Proof of our creator: Anyone: Please design an acceptable experiment that would give proof of God.?

Hi wendalore, is the nail growing right from its edge or is it being pushed out of our body? Is hair cell coming out at the tip of the hair or is it coming out at the root? Same way is the plant growing at the tip or is it being pushed out? Right from seed plants come out. Same way right from the only one point, this entire cosmos has come out. And that point is you only and no body is responsible. So it is enough to realize your own self as the only one point where from this entire cosmos gets projected. Then no more search for a God as one which is apart from you. All the best dear.

I would actually turn it over to the experts. Anyone who could devise an experiment that would win the James Randi $1M prize for providing evidence of God would pass in my book.

Easy test: The one true god will have 100% of humanity as it's followers.

Anything less than 100% compliance indicates a false god.

How does your god stack up?

Its simple!

Believe that Jesus Christ is God and accept Him as your Lord and Savior and God will fill you with the Holy Spirit who WILL give you the proof that He is real!

"Please remember, we have no idea what the nature of a creator really is."

Without having an idea about the nature of something it is impossible to test it in any way.

"Please do not go by descriptions in religious texts in your proposals unless you believe those descriptions."

Whether or not I personally believe any descriptions that are given is irrelevant. If a description HAS been given then it may be possible to test whether or not that particular 'concept' of a god exists, for example, the idea that a god that answers prayers and heals the sick exists can be tested by testing whether prayer is an effective cure for anything (note: it is impossible to prove that a god DOES NOT exist though).

"Try and imagine what our Creator WOULD be like if there were one."

If there is a creator that does not interact with us or the planet it is untestable by any means we currently have.

On the other hand, ALL of the named gods that are currently claimed by people allegedly interact with humans - therefore it should be possible to test whether or not the claimed interactions occur (or at least that there is an otherwise unexplained tendency for certain things to be favoured).

If a 'creator' doesn't interact with us,or anything that affects us, then whether or not it exists is irrelevant and unprovable - and there is NOTHING to be gained from believing it exists.

I have stated some very logical reasons to our existence while some others would say "Big Bang" with no understanding of where it came from. Laughable? Very. And then some may say a piece of Ape hair grew out of the ground, Male and Female Ape hair and fish scales. Lol. I love the decreasing logic when people refish, i mean regroup, ughh Stupid evolution key board with official ape hair. What I meant to say was, I love the decreasing logic when people Refuse to accept God. Had to change key boards there. :-) Oh yea, and some claim Energy and Matter created us. :-) aren't there some really bright people in our future? And the cycle is sure to continue.

I believe in a first century Jewish man.

I believe in him because we have his well documented words.

I could sit down with you over coffee and tell you WHY I believe in his words, and after work out in concentric circles to his birth, death and miracles.

Only after we that would I be willing to discuss other more unbelievable things with you, like talking snakes and donkeys, worldwide deluges and the beginning of time.

Because if you don't get the first part, you won't understand anything about the rest.

This is life and death. YOURS. Don't be a lazy historian. I can't sit down over coffee with you, so go and do the work and find out why so many believe in the one who split history into two.

Hang onto your wallet and test everything when you're searching for truth.

With few exceptions it will be futile to impart the Christian faith to non-believers. The spiritual world is supernatural to anyone not blessed with faith in God. The atheist is unable to grasp the truth of prophesy, morality or Biblical teaching. To him these can only come from early parental influence or a desire to be accepted by believers. We must bear in mind that we have no power or authority to convert another person, and that conversion is the work of the Holy Spirit. While we my in some ways influence s person to be curious or interested, the gift of faith can only be given by God.

We see that the nonbeliever, for his own reasons - boasting of his intelligence, powers of reason and logic or scientific knowledge - often take pleasure or self satisfaction in debating with believers, having no understanding of the source of a believer’s faith. They ask why God did or didn’t do this or that, things that humans find in conflict with human behavior. The telling clue to the mystery is found in the book of Isaiah::

Isa_55:8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.

Isa 55:9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.

Although these passages are in reference to pardon, especially how God’s forgiveness may be repeated as often as the sin is committed, which is not generally the case for people, they serve to explain why any human arguments using human logic, human reason and science simply do not provide any understanding of the divine mind and will. Once God’s grace has been imparted, however, the truth of His presence becomes incontrovertable and irresistible. And since grace is required to attain the knowledge of God, only His children are able to grasp it. In short, human abilities are simply inadequate for spiritual enlightenment.

Science is not designed to do all things, and not all knowledge we acquire can be subject to the scientific method.

Science is designed to give us insight into the natural world.

God is supernatural.

Science cannot provide us with the knowlege that Carmen is great music, that racism is bad, or that The Hunger Games is highly overrated. Yet our specices can come to a common consent that all these are true.

Experiment: take an instance from your life of a very unusual experience, which you've probably pigeonholed (just like most people ) as some momentary illusion or sensory perception phenomena or unusual feeling (like a momentary visual illusion, or one that persisted more than a few seconds, or a sound hard to explain, or a very unusual feeling and thought, epiphany, etc.), and then, instead of keeping it in that pigeonhole where it resides awkwardly, let it be the unique thing it actually was, and try to simply let it be fully whatever it was, without prejudice, without rushing to push it into another pigeonhole. Difficult, but possible. Then just continue to allow it to just be, to just be there. Perhaps you'll remember it more completely then.

This itself is not about proving anything, but instead is an exercise to begin to develop the ability to perceive events more accurately. The difference between insightful thinking and ordinary thinking is most often about tolerating something as being different/new, instead of just making it inaccurately old.

Think of it as training to be a good scientist, if you like.

Think of it as a prerequisite to doing good science, or discovery.