by a collapse, to be followed by another Big Bang with the present incarnation of Vishnu being the God of now.

Native American mythology uses more colorful symbols to represent God such as the Hawk or even the Turtle. In some cases, these religions have more than one God with the sky being the Father and the Earth being the Mother.

The Talmud/Bible myths of Judaism and Christianity seem more vague in their depictions of Creation. Since there are two distinct versions of how it happened in both texts, which contradict each other, it sort of comes across to me as if they didn't really refine their thoughts on it very much. It makes me wonder sometimes how it is some Judeo/Christian followers get so fired up over the precise details of their particular mythology since there really isn't much deatil to it. They seem to kind of make it up as they go.

All in all though, I suppose any folklore is as good as another when it comes to trying to prove the existence of God with it.

• Re: Existence (which one??) - Tön - July 14, 1999 - 16:56 UTC
  • Re: Existence (which one??) - David/">David - July 14, 1999 - 17:11 UTC
    • Re: Existence (which one??) - daViper - July 14, 1999 - 19:56 UTC