Placing a bet on the existence of God

The Times reported that Paddy Power - the online betting site has just slashed the odds of scientific proof of God being found - to just 4/1 there’s a ChipIn page offering 50/1 if proof is found.

What do you think?

so If I bet 1 U.S. dollar and God is proven I get 50 U.S. dollars. Hmmmm, can someone lead me 1 Mil? (Actually, I won’t be here to collect it, because here won’t be here anymore. :smiley: )

Exactly. If God is proven by science on Earth. If you are correct and God exists but you have had to die first it’s not really very much good - if collective science finds evidence and the peer-review process agrees you could make a lot of money for very little!

Much better than the offer of 4/1 anyway!

I suppose the question is ‘do you think that it is ultimately possible to prove the existence of God scientifically?’

hmmm, let’s see, the universe is ordered, not chaotic as is should be if the big bag theory were true. How do humans stay grounded on this planet with out flying off, what is gravity? Do automobiles appear spontaneously or are they designed, is the human body an intricately designed “machine” or is it just there? Explain the process of procreation with out God. There are too many things in this world that point to a creator.

Science is based on observation (which requires the senses). we cannot observe God as such (because He is pure spirit), but we observe His acts–of course, the entire universe is observable evidence of His acts. But trying to observe Him directly in Creation is like trying to observe Melville in the pages of Moby ****.

So you think that it is possible?

We don’t know what gravity is but we may know one day - when it ceases to be mysterious does God cease to play a part?

Evolution gives us a very good explanation as to how things that appear designed can be driven by something that is unintelligent - until Darwin offered this solution it was reasonable to assume that designed things were designed.

Explain procreation? Human procreation or simply list the many ways that natural selection has solved the problem?

The driving force is not intelligent but it certainly isn’t random - you sound like you don’t understand it properly - evolution isn’t random.

Hmmm, that describes a creator that has no further influence, surely. If you’re saying that God is what we call the beginning then you haven’t learnt anything about the beginning by naming it God.

If you say that God is all good and all powerful and then explain the problem of evil with freewill or that good needs evil to exist then you might as well have said that God is all powerful and all evil and simply allows good so we should know evil. That’s logical, is it not?

It used to be considered one of the gravest sins you could commit to tempt God like this.

It surely doesn’t. God is not just the beginning, but also the end and everything in between, so to speak–“the Alpha and the Omega.” And He does intervene in human history–we call this “revelation”–that is how we learn about Him. But we can know of Him and certain things about Him circumstantially without revelation as I described (rather than by direct sensory observation of His essense).

If you say that God is all good and all powerful and then explain the problem of evil with freewill or that good needs evil to exist then you might as well have said that God is all powerful and all evil and simply allows good so we should know evil. That’s logical, is it not?

I’m not really sure what you’re saying here, but evil is simply the absense of good, it is not some separate substance, so to speak. God is all good and incorruptible. Everything else is not God so therefore it is less good and subject to corruption. However, the Incarnation unites the divine nature with human nature so that human nature can “partake of the divine nature,” that ultimate good. God “reconciles the world to Himself.”

I’m saying that whatever you use to explain the absence of good (human corruption, freewill etc) is equally valid if you assume that God does exist but that he is evil - wholly not good.

God is evil therefore good things happen so that we might know evil.

God is good therefore bad things happen so that we might no good.

Can’t you see that either statement is equally validated by the world we observe so all we do is to make an assumption that God is good (and that he exists at all) because it is comforting.

Well it wasn’t God that changed his mind since he is, by definition, unchanging.

Who would I have been sinning against?

Well, the implication is that it still is, just that the cultural attitude has shifted.

Tempting God like that is just flat out blasphemous.

Or that it never was and never will be.

How can we possibly know?

Firstly your views of where evil came from and the history of “sin” are incorrect. You’re taking the stance that God “created” both good and evil. Again a wrong view. Of course when presented with the facts you, as others have already done, will calm because God created A and A committed sin that therefore God must have created sin and he is therefore responsible. Again, false.

Why is this false? To understand this you must first understand the concept of Love and Freewill. When God created Man he created him so that Love could abound. Love between men (that relationship between man and woman as husband and wife) and Love between Man and God. For before sin Man was allowed into the presence of God to commune with God directly. Man was given the freewill to choose as were all God’s creations, including the Angels. And so when one of those Angels decided to rebel against God, sin entered the world.

Ahh, you say, but God is supposed to be all knowing, so being thus he should have known that this Angel, Lucifer (Satan) would rebel and therefore should not have created him. Consider this question. Now without knowing if you have children or intend to have children. Did you or do you have any assurances that your children will always be obedient to you? If not, what are you doing or what are you to do to insure their obedience? In your mind is obedience a sign of their for love you? How will you ellicit obedience from your children to obtain that love? Does force ellicit love or does patience and the allowing of freewill ellicit love? When you can answer these questions then you might be able to begin to understand the workings of God and how and why he is dealing with the issue of sin and evil the way he is.

As to evidence to his existance, archealogy, biblical prophecies and historical evidences in addition to those things already presented all point to more than what Darwin had presented in his “Theory of the Origins of Man”, which has yet to be validated, but which has been presented as fact. My suggestion, clear your mind of all prejudice and make a more fervant study of those things that have been presented. You may find yourself somewhat surprised at what you find.

How arrogant. You have know idea what I have studied. I wasn’t saying that God created good and evil since I don’t believe that is the case. I was asking if the world we see around us can be explained equally well if you make the assumption that God is all evil…

I believe it can.

Arrogance has nothing to do with what I have said. What was posted was posted in a loving manner, and as an encouragement to further studies on this matter.

How can an assumption be made that God is evil? Is it because he “allows” evil to exist? If that is the case then we must ask ourselves, would an evil God allow himself to become human and the subject himself to the humiliation of ridicule, torture and an inginimonious death just so he can redeem man in such a manner so that man may once again be able to commune with him directly and eventually face to face as in the beginning?

Or are you ascerting that God and Satan are one in the same? If so, I would have to say that I don’t know of too many religions that teach this sort of thing, not to say there aren’t any out there. Yet, if we are talking about God in a Judeo-Christian level than scriptures absolutely shows that God and Satan are not one in the same but that Satan, first created as Lucifer, is actually a fallen Angel, cast out of Heaven with his followers to this earth below, bringing with them the sins that they prepetrated in Heaven.

[quote="Sabbath Keeper]What was posted was posted in a loving manner, and as an encouragement to further studies on this matter.

Very difficult to suggest without knowing how much I have read on the subject already. Just within these forums I find the explanations and ‘facts’ very unsatisfying - but it’s always interesting to hear an original opinion.

Equally, how can an assumption be made that, if God exists, He is good? I’m not saying there is a God or that he is good or evil - I’m simply saying that the arguments you can put forward that he is good work equally well if you assume He is evil.

I don’t support either idea - just interested why, rather than coming up with elaborate reasoning (freewill, evil simply being absence of good etc) why not just turn the question on it’s head and see what happens when you don’t take it for granted that God is good.

The same reasoning (for the existence of good and evil) work perfectly well when the opposite is true.

This only works if you believe that happened. I could then just use the old ‘mysterious ways’ line. We still haven’t proven that (again, assuming I accept your premise that God exists at all) He is not evil and your example was a distraction or simply to make bad things worse in contrast.

[quote=Sabbath Keeper]Or are you ascerting that God and Satan are one in the same?

To me they very much are. I have a large number of things that I would put in the same category as very poor, outdated explanations for the universe.

If you find that biblical scriptures satisfy you and mark definate knowledge then I can only agree. If you think the Bible is factual how can I argue with that? If the Bible is true then you are definately correct.

I don’t find that it provides the answers that I need.

Well, I think that’s what faith is all about. Plus it’s breaking the 2nd commandment “Don’t use the lord’s name in vein.”

So it’s really something that’s best not to do.

I’m going to go out on a limb here an say he’s good.

I think that much can be assumed without recourse.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit