Is it better to know that God exists? Or to believe that God exists?
350382
At first glance it looks like you are splitting hairs. But if you are splitting knowing from believing because know means to have indisputable evidence and believe means to strongly think something is true, then the answer is not that simple. We know things in every day life because we experience them. We sit in a chair because experience tells us it won't break. We can say we have faith in that chair but we don't go that far. That's silly. Of course the chair won't fall. It's something we know. However we believe that the North Pole is really up there but not because we have verified that through experience, but because the majority says it is up there. A lot of our knowledge is based on what the majority says is true and is continually verified by others. Now this brings up a question. Does a belief have to be held by the majority of people in order to pass from belief to knowlege? The first people who realized the earth was round had some hard sledding convincing others. In fact they were persecuted. All the time all the people thought the earth was flat; all the time a few thought the earth was round, and all the time that the majority thought the earth was round, through all these stages, the earth was always round. At first nobody knew that; then a few knew that; now  everyone knows that. It was always true. Belief did not make it true. The majority did not make it true. Is there a God? Look at the evidence. Does not make a difference what others believe. If you want to know what is true you will always find out what is true. If you have a bias, then all evidence will be processed in the mind to support that bias. So the question (does God exist), we have to want the answer that is true, not the answer we want. Atheists want the answer to be there is no God. But do Athiests know how much gold there is in the ground or how many grains of sand there are in the world? Of course not. Neither can they know there is no God. They would have to be God to know that. So an honest Atheist can only be an agnostic, not knowing.  Evolution would be true if all millions of the in-between or transitional life forms were in the fossil record. They are missing, all millions of them. So evolution is just as logical as throwing a bunch of metal on a flight line and presto a plane emerges. It won't emerge after five minutes, five hours, five years, five millenia. Airplanes are man made. Everyone knows that. Yet they use the above mentioned logic to say that trees, animals, fish, birds and people living on the only habitable planet, just evolved over billions of years. If the metal can't evolve into a plane after billions of years, what are the odds that in all this universe the earth's inhabitants evolved only on earth but nowhere else during all those billion of years? What makes sense to me is that a creator did all this. To me it is a belief but it is more than a belief. My inner self knows it to be true, and it disagrees with no logic or known fact.
625515
My dear Friend , God is A Big Fact .God is great and generous .Look how he has arranged the world for us to live in , even a   single change in his decision can make the world collapse and destroy. Every thing in the world , the birds , animals, air, water, mountains and everything is the evidence for his existence. We need to prepare our mind to explore and don't be prjudist.\n       Definitely by his grace you can experience his presence every where.\n With love shaaan
738102
If there is no God, then I have two things to consider: Either there is an afterlife, or there is not. If there is none, then there is no me to be sad. If there is, then I hope that I will have lived the life I wanted to.\n\nIn any event, I am striving to live a life that I will be proud of when I die. Whether there is or is not some God, Goddess or Deity, I hope that I can be proud of the life I have lived when it is time for me to travel to the summerland.
276093
Knowing and believing are two different things.  You would like God to reveal himself to you so you could know he exists.  I agree. That would make more sense than giving you a brain and then expecting you to believe what you can't see.
627626
If there is a god, he is an atheist. He doesn't believe in a higher power.\n\nIf there is a god, he also loves atheists, since we use our brains (given by Him) to analyze His creation, use His rules of logic to test our ideas. We demand evidence for outlandish claims, and reject faith & dogma. \n\nI agree. If a god exists, it would have to favor atheists & humanists.
845144
It would first be necessary for the apparition to convince me that it was in fact god.  The obvious test to use, since one may suppose that god knows everything, is to ask for the ultimate theory of everything.  (Einstein spent the last years of his life looking for such a theory; he never found it, and neither has anyone else.  The problem is fiendishly difficult.)  If the apparition succeeded in convincing me that it was god, then I should ask: what would he like me to do?
540389
It is assuming the existing part.\n\nit's like the famous "I think therefore I am"\nThat actually is a horrible place to start because it assumes the 'I'.\nA better start is "Thought exists" then work your way to the I.\nSo saying that existing god exists, is like saying the blue bird is blue.  You can't make the verb exists into an adjective, existing, and think it doesn't need to be justified.
167663
I would rather live my life as though there IS a God and maybe find out there isn't one, than to live my life as though there isn't a God, only to find out there IS!!
906336
Absence of proof is not proof of absence.  \n\nHowever, it is the logical (or I should say illogical) fallacy "argument from ignorance" that because there is no evidence that God exists, that is evidence that God does not exist.   \n\nIt is also logical fallacy of "negative proof," that God must exist because there is no proof that God does not exist.  Why do you think God exists.  Why do you think God doesn't exist?    \n\n"The burden of proof should be on the proposed idea, not the challenger of the idea."  The challenger must only raise an issue of doubt, whereas the proposer must carry the burden of persuasion.  \n\nWhat can be more "honest," "practical," "intelligent," than LOGIC?\n\nAnother point, it is beliefs we are talking about, which are devloped best from the weight of the evidence in a world that seldom presents absolute proof.  Provocative question!  Thanks for keeping me up all night with this non-sense!
592235
Dear musical_k,\n\nRegarding miracles...\n\n1. It is rational to believe that God exists (e.g., see http://www.godsci.org/gs/godsci/evidence.htm for scientific and intellectual evidence for the existence of God).\n\n2. If God exits, he can perform miracles.\n\n3. Given that it is rational to believe that God exists, it is therefore rational to believe that miracles are possible.\n\n4. I choose to be consistent and rational in my world-view and in my beliefs. Therefore I believe that miracles are possible.\n\nCordially,\nJohn
372959
look around you, can you testify the existance of GOD and the universe?
535471
Woo hoo, a comment clearly designed to start a big argument on here, which I don't agree with, everyone has their own opinions!\n\nHowever, I sense that the basis of your point is that there is no real hard evidence to sustain the existence of any god, which is not the same as saying he doesn't exist, but is a definite statement to say that wehave no way of knowing. \n\nSo why everyone doesn't just live their life based upon earthly things, eg looking after and revering the earth around us, rather than pinning our hopes on some concept of a higher being, I don't know. \n\n(by the way, there IS actually hard evidence to suggest that the whole idea of a god stems from a part of the human brain, which operates only to convince us of a higher power, so we feel more significant than we actually are..)
1116511
It is easier to not look and deny that God exists
915923
None. \n\nTHERE IS NO PROOF THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST.  \n\nBut there is evidence EVERYWHERE that He DOES exist. \nWe see God in all that there is. There is evidence of him in all cultures. Some differ on who and what He his. But throughout history man of all ages and all cultures acknowledge a god. \n\nOne may not agree with all the natural things that point to God, all the history that points to God, all the people that point to God.....yet, and still, there is at least SOME evidence in these things to ANYONE that there is a god.\n\nWhen you weigh both sides, it  takes a fool to not believe in God.\n\nVirtually all our great leaders and presidents alike acknowleged God.  Our forefathers and foremothers, even the immediate fathers and mothers of of those that don't even believe in God; they believe(d) in God. \n\nConsider all the religeous scholars throughout the ages even unto this day, all the songs and hymns that have been written concerning God, etc. We could go on and on.  They don't all agree on many principles, but, they ALL agree that He is.  Somehow, all of these people are nuts and a few dim souls with enough free time to float around on Yahoo for several hours a day think they KNOW that God does not exist! I THINK NOT.  \n\nOne thing is for sure, some of them, before they die will come crawling to the God they denied;  the others will die wishing they had.\n\nIf we that believe in God are fools; then let it  be known that their ancestors, even mothers and fathers where even bigger fools.  Many of those that lived and died before us where fools.  Because they also believed.  But praise be unto God; they where not.\n\n"believe there's no proof"  . vs.  "believe the written testamonies and evidence everywhere"\n\nIt's a persons choice, but it takes a BONAFIDE FOOL to side with "no proof".\n\nThere is no "burden of proof" on anyone that believes in God to prove it to ones that do not believe in Him. The belief in God is ones OWN burden. Everyone only has their own burden to decide to believe or not to believe. \n\nI have no responsibility to prove Gods existence to anyone. Neither does anyone else have that responsibility.\n\n\nPeace
218085
There is no concrete way to test for proof of God.\n\nPeople who say they know that there is a God, simply BELIEVE there is a God. To say that the world around you is proof of His existence is not true proof. God could have made everything, but science has proven otherwise.\n\nSo unfortunately, each one of us will not be sure of God's existence until our own individual existence comes to an end.
1186256
You compare different issues:\nSince god does not really exist, except in the minds of believers, god can't be anything, including fool!\nMan, believing something non existing is an idiot!
310896
1. If God exists, then God is omnipotent, omniscient, and morally perfect.\n   2. If God is omnipotent, then God has the power to eliminate all evil.\n   3. If God is omniscient, then God knows when evil exists.\n   4. If God is morally perfect, then God has the desire to eliminate all evil.\n   5. Evil exists.\n   6. If evil exists and God exists, then either God doesn't have the power to eliminate all evil, or doesn't know when evil exists, or doesn't have the desire to eliminate all evil.\n   7. Therefore, God doesn't exist.\n   8. If God doesn't exist, hell can't exist either.