Would you believe in God if there was scientific evidence?

"

 
Its a website,ABOUT VIDEO GAMES.

"

" @Jeffery said:

"

 
Its a website,ABOUT VIDEO GAMES.

"

I only read the last page, but I'm guessing this turned into a smug internet atheist thread? "

Religion is always such a hot topic.
 
The way I see it is that science is evidence for a God, but not the bearded man in the sky God, not even a literal God. Science has taught us how nature works, so surely nature itself is the creator? I'm not saying this in a save the whales kind of way, I'm just saying that science and religion are compatible - it's just BOTH SIDES of the religion-science debate trip themselves up by taking everything literally. To me, God is everywhere, and heaven is a contented smile at the end of your life knowing that you have done everything you wanted/needed to do, and knowing that you will not be forgotten by the people who loved you.
 
Christians are (mostly) idiots because they seem to all believe in a robed Zeus-like figure sitting up on a cloud taking a personal interest in their own pathetic little life. Atheists are just as bad as Christians, too - Atheism is a religion against religion, it's a religion based around arrogance of belief and Dawkins is the pope. It's a hypocrisy on such a grand scale it's laughable.
 
Take religion as literally as you want, take Atheism as literally as you want, but don't be arrogant enough to label it as truth - it's a fool who believes that they know everything there is to know. We are only humans.

The most important thing is that Bible-based games are notoriously shitty
 
But to answer the question, yes, if there was evidence in the true sense of the word I'd be convinced. Until then, nope!

 http://www.giantbomb.com/video-thing-its-a-website/17-20/
 
This really isn't the place for trying to aruge the universe. These arguaments never go anywhere, nobody ever gets converted.

"Religion is always such a hot topic.  The way I see it is that science is evidence for a God, but not the bearded man in the sky God, not even a literal God. Science has taught us how nature works, so surely nature itself is the creator? I'm not saying this in a save the whales kind of way, I'm just saying that science and religion are compatible - it's just BOTH SIDES of the religion-science debate trip themselves up by taking everything literally. To me, God is everywhere, and heaven is a contented smile at the end of your life knowing that you have done everything you wanted/needed to do, and knowing that you will not be forgotten by the people who loved you. Christians are (mostly) idiots because they seem to all believe in a robed Zeus-like figure sitting up on a cloud taking a personal interest in their own pathetic little life. Atheists are just as bad as Christians, too - Atheism is a religion against religion, it's a religion based around arrogance of belief and Dawkins is the pope. It's a hypocrisy on such a grand scale it's laughable.  Take religion as literally as you want, take Atheism as literally as you want, but don't be arrogant enough to label it as truth - it's a fool who believes that they know everything there is to know. We are only humans. "

" @Isaac:  Doesn't the fact that we have found remains millions of years old prove that the world is older then 6,000 years old.  The fact that man can't come to grips with the fact that when we die we simply become part of the earth like everything else is why people need to have a god or in the past gods to cling onto. It sucks, I don't like it either but that doesn't mean i have to cling onto some guy in the sky that will let me come live in his awesome house if i am good and do what he wants and if not will send me to timeout in a fire pit. "

" @SeriouslyNow:    science can be abused practically but also by fundamentalist interpretations of what it implies.  I'm  talking about belief, so using valence theory as an abuse of science to argue with me is like saying people can kill each other with sharpened crosses.... My point  was about humans interpretations of highly regarded works on the level of belief.  I agree that religious faith is potentially scary in the 21st century. but I wanted to add some balance against that argument:    I think the appropriation of scientific theory into a faith can unlock brutality in the same way  as appropriating the 'word of god'.     I really think darwinism was such a radical new thing that it affected the zeitgeist enough to pave the way for Hitler in a way, with neitzsche making it a philosophy and  loads of thinkers/writers becoming eugenicists.  the nazis were a 'scientific' dictatorship in the same way that Iran has a 'religious' one.      The way I read history the holocaust was a horrific but logical conclusion of   natural selection being taken at face value, as a faith.  and no you can't blame science, just people's natural inclination to faith.  (a faith in the superiority of the ayrian race which also comes from   'scientific'   endevour of the time) .  the point was that humans can use science as a dogma,  despite its good intentions,  the same as religion, and this has created shit in the past too. I was just trying to be fair and maybe your right that at the moment there's alot more dangerous stuff in religious works than scientific  (I hadn't thought about that its true   .).... and basically I agree the world would be safer right now without religion.  (and faith!)    You win because you have alot more modern examples with religion but you haven't shot down my 'balance giving point'  IN MY OPINION.   ( shit I can't stop it underlining)             Basically your last line but replace science with 'highly regarded works' .....  "

" @diz:  Actually, I would say that claim should be attributed to Agnosticism rather than Atheism, but I suppose the two overlap sometimes. I do, however, stand by my comparison - Atheism has become almost militant in it's denial of a Christian God in the past few years, something which has been widely documented.  As for scientific truth, the belief that truth must be supported by fact is only relevant to physical problems - metaphysical issues such as God and the universe have no solid proof because there is none to find - you can't just send a probe up through the clouds, confirm the existance of God and wash your hands of the affair, there comes a point where you must make logical deductions and logic tends to differ from person to person. I mean, it's like what happens after you die? I like to think that there is something more than a short spell on Earth then an eternity in a little hole in the ground but I could never offer any proof to that - and neither could any Scientist, to the contrary. When a question cannot be answered, the truth becomes whatever opinion dictates.  But regarding your final paragraph - are you implying that my existance IS my responsibility? My life, certainly, but my existance?   I call people idiots because people are idiots, spirituality be damned. And finally, I can only work from what I am familiar with; "The rationalist relative approach concedes that we can only "kno" things based on our current frame of reference and based on our appraisal of available evidence, which has, does and will change with time." I'm not caiming every Christian believes that, that would be both moronic and hypocritical, but such people do exist and I'm using them as my frame of reference - dealing with the most 'extreme' version, if you will.  Do you believe in anything other than science? I'd like to think that people can find comfort in something other than the pursuit of fact. It's as though people are too busy examining the brush strokes to appreciate the picture. "

Oh goddamnit this is gonna get bad fast.... oh wait... too late.... Who gives a fuck anyways? All you know for sure as that this is the one true life, so live it as best as you can and make sure your happy when you die. If there's another life after that then huah! but till then.... I'm proud to not give a shit.

God will never prove his existence it defeats the purpose of faith. 
If you ever find proof of God you are actually disproving God, because God would never prove himself.

I beleive in Allah becuase....well their just has to be a god, its called having faith :p

"Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy) explained (Psalm 102:25-26). This law states that everything in the universe is running down, deteriorating, constantly becoming less and less orderly. Entropy (disorder) entered when mankind rebelled against God – resulting in the curse (Genesis 3:17; Romans 8:20-22). Historically most people believed the universe was unchangeable. Yet modern science verifies that the universe is “grow(ing) old like a garment” (Hebrews 1:11). Evolution directly contradicts this law.
"

Whoa. this thread is still going, niccce. I love sonseed. They are so bad they are good haha

@diz:
 
Wow. 
 
I certainly didn't expect my reply to be taken quite so badly, but from what you've written it seems you missed the crux of some of my points. 
 
I didn't deny Atheists don't believe in any form of God - through the process of denying other God's this is made clear. Consider the 'Dawkins culture' that has been doing the rounds recently, I'll post a video of the main man himself, the worlds most famous atheist, comparing God to Wotan, Thor and JuJu up the mountain. If that isn't enough documented evidence, you could take the youtube comments as well - there are some there from self professed atheists all denying God. Or you could check out some videos uploaded by self professed atheists 'debunking' God, that should count too. Of course, you could always try books - I don't like playing the Dawkins card too often, but he did write 'The God Delusion', and I know that Sam Harris has written some quite potent anti-religion book although I don't know whether he has all-out denied the existance of a God. And, of course, there will be plenty of television debates to choose from - I'd check Bill O Reilly, see who he is shouting at these days.
 
And I'd also like to point out I said 'almost' militant. Not actually militant. I'm talking about the sheer energy they put into trying to debunk faith.
 
As for your point on scientific proof for metaphysical issues, I didn't really make my point clear, of course science has uncovered fact from things that were previously described as metaphysical, and of course we have a good theory as to how the universe came to be, but all that is irrelevant to the point I was making. I'm talking about pure existance, there could not possibly be any physical proof of a God. 
 
As for the whole objective truth thing, you hit the nail on the head. But there is a difference between objective truth and personal truth, but if there is no physical evidence to something it doesn't mean that thing is never spoken of again, it switches from objective to personal truth, and becomes belief. It's like saying someone is wrong for having a certain taste in music.
 
And finally, quote to me the bit that gave you the impression I thought a rational approach was moronic? I don't even see where you got that from. All I said was a lot of people are stupid, it's the nature of humanity. The only other use of the word moronic I can see is where I said it would be moronic to assume every Christian believed exactly the same thing, which is something I thought you would agree with.
 
Oh, also - how is the pursuit of comfort unhealthy? I assume you mean people taking comfort in something that isn't true, but is it not the living that counts?
 
Edit: Forgot about the Dawkins video I mentioned:
 
 

aaaahahahahahahahahahaha
 
god...

I once saw this gothic dude wearing a T-shirt with JESUS IS A CUNT on the back.

" I once saw this gothic dude wearing a T-shirt with JESUS IS A CUNT on the back. "

" @Isaac said:

"Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics (Entropy) explained (Psalm 102:25-26). This law states that everything in the universe is running down, deteriorating, constantly becoming less and less orderly. Entropy (disorder) entered when mankind rebelled against God – resulting in the curse (Genesis 3:17; Romans 8:20-22). Historically most people believed the universe was unchangeable. Yet modern science verifies that the universe is “grow(ing) old like a garment” (Hebrews 1:11). Evolution directly contradicts this law.
"

woah. awesome dude. I believe in god now "

" I feel that the core of any religion which is faith would be cheapened by any scientific evidence of his existence. Since the main purpose of faith is believing in Him even though you don't have a perfect knowledge of Him. It's almost a test of our love and trust in God. Plus the Bible has been translated through many many ages, so even though the integral message is kept intact, certain little details might be lost or mistranslated toward the present day. "

ITALICS = SMART!

This is why I'm a Pastafarian. Hail the spaghetti monster!

Just let this thread die already...

I highly doubt that there would be any scientific evidence for God, as religion is based on faith not fact.

" the bible isnt even fact its just parables that are made to teach a lesson and make you a better person "

HOLY CRAP THIS THREAD IS OLD!  
 
On point, I already believe so Science can only strengthen.

" I love Jesus he's legit "

I'd believe in Santa Clause if I traveled past the arctic circle and saw a barber's pole, if that's what you're asking.