What are the odds of God existing?

Maybe there is less. There is no universe, there is no us. If something can come from nothing then there can also be nothing. And this is it. We cannot prove anythings existance without using things which we are trying to prove exist as moorings. It seems somewhat circular to me. As does nothing proving it is nothing - but then again we have nothing to say nothing is actually something attempting to prove anythingYou pays your money...

See if this helps.Omnivorous comes in from a long day, slides a disc into his dvd player, pours himself a generous slug from that 30 year old whiskey he's finally permitted himself - and flops down on the couch with a sigh: "How much longer Lord (if you exist)"Omni presses PLAY.He finds himself moved by the opening sequence of the movie. Its "Saving Private Ryan". Given his Vietnam vet past, he finds the opening sequence a little heavy going and fast forwards past it until he gets to the story proper. There is no succour there as the film continues to contrast the depravity of battle with the sheer humnaity of man. Scenes from Omnis own experience flash unbidden before his eyes. His fingers unconsciously use all their former war experience and crawl on their bellies towards the FAST FORWARD button.."KNOCK KNOCK"... on the door. "Dang! Those pesky trick or treaters" he mumbles to himself - partly in relief for the (unbeknownst to him God-supplied) unexpected break, partly in reaction to the twinge-of-pain his miraculously repaired colon gives him on rising from the couch in reminder as to what he knows (yet somehow still denies) went on in that fevered hospital time. He presses PAUSEFinding himself ill-equipped to debate the thread topic "Satanic Origins of Hallo-ween" with the fresh faced youngsters he encounters, he relents and pops a couple of sweets into their trustingly proffered bags - wondering (as Iano does) why it is that nobody seems to give fruit and nuts anymore but prefer to dole out all manner of suger-delivery-devices... and money... and porn.Compelled in to pressing PLAY again, Omni stands at the drinks counter treating himself to a small refill. The tv images translate in his brain so as to initiate a burning in his throat, lubricated remotely by the gentle overflow from his eyes - as he surveys the sheer, inexplicable heroism portrayed in the Alamo battle. Entering the final sequence he glances around and stands, the now-old soldier, to attention - and choruses the protagonists salute to the men with whom he fought... and in may ways... died.Omni is God. He inhabits his realm. You? Your Private Rohan. Your life is played out one frame at a time, in one movie, the past known to you, the future not. Omni can fast forward, stop, pause, play his viewing of your life before you even live it. He can chose to see any and every scene according to his will. Your conception as a story, your birth, your marriage, your death. Your destinationAnd if Omni was Stephen Spielberg, he would be an even better model of God. For he could allow anything at all to happen to Private Rohan. Yet nowhere in the final cut does Private Rohan make anything but his own choices.It ain't perfect Private...but its the model I use whenever the mood takes me. And its reassuring to know, even if "through a glass darkly" what the ending will be before I get there. Real reassuring.And you don't even have to "earn this"

There is bugger all to be taken from this film - other than perhaps to invoke its title:Mission Accomplished

It would be interesting to see if unreason could come up with anything that couldn't be slotted into an existing category. If not then you could insert this one on the basis of ununderstood stand-alone.I felt something go 'POP' in my head as I wrote it - if thats any consolation.

what on earth has science to do with it?

Neither is it - per definitionOne of your possibles is "God says"The uncertainty of what he says lies more within you than him If QM says that then I would start to question QM - for obvious (it refutes itself) reasons.

In that case the probability must be 1. How could God not exist?{AbE} Just joshing DF. In case you didn't know a thread tops out and is closed at approx post #300. Lets leave the main protagonists to finish without further interuption from you or me. No offence...am as guilty as you (and THAT's a bigger issue than the one here)Welcome to EvCThis message has been edited by iano, 03-May-2006 11:56 PM

And there was me trying to add a sense of decorum, a sense of gravitas to the terminal stages of the illness. Only to have Chiro leap on any old toss-in that happens to be tossed-in. And by a post #1 no less!Where's me STOP - STEP AWAY FROM THE VEHICLE sign??

He says finite: Genesis = in the beginning, Revelation = in the end. Time is a bubble pushed out of the skin of eternity. A subset of eternity if you will. I haven't modelled it yet though... Absolutely. He knew all events before a frame of film was exposed. "Them he called (pre-christian) he also justified, (at conversion) them who he justified he also glorified (in heaven)". God is already enjoying the company of those who 'will' be in heaven (and them him) and exposing to his wrath those who 'will' be in Hell (and them receiving). Time is the canvas on which this main event was/is already/ will be... painted out. A sideshow - albeit an important one.Private Rohan is just getting into having a crush on his high school history teacher Total/none. If a person is lost then they will have earned that wage (of sin) totally by themselves. Perfect justice demands that there can be no finger pointing at God (perfect punishment would deny one that comfort)If, on the otherhand they are saved, then Goddidit. Its the predestination/freewill.... interface/(in time only)paradox in sharp reliefGod saves man vs. man loses himself. Perfect grace vs. perfect justice. He choses - you pickThis message has been edited by iano, 04-May-2006 12:31 AMThis message has been edited by iano, 04-May-2006 12:33 AMThis message has been edited by iano, 04-May-2006 02:16 AM

It is a paradox..or perhaps better...a tension. But only in our time based realm. The mechanism of salvation is Gods design. Its correct and coherant functioning must only satisfy (and be comprehensible and acceptable to one person - Him).If you pictured space/time as a flat sheet of paper and looked at a plan view of a house you couldn't see all the detail "How does it work?"You would have to have the third, vertical dimension open to you in order that you can get a genuine 3d model which can be walked through and every detail of the house examined. That dimension is only open to God. Suffice to say the mechanism of salvation does not require that YOu can intellectually resolve IT in order for IT to work on YOU. Thank God.There is sufficient in what you all ready know (if I have read you correctly these last months) for the paradox to satisfy much of what you already know.God saves: aligns perfectly with it being Gods grace which saves - a theme you are familiar with. "A righteousness FROM God". "The Gospel is the power OF God unto salvation (God winds the handle on the salvation mechanism)"Only mans rejection of God mechanisms can result in his condemnation : aligns with any sense you might have of perfect justice and punishment. Any punishment must be fully deserved. God cannot be implicated in any way for a mans condemnation otherwise the justice isn't perfectGods predestining: aligns with God knowing who will come before they do. He knows who won't reject and thus he can call them in the effectual way that results in their comingLike I said: intellectual understanding is not a requirement for being saved - otherwise it would be "Jesus came to seek and save the smart". God can use your intellect as a vehicle however. He can (in your non rejection) have your intellect go 'Ping' so as to get various aspects of the gospel which are currently shut to you.The game is played out in any case in a place other than the intellect. Your only a Private Robin. Your role is to follow orders. "Believe" is the order. If you ever do, then he will have been the one to enable you to carry it out.

From John Blanchards "Does God Believe in Athiests"* Richard Feynman, The Character of Physical Law, MIT press p.27Feel better RR?This message has been edited by iano, 04-May-2006 01:39 PM