Which Has The Most Evidence Aliens or God?

reply to post by TheHunted


"The past, present, and future are nothing more than a stubborn illusion" - Einstein

time isnt what u think it is. all the rules of physics only apply to certain limited realms. Like newtonian and quantum. Evolutionary process doesnt apply to all of life. On the highest levels, evolution is an illusion as well...and yet here it is happening.
I dont think many understand the paradox...they always think either or.....but evolution is true and not true. See the problem? and why so much fighting. Creationists are corret in essence...they just dont have a clue about the actualities of their argument.

somone said that god isnt a being or a person, but god is described as the Will of nature, the way things come to be, personally thats a good description, aliens i beleive, i just cant see why so many people would lie about some of the storys i have heard, yes lots are fake but no all of them are.

God is so vague it renders your question impossible to answer.

Which God? Objectivity come from Subjectiveness. Therefore, how can we prove the very essence of subjectiveness. Proving something that is the very definition of elusiveness and mutability is going to have to be done in a way that is very un mainstream.

We will eventually prove that consciosness is the root of all things. And it is aware of itself. We have practiaclly proved it already in physics. Its just people are too busy watching TV and demanding us to show us an object as proof....which is ridiculous. you have to understand the interaction between mind and matter in an abstract way thru QM. I belive some have already seen enough to realize consciousness is at the ground state.

you dont need to have others prove aliens exist. Just understand what space/time is....and its obvious that their is life all around you.

Originally posted by fatdeemanTo be fair if god is what people believe he is I don't think he would be the kind to abduct people

Nah, he would not "abduct" people, god only sends the "non believers" to hell for eternity. Now that's just peachy, and definitely not taking advantage of anyone.

I believe that Aliens ARE God, so that makes things a whole lot easier.

In my opinion, the Earth and humanity are simply a huge scientific experiment by an advanced race. We 'primitives' are basically like the intergalactic Truman Show.

Crazy? Maybe. But to me it is more plausible then some all powerful guy sitting in the clouds.

CAVEAT: On rare occasions, I think posters come across as arrogant and disrespectful…I never want to be perceived that way…but please consider the following as an answer to your original question concerning evidence for “God”

Here’s three points to consider…all you doubters…Remember Back to the Future and the Delorian? Imagine if you were Micheal J Fox and someone asked you to go to five (only 5) different time zones/geographical areas and meet one person in each time zone/area and ask them, "please write a book about God, I'll be back in 5 years to collect it."

Five years later you went and picked up the five books. Logically speaking what are the chances those five books would agree? What are the chances those five books would build upon one another? What are the chances you could make any semblance out of them...to live by or the like? Snowballs in your know where, right?

Different people! Different cultures! Difference Time frames! Different Premises! Different World views! etc...logically speaking you would have five unconnected books with five different perspectives, right?

Well, the Bible (torah, prophets, gospels, epistles, revelation) are not 5 books by five authors, but 66 books by 40 authors...who did not know one another, did not live in the same town, did not live in the same time line...authors were of every occupation and financial status........yet......the Bible is a one-themed, continuing story.

Doesn't prove it God's Word yet though...just something that might warrant another look.

Point 2 ---- Here's an undisputable fact (I believe atleast after examining) Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be God through not denying that fact on a number of occasions, his followers claimed He claimed to be God...and...the non-christian journalist (Josephus) wrote He claimed he was God. Doesn't appear here to be different agendas going on. He said it, His followers said He said it, third parties said He said it and even his enemies said He said it (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc)

SO...with all that said...we have only two LOGICAL outcomes. No religious double-talk here) Either you BELIEVE or you REJECT. Really no other options right? If you believe, then to you HE IS LORD. If you REJECT there are really only two options for you.

1) JC knew he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LIAR

2) JC didn't know he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LUNATIC. In my mind that's the only three logical outcomes...LIAR, LUNATIC or LORD.

There is no room for him being a good guy and all, no room for him being a prophet as every other religion on the face of the earth calls him. Because prophets don't lie and they are not usually in psych wards.

Point 3 ---- Most direct followers were killed for believing in JC. If they had stole his body and the Romans excused, at least one of them would have squealed just before their execution right? I would have...but NO-All these ordinary folks were willing to die for what they saw…

These 3 assertions are for the viewers consideration...

OT

reply to post by OldThinker


Six feet of quotes is not evidence. It's thoughts. The op asked which had more evidence, not famous supporters.

As for your most recent post, Muslims are willing to die for an interpretation of the Quran. Which maintains Jesus was a prophet. By your logicm though, since ordinary people are willing to die for it, that's STRONG EVIDENCE that it is true. Yet that conclusion is inconsistent with your argument. Please consider.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by '___'eviant]

reply to post by OldThinker


How can you prove that theses 66 books did not have the same author for all? Stephen King had a pen name as did Dean Koontz. Is it possible that the same author wrote each book?

They both have the same amount of evidence. None.

Then again, how can you present proof when everything surrounding you is proof.

reply to post by '___'eviant


'___'eviant, That was a good come back...and funny...nice job.

To directly answer your point...NO, He will not show himself to you, for now...that's called MERCY...that's called, leaving you time....time to marinate...time to have life kick you in the rear....time to eventually SEE his LOVE for you...

But I do disagree with you that words aren't evidence...someone once 'said' "the world is not flat" and the rest of us SAW, someone once 'said' E=MCsq....and we eventually saw, someone once said, "blacks are not 3/5's human, and we SAW....I could go on and on...

Please take the time, at least a day...to think about my responses...I've been doing this for more years than you know...and then respond my brother...

Please notice my signature...

OT

Inevitably I'm sure someone said "evidence for God is all around you". But I've yet to see any God hair or God droppings being studied.

Aliens have UFOs, implants, eyewitness accounts, and much more that should get it the win. Obviously, the evidence isn't proven to be linked to extra-terrestrials but its much more than God has on his side.

Oh, he has some books out.

Originally posted by fooffstarr
I believe that Aliens ARE God, so that makes things a whole lot easier.

In my opinion, the Earth and humanity are simply a huge scientific experiment by an advanced race. We 'primitives' are basically like the intergalactic Truman Show.

Crazy? Maybe. But to me it is more plausible then some all powerful guy sitting in the clouds.

Oh good - someone thinks like I do.

All are of the Creator. I use Creator only to signify a beginning when energy evolve with consciousness and intelligence.

Everything is an energy creation of thought consciousness.

Originally posted by OldThinker
Five years later you went and picked up the five books. Logically speaking what are the chances those five books would agree? What are the chances those five books would build upon one another? What are the chances you could make any semblance out of them...to live by or the like? Snowballs in your know where, right?

I disagree. With written work in particular, the number of people who would be involved in preserving the texts would actually be quite small. After all, we're talking about a very small population of highly-motivated religious zealots, many from the same cultural background, who maybe know how to read, but who at least know how to accurately copy what they consider to be "holy." In that regard, the amount of drift, variety and contradiction is about what you would expect from highly motivated people doing the job. No particular divine influence, if that's what you're implying.

So that, and considering that the books in the Bible were specifically selected by the Emperor Constantine's experts because of their relative consistency, and those that weren't were left out or purposely destroyed, it's not surprising that they're relatively consistent. Still not 100 percent, but not bad, considering the problems involved. To get an idea of what they were working with, check out:

www.earlychristianwritings.com...

Fascinating stuff.

Point 2 ---- Here's an undisputable fact (I believe atleast after examining) Jesus of Nazareth claimed to be God through not denying that fact on a number of occasions, his followers claimed He claimed to be God...and...the non-christian journalist (Josephus) wrote He claimed he was God. Doesn't appear here to be different agendas going on. He said it, His followers said He said it, third parties said He said it and even his enemies said He said it (Sanhedrin, Pharisees, etc)

SO...with all that said...we have only two LOGICAL outcomes. No religious double-talk here) Either you BELIEVE or you REJECT. Really no other options right? If you believe, then to you HE IS LORD. If you REJECT there are really only two options for you.

1) JC knew he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LIAR

2) JC didn't know he wasn't telling the truth, therefore he would be A LUNATIC. In my mind that's the only three logical outcomes...LIAR, LUNATIC or LORD.

But even Jesus doesn't actually define what he's talking about, particularly Jesus the Gnostic. He doesn't deny that he is the Son of God, because in many texts he indicates that he knows the entire question makes no sense. Logically, since the entire notion of "God" is humanly incomprehensible to begin with (according Jesus the Gnostic), it makes no sense to directly confirm that he is this vague concept's "son," but it also makes equally no sense to deny it. Are you the Son of (------?------)? So he simply answers, "Hey, whatever you think." To those who don't understand the sheer illogical nature of the question to begin with, they see it as either a denial, or an admission. So it's not a matter of him "lying," it's more a matter of him trying to get people to understand that they're asking the wrong question. Which, obviously, didn't really succeed 100 percent.

You're not Southern Baptist by any chance, are you? I know that this whole cute but logically unsound "then Jesus is a liar," bit is popular among that bunch. It's logically unsound because the definitions are fundamentally unclear and built on assumptions that are not agreed upon.

And it still uses that faulty argument that "a truthful man always tells the truth," which fails to take into account that a truthful man might not always know the truth of which he speaks.

reply to post by Nohup


Nohup, (Robin?) NO! NO!

God no! I'm not a Southern Baptist...I live in the North...those Bible Thumpers are from the South, right?

And...your points are very thought-out, respectful and completely worthy of response...

Please give me a day to think them through...ok?

OT
Phil 1:3

PS My definition of "CHRISTIAN" is so-oooooo much broader than my 'AdrianRoger-ites'...

PSS EVERY...(EVERY)...GOOD AND PERFECT GIFT COMES ABOVE!!!!!

Let's say God created humans and E.T.s at the same time. If we are being visited by them, how did they become more advanced then us. Also if we were all created in his image would we all be humanoid?

If God did create both why no mention of both in the bible if we are all his children? Plus, why separate his creations?

hey its stevo351 im at school and cant remember my login pword :S
but i was just going to say i agree with the enlightened one; it all depends on how you believe. natural theology, is basically looking for evidence that a god exists - using trees or stories or the fact that it seems a little too much of a coincedence that the world just 'started' and was all set up for humans by an almighty architect - rather than just having faith in something such as a higher power; which needs no evidence at all. as long you believe in it it will exist to you. so one may have more evidence or one may seem more beleivable but yeah i guess what im saying is as long as you believe it that's all that matters.
but... im on the aliens side quite strongly. thats my 2 cents.

If I could reword the question of whether I think there is more evidence of UFOs (whatever they are) or a "personal" God that is separate from creation (like a big daddy figure), I would say that there is absolutely no evidence for the latter and plenty anecdotal evidence for the former. I would bet my paycheck on the aliens any day - as I have seen no evidence in my 53 years of any "interventionist" deity.

Of course, everyone will just tell you that you have to take the God thing on faith (but faith is the only evidence that exists, and so for all practical purposes, there is "no evidence" of a great sovereign deity).

[edit on 31-7-2008 by whatsup]

I think God exists, and it doesn't matter if it can be proven or not, to me, the proof is all around us. Really, how many people really think that the universe just came to be how it is just by natural cause? Even if so, How did it begin and from what? Take the "Big Bang" theory, there must have been something before the so called "Big Bang" to cause it, if so what was there before it and how did it form and why? Go back as far as you can answer, you'll only end up with the subject of a higher power, a God.

As for aliens, i have no doubt in my mind that they exist, just like us humans on this small planet, there are others in the other "billions" of planets out there. Why would it only be us in this vast universe? doesn't make sence. And i truly believe they understand more about the universe and God than what we know.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by -elmo-]

reply to post by -elmo-

How did it begin and from what?

Well, the same could be asked about God.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by whatsup]

reply to post by TheEnlightenedOne


Interesting debate.Why can god be timeless with no beginning or end but the universe cannot exist with no beginning or end...or creator?And is the concept of beginning and end simply a quirk of how the human mind functions and therefore needed by human intellect for anything to make sense to our logic and reason?.
Apply ET's to the bible stories in place of godly visitations or works and it looks a lot more feasible that things like the burning bush was a reference to bright lights(of a craft?) as the only source of light at night was fire to those people and so on throughout the entire book.
Many biblical references to firey wheels in the sky etc are said to be dreams inspired by god....sound familiar?
If god is all knowing(knows the future and past) then why create the devil to cause mayhem and misery in the first place, yes the devil wasn't created bad I know but god would have known the future events and yet still let it happen to our detriment.
If god knows what is in the hearts of men then why the tests spoken of throughout the bible.(sacrifice your son etc)
Religious dogma dictates that you believe based on faith whereas science dictates empirical proof and even then is open to further developments ,discoveries which may modify current findings.Religious people always demand scientific proof of anything which contradicts their belief system(ironic) and yet their only 'proof' is always their 'faith' which has no scientific substantiation-clearly a double standard.
I believe it is highly likely that beings of advanced technology and 'spirituality' are responsible for our existence and continue to monitor our progress allowing periodic advancements in our technology from time to time.These visitations are well documented from the beginning of record keeping in the form of cave paintings right up til present times and represent a clear record not just over a period of time measured in years or even hundreds of years but thousands and even tens of thousands of years.
The bible is known to have been written by men periodically over a number of years and passed down to the present day-2000yrs.Flying craft and glowing beings have been consistently recorded for up to 60,000 years!! by all races and creeds from tribal isolated ancients right up to modern leaders and peoples the world over, how can you deny that evidence?.
The human race is on a long journey of advancement always striving to improve our technology for the betterment of our species and always looking to the stars because it is inherent in us to return from whence we came!.Just my thoughts on this fascinating subject.JH.