An open question to believers of Christianity.?

Darrin, evolution can be measured, by genetic frequencies, hox genes, and vestigial/homologous structures. It can be observed, see finches in the galapagos islands. have you ever used penicillin or any family members who have? if so, penicillin should not exist according to your beliefs, because it is/was invented by resistant strains of bacteria, that came about through (heaven forbid) evolution.

as for the proof of anything supporting the bible; there is nothing. there are many lies and fallacies, that is why i am an atheist. yet it teaches people right and wrong, and if they have to get that from a fictional book, then i am glad the bible exists. and, you should not ask such a question, because what can you give to prove god doesn't exist? i just want to clarify, there is no scientific support for either side, it is the opinions of all these people, not scientific fact.

geessewereabove-evolution is a theory, but you use that word in a common denotation, as if it had no proof, yet it does. in a scientific context, a theory explains why something happens. it is not called that because it has no merit, but it simply is an explanation. and that "ark appearing on a mountain" is total bull. come back when you have real support for biblical stories.

lightning-abiogenesis occurred through a random accumulation of chemicals, which were able to use a membrane to keep a different chemical composition than the outside environment. scientists have replicated the accumulation and creation of nucleotides/amino acids (base units for RNA and later DNA, as well as proteins). called protobionts, they split apart and "reproduced," despite being a simple collection of chemicals in a membrane. eventually, the amino acids formed RNA. these were able to do so because there was little O2 in the atmosphere and so was reducing, along with the components of the primordial soup. as for the big bang, it wasn't a black hole. it was an extremely dense clump of matter. look up membrane theory, it is the best current theory in my opinion, better than "some intelligent designer who made the universe." it is also compatible with string theory.

Many scientific theories today cannot be tested or proven but are widely accepted because they are the only way to explain certain things. For example, once upon a time we were unable to view electrons but we knew they had to be there or atoms wouldn't make any sense.

With that in mind, here is my evidence for God:

Let's start with evolution. It's the accumulation of small changes in DNA as an organism adapts to its environment. Now, obviously evolution happens, and really a lot faster than Darwin supposed. But if you look at the probability of a mutation occurring in an actual coding section of the genome, and then look at the probability of that mutation being beneficial to the organism, you'll find that in all the 4.5 billion years the earth has been around, there hasn't been enough time for the first single-celled organism to have developed into another, different single-celled organism, much less all the diverse life that exists today. But obviously life does exist, and almost as obviously it developed through evolution. The only explanation that makes sense, then, is that there is some higher power directing evolution and causing these beneficial mutations to occur.

And now let's go back to abiogenesis. That's the creation of life from nonliving matter. Scientists claim to have replicated it in a lab, but even with circumstances as conducive to abiogenesis as they could make them, they were still only able to cause the strand to "spontaneously" generate when 51% of the strand had already been assembled. The odds against the first 51% of the strand randomly coming together in the primordial soup that was the early Earth are astronomical. Therefore there must have been some creator who caused the first 51% of the strand to assemble.

Finally, let's go all the way back to the Big Bang. All the matter in the universe was in a single point, presumably fairly stable because the only thing that now exists in a single point is a black hole and those don't tend to explode. But something touched off an explosion. If all the matter is together, held in a single point, what could have caused it to explode? It would have to be an outside force. For the sake of convenience, I term that force God.

Unless you can come up with a better explanation, I consider this compelling evidence that God does, in fact, exist. The truth is, science simply cannot explain everything. For a while, people thought it could, but the more we have learned, the more scientists have discovered that there simply is not an answer for everything, and in fact, it's impossible to find one. That's what the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle is all about.

Interestingly, the Hebrews were the first people to posit that time had a beginning and was not in fact cyclical, as most religions of that time believed. And the Earth described in Genesis is not resting on anything, but rather floating about in space. Rather than focus on what the Bible got wrong (it was, after all, written by humans), I'm amazed by what the ancient Hebrews had right that they had no business knowing.

You are assuming human logic is completely flawless and that we know everything about what is and isn't. This is an egoistic way of thinking (don't take this personally, it's not an insult).

Let me remind you of Magellan's trip around the world. Before that, it was completely logical that the Earth was flat, anything else was nonsense. That was wrong.

Logic is subject to change. It changes slightly every time we learn something new, and thus logic is limited to explain what we know - what we think we know - and nothing else. So logic's scope is really rather narrow, when you think about it.

And it bends everything perceivable to fit this model of "what we think we know", and what doesn't go according to that model is illogical. Here comes the tricky part: Just because it's illogical doesn't mean it's wrong. Maybe we just don't understand it yet, because we lack knowledge.

You might think we have all kinds of scientific knowledge. We do, that's correct, but we should still have a bit of doubt instead of assuming we're all-knowing.

Imagine you're wearing a blindfold and holding a giraffe's leg in your hands. You can feel the leg, you can make it bend, you can twist it, but you will never know it's in fact a giraffe's leg. In the same way, we can make stuff (atoms and what not) do what we want them to, but we'll never know if they're actually what we think they are, and if they're part of something greater, something our minds cannot comprehend.

I don't believe in God as a personal individual, but more as an energy co-existing in and with the universe, and therefore I might not be the right person to answer this. I just wanted to open your eyes, though, to the possibility that even the most absurd can have a hint of truth.

Are you catching my drift? :)

Excellent question, and I like your style. Perhaps I can lend a little fuel to your fire. You see, the study of people and society is called Sociology. We, as well as other sciences, have methods we use to measure and test our theories. Sometimes, phenomena in people can't be "measured" or "tested" in the exact ways you state.

Sociology has quantitative and qualitative data it uses for research. Quantitative data can be actually measured, such as how many times a person goes to the bathroom or how much money they spend on something. Qualitative data measures exactly what you are referring to---the reason why they do that. Perhaps the person has to pee a lot because they drank too much, perhaps they have a kidney infection, perhaps they have a weak bladder. All "invisible" evidence that can't really be measured. Therefore, we give a nominal definition to a behavior. "Going to the bathroom." We then assign a variety of systems to measure the indicators as to why that occurs, i.e. transforming it into measurable, "real" data. From that qualitative data, we also reach rational and plausible outcomes based on testing and research. We could deduce, for example, that people who go to the bathroom more than 10 times a day are more likely suffering from kidney infection than simply performing the "natural" act of peeing.

Our theories, data, and methods are used to predict patterns in human behavior and society. To then use those theories to formulate programs for society, understand human behavior. Even to give numbers to you "real" scientists to perform some of your studies.

So---there is your answer, and I didn't use the Bible. There IS an approved method for studying human behavior and patterns in society that follows scientific method. Strange, but most of those theories seem to coincide with---rather than disagree with---the Bible when closely examined. Does that mean these theories "prove" the Bible true? Nope. Not anymore than your theories actually succeed in proving the Bible isn't true. Your theories do just as you state, and just as Sociology's studies sets out do do...provide a scientifically supported reason why something exists or how/why it occurred. I wasn't aware all of science exists solely for the purpose of disproving the Bible. I thought it existed for the improvement in and understanding of nature.

It all boils down to a person's choice which side of the very empirically evident, researched, tested, hypothesized version of the truth they want to believe. You are perfectly free to believe what you feel and what you believe is more logical and correct. So are Christians. I think both sides need to realize that and just be nice to each other.

Your physical existence on this earth, the free air you consume every day, the plants you eat as food daily, your ability to ask this question in R and S ( because your dog can not do that), to mention but a few are all due to a supreme being. The irony is that, there is no way a man can see God in the physical. You need spiritual eyes. Just like there is no way a virologist can see a virus with the naked eyes, he needs a magnifying eye. Man's knowledge about God is limited to his thinking, understanding and circumstances. And, there is no way God can reveal himself to man more than what He has done in the bible and in the things He created. Just like it will be the height of foolishness explaining to your pet dog that there is a R and S forum in YA on the net, because a dog only understands the language of dogs.

You have effectively ruled out any possibility of having any acceptable proof. You did it by using the wrong criteria. However, the proof for the existence of God can be determined by the use of natural reason. Those who cannot do it are either incapable or unwilling to use their reason in this manner. And as for the Bible, the ONLY proof for its infallibility is its ability to fulfill prophesies. If this is not sufficient for you, you are never going to get the answer you are seeking.

Because life is going to remain a mystery even with those proofs. Good luck.

Tell me, How come the "Theory" of Evolution is only a "theory that has never been proved? There is NO evidence of it!

Tell me where did the first atom come from that split into two, then four, then eight,... into all the moons, stars, planets, gases... into our Earth with everything from water to mountains, tress to seeds, fish to worms, fruits to deer, bears to grasses,... into us with he ability to love? Where did that first atom come from that the "Theory" of evolution can not prove?

As far as proof there is lots! IF you looked at history you would find that neighboring countries wrote down the same history as the Bible tells us. Places have been found that are in the Bible. even Noah's Ark! One year it got warm and and the snow melted off the top of the tallest mountain in the Turkey/Iraq area. Men could see the Ark up there and went to it and measured it all. All just as the Bible states. NASA even sent a Satellite to it and has photoed it from outer space. It was snowed over again, covered since then...

What is your explanation for the 10,000s of people that have died and been brought to life and even the blind ones able to describe what they SAW! I died in 1976 and my sole left my body, so I know that is all true.

In a court of law there are few things that are considered evidence to show proof or fact.

Christianity proves the test.

There are:

1. Eye witnesses

2. Biblical prophecies fulfilled

3. Archeological evidences (a LOT here).

4. NOn biblical evidence (Even well read Atheists KNOW the man Jesus was here and had a great following).

Let me know if you are truly searching or just making fun. I have ample evidence to show you.

So by your definition, you limit evidence to our six natural senses.

This is the typical arrogance often scientific era of the last 5 centuries.

This is like the flat-earthers, rejecting any conflicting ideas.

Spirituality goes beyond the mere physical reality to the supernatural.

Scientists are now learning that their ideas of space/time are faulty.

The only proof would be the prophecies from thousands of years ago coming true right now. Every prophecy about Jesus first coming came true and will come true about His second coming. The science that proves the reality of Biblical people is archeology. Try googling Bible archeology and see what you get.