Rationality & religion don't mix.
Nothing Sacred - 1997 Proofs for the Existence of God 1-1 was released on: USA: 18 September 1997
One common contradiction to St. Thomas Aquinas' five ways is the argument of the Problem of Evil. This argument asserts that the existence of evil and suffering in the world is inconsistent with the idea of an all-powerful, all-loving God. The Problem of Evil raises questions about the nature of God's attributes and challenges the logic of Aquinas' proofs for the existence of God.
God can't be seen, measured, weighed, smelled, felt or in any way sampled. All proofs of God's existence are either hearsay, or inferred proofs as in "this world has to have been made by someone"
St Thomas Aquinas relied on what is known as the Cosmological Argument for the existence of God. He claimed that there were five valid ways to prove God exists, although thre of them are essentially restatements of the same things. Essentially his view was that some contingent beings exist; contingent beings require a noncontingent ground of being (a "necessary thing") in order to exist; therefore a noncontingent ground of being exists. This is not a great deal different to the Ontological Argument. Aquinas' theological positions involved making unprovable assumptions from which to prove the unprovable.
Yes, no-one has found any proof that god exists. Not one scrap of evidence.
It really dosen't matter because everyone should know God exists ever if you are not christian but im a Pegan.
Absolutely! He developed some resounding proofs of God's existence that were used often in Western Philosophy
yes the god Krishna realy exist.. http://www.iskcondesiretree.net/forum/topics/dwaraka-a-lost-city-recovered
AnswerNo, it is not fear - it is being rational. Since there is no evidence for the existence of God, it follows that there is no evidence that Jesus is the son of God, and no evidence that he can save us from a hell, the existence of which is purely conjecture.
The questions not wheres the proof? It is do you believe?Answer:The proofs used by believers to demonstrate the existence of god are fallacious arguments to non-believers. To be proof in the scientific sense they would have to be repeatable, observable and conducted with a program of triple blind examiners to remove potential biasing of the results. No such tests have been undertaken with verifiable results. The problem is that if you can make a "god" jump through hoops to provide the proof, he isn't much of an omnipotent deity.
Belief in God, in the Torah, in the existence of free-will, in our being responsible to God, and that we possess an eternal soul.
Deists believe a God (or Gods) exist. Atheists do not. Deists tend to believe God is a rational explanation for the existence of the universe, but rarely if ever intervenes in its operation.