Do you think religious formations sufficiently prove that God exists?

Question: Do you think religious formations sufficiently prove that God exists!?

There are natural formations as the ones for solar systems, atoms and molecules in elements and compounds, plants, trees and flowers!.

Human beings have their formations as communities, families and workforces!. We can understand the reasons for these, but human mind has a capacity for faithful beliefs!. When we believe in God through a religion we assume religious formations of worship and prayer!.

For instance, I have observed fellow Muslims in Mecca for their annual pilgrimage and form circle round the central place of worship in millions!. There are similar instances in all other religions, there are sacred rites, rituals and ceremonies that I would not cite here myself, and leave to your good self to call upon!.

I do not see any reason for this other than the fact the God exists in the mind, in a way that we might not be able to comprehend directly but only through what is manifest in human action!.

Thanks for your time and kind thoughts!Www@QuestionHome@Com

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker:

I do believe that God exists in some minds, but I believe, we

have to come to that conclusion ourselves!. I was not brain

washed by my family, community, nor workforces nor did I

go to pilgrimages to seek God!. I don't see God in Human

Action!. ( especially today, when the world is filled with wars,

hate and violence)

I learned about God as one learns about life!. Of course as a
baby, I was baptised ( I am Greek Orthodox Christian) but other than by Baptism, and church services ( which I hated to
attend as a small child) I found them long and tiresome, I never had anyone else preach to me, or force me to do anythng!. ( and half the time, I daydreamed and didn't listen to the long liturgies that seemed to ramble!. on and on !. Sad but true!. ( and Greek Orthodox don't read the Bible but listen to our Priests who do when they sermonize the Bible!.

I in my own journey in life came to the conclusion that GOD
exists in A UNIVERSITY COURSE ( a non religion based university)

GOD BECAME THE POWER OF MY LIFE AND LIGHT OF MY LIFE!. ( AND NOW I AM TRULY A EAGER CHURCH GOER AND WORSHIP EVERY WEEK WITH ALL, ( IN MY GREEK ORTHODOX CHURCH AND GO TO CHURCH WITH GLADNESS!.AND OUR LONG SERVICES DONT SEEM TO BE LONG TO ME!.

GOD IS AGAPE!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I agree with you completely, but I would use the word "evidence" rather than proof!."

Now, does turning a spiritual message upside-down prove that God does not exist!? I don't think so!.

But I agree wholeheartedly with your primary idea!. The very existence of relgion is good evidence that God does exist!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I know of no religion that intends to prove that God exists!.
I know that God exists, because of simple fact - I exist!.
And I am a part of God!.
There is a little 1/2′ screw in a complex labyrinth of parts that knows an Atomic power station is somewhere around!Www@QuestionHome@Com

God exists not only in mind but every where if you try to understand you will find that GOD exist and he is the one also point is that GOD is not dependent but independent and infinite so you cant percieve it only u can feel him!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

Having a philosophy based on the unreal is a contradiction and will only lead to turmoil!. Proof is seen on the nightly news!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

I believe that some do, however some religions have by their history been an abomination to his words!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

After having experienced the mircle of having children how can I believe that there isn't a God!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

God cannot be proven to exist, or not exist!. The whole point is that it is a matter of faith!. Empirical judgements don't apply!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

No I do not believe god existsWww@QuestionHome@Com

No,its a dogma we follow!.
I do believe that almost all humans believe in seeing!.Why!?, because even those who may tell you now, that God exists(ofcourse we all have our own image of God), but if God appears right now in a different image or form from the one all of us believe in, everyone will run away or deny God!.

SO like you asked for an opinion, i do think that, religion is a tool used to put/check human behavior!. We are entitled to interpret it as we understand best!.
If Psychologists tell us that, humans have got some thing called subconscious and conscious minds,which do control our lives if used appropriately/tamed(esp!.subconscious mind)!.
Now, lets look at the subconscious mind which can give us any thing we ask for, good or bad, of which i believe people associate with fate making, if we constantly ask this brain to give us wealth, or let us die don't you think it will in the long run do so!?,
Then , i would agree with you that God is in our minds!.
may be i would coat it this way, God uses our minds to guide us or rather, he is present in our minds, since the mind controls the whole body!.
This is what Alternative to violence project(AVP) members call Transforming power and the Christians call, the spirit!.Which is present in everyone willing to put it into good use!.
Thanks for asking!.interestingWww@QuestionHome@Com

If you look under the surface of the physical universe, there are far too many coincidences in the way things are put together to enable me to believe that Someone didn't design and make it all!.
I'm not entirely certain about the 'religious formations' of which you speak; but wouldn't you agree that if there was a God, we'd be built in such a way that we would have the capacity for belief!? There is something comforting in recognizing a higher authority - though some would argue that is just a 'mother-complex' manifesting itself and we should all just grow up!. However, Belief does seem to be something that (deep down and if they really admit it) affects pretty much everyone!. Why would that be, if we evolved!? What would be the evolutionary benefit of belief in a God!?
Does the fact that we're even discussing this mean anything!?Www@QuestionHome@Com

I applaud you general connection to your fellow Muslims!. I applaud their solidarity of action!. I applaud your love of nature!. I applaud your search for something more!.

but the idea that god exists based on the fact that tens of thousands of your fellow Muslims congregate at one place, is false transcendental knowledge, and not proof of god - they're not there because god exists they're there because they're motivated by Islamic dogma!.

something "existing in the mind that is not understandable directly" is what you are looking for!. but it is not manifest in "human actions" you can't deduce god from the religious!.

if you have no inner proof that matches a religion why follow a religion,- why follow rules that you would never think up from what you believe!? only do what your god tells you not what someone else tells you god wants you to do!.

I only take actions to cause results that I think mimic the pattern i see in the universe!. I see betterness everywhere and act towards that betterness - I have laws but none of them are religious laws - No religion will help me be better as effectively as the way I have chosen!.

I also thank you for your kind thoughts!. and wish you further success in your search!.
BuffWww@QuestionHome@Com

The so-called "scientifically enlightened" section of society believes that something big coming from something small is scientific, and the idea of God is pure superstition!. This is pure silliness in that their Big Bang theory proposes that the entire universe came about of a hot dense ball of mass which exploded and expanded, but no account is given for how this ball was supposed to have magically appeared!. Intelligence presumed to have come about through a freak combination of amino acids pushes superstition (in the desire to avoid acknowledging God) far further than religion ever could!. A law of science is that matter is neither created or destroyed, but rather, converted!. Thus the big bang theory collapses upon itself!. Call it the Big Philosophical Implosion!.

Recently, the state of South Carolina joined Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Kansas and New Mexico by approving statewide science standards which require a critical analysis of evolution in science classrooms!. In these five states the standard-issue Darwinian evolution will still be taught, but with an interesting twist which ought to raise some eyebrows - the scientific WEAKNESSES of Darwinian theory will also be disclosed!.

In a country where ideals such as free speech, diversity, balance and tolerance are preached constantly, the remaining states DO NOT ALLOW the scientific weaknesses of Darwinian evolution to be presented in our public school science classrooms!. This means that, in the state of Oregon (and 44 others) Darwinian evolution is taught as sheer dogma - scientific weaknesses are withheld from our students and Darwinian evolution is presented as a theory of origins that is incontrovertible!.

If one believes we should continue to conceal the evidence against evolution, one must answer some very tough questions: What good can possibly come from withholding scientific evidence against ANY scientific theory!? How does that not undermine the integrity of science itself!? Isn't scientific experimentation and discovery supposed to be transparent!? How is it fair to our children to withhold this evidence!?

When considering whether to "teach the controversy," it's useful to cite an article published in The Guardian in September 2005 and written by renowned evolutionists Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne in which they conceded that "asking our students to analyze controversies is of enormous value to their education!." Despite this, their column justifies ignoring this particular controversy and hiding it from their students on the basis that evolutionary science itself is, in their words, "bountifully endowed with genuine controversy!." Apparently Dawkins and Coyne think that the persistence of controversy within evolutionary theory somehow makes the theory more robust!. They are unwilling to consider the possibility that the theory they peddle is filled with controversy because it is fundamentally flawed; so flawed that biologists have had to scramble for inventive (but contradictory) schemes to keep the theory alive!. But what's more important is that when it serves their purpose, Dawkins and Coyne are clearly willing to rob their students of what they themselves admit is valuable to students' education: exposure to controversial views!.Www@QuestionHome@Com