I believe it can be proved that God exists. However, it is most unlikely that anything said on a thread like this will convince a serious skeptic.

'' I honestly want to hear them'''

So I've been studying the Vedic texts for about 7 years. I also happen to be studying Science (Physics). It is my firm opinion that anyone looking for coherent answers must look to the knowledge of the Veda. Here are some quotes to justify my claim:

Schopenhauer: "Vedas are the most rewarding and the most elevating book which can be possible in the world." (Works VI p.427)

Niels Bohr: ''I go into the Upanishads to ask questions.''

Erwin Schrödinger: ''There is no kind of framework within which we can find consciousness in the plural; this is simply something we construct because of the temporal plurality of individuals, but it is a false construction....The only solution to this conflict insofar as any is available to us at all lies in the ancient wisdom of the Upanishad.''


Werner Heisenberg: ''After the conversations about Indian philosophy, some of the ideas of Quantum Physics that had seemed so crazy suddenly made much more sense''

Julius Robert Oppenheimer: ''Access to the Vedas is the greatest privilege this century may claim over all previous centuries.''

Henry David Thoreau: ''In the morning I bathe my intellect in the stupendous and cosmogonal philosophy of the Bhagavad Gita in comparison with which our modern world and its literature seem puny and trivial.''

Ralph Waldo Emerson: ''I owed a magnificent day to the Bhagavad-Gita. It was as if an empire spoke to us, nothing small or unworthy, but large, serene, consistent, the voice of an old intelligence which in another age and climate had pondered and thus disposed of the same questions which exercise us.''

There are a ton more quotes where that came from.

Interestingly, most of the founders of Quantum Mechanics studied the Veda to some extent (Bohr, Schrodinger, Heisenberg). Robert Openheimer (father of the atomic bomb) quoted Bhagavad Gita the moment the first nuclear explosion was observed, and he glorifies the philosophy to the n'th degree. Einstein read and praised the Bhagavad Gita. German scholars raved about the Upanishads once they were translated. Clearly there is something interesting there - at least.

Growing up in a Christian house (stepdad was a minister) I was always quite religious. One problem though was the Bible. How can THE ONLY book the all-intelligent Creator left us be so incoherent, incomplete and contradictory? Sure, they will preach to you about faith, but those talks were unappealing to a person who is looking for a perfect philosophy.

I turned to study psychology, and specifically all Carl Jung's works. I must've read 5 books a week at that point in my life. It was riveting stuff - unravelling the deep mysteries of the human psyche. This (obviously) led to the study of Buddhism. Jung himself was enamoured with India and its philosophy, and Buddhism was an attractive prospect at that point in my life - intellectual, philosophical and not based on ungrounded faith.

My next big step was reading 'The Path of the Masters'. Most interesting was the story of the author. Julian Johnson was a guy that went to India to go and 'save' the people by teaching them Christianity. He was no ordinary man - he was a qualified MD, Pilot, Artist and Minister. After his first visit to India he returned to America in despair. It was clear to him that these people that he wanted to 'save' know a lot more than him, and were more advanced spiritually. After searching his soul he left all his posessions behind and went to study Sant Mat under a Master. The book is stunning: http://www.archive.org/details/ThePathOfTheMasters

The philosophy of religion must be exact and coherent. It must be perfect. It must be beautiful, and it must give joy to the soul. All parts of the human being must be satisfied by it. Whatever knowledge emanated from a Supreme Being must be beyond the fabrication of the fallable human mind.

The Sanskrit word 'Yoga' literally translates as 'a method of linking'. Incidentally, the word 'religion' has the exact same meaning if one knows about its Latin roots. Yoga has nothing to do with stretching. These excercises are simply one part out of eight of the Ashtanga Yoga process. It is not even essential to do any physical process to follow yoga, but all types of inclinations are accomodated. So, for instance, if you are more into philosopy or meditation then you may focus on that.

In the Ishopanishad it is written:

oḿ pūrṇam adaḥ pūrṇam idaḿ
pūrṇāt pūrṇam udacyate
pūrṇasya pūrṇam ādāya
pūrṇam evāvaśiṣyate

''The Personality of Godhead is perfect and complete, and because He is completely perfect, all emanations from Him, such as this phenomenal world, are perfectly equipped as complete wholes. Whatever is produced of the Complete Whole is also complete in itself. Because He is the Complete Whole, even though so many complete units emanate from Him, He remains the complete balance.''

This verse requires some careful pondering. It implies many things. One simple implication is with regards to the language of the Veda - Sanskrit. Even though you don't need to learn any Sanskrit to follow the yoga process, the shear intellectual delight of studying the sublime language satisfies the mental desires of even the most intellectual man. Surely if the Veda emanated directly from the Supreme Being then its language must be perfect? Interestingly enough 'Sanskrit' directly translates into 'Perfectly Created'.

Sanskrit stands as the only unambiguous spoken language on the planet. Studied by NASA as a possible language for communicating with A.I systems, it is more developed and elegent than the closest known language - Latin. All this is in the Wikipedia page. I would advise to take most of what western scholars say with a grain of salt since there has been a steady attempt at devaluating 'Hindu' India by the British academics since their colonial rule. Anyway that's up to you.

I have many more things to say - personal experiences from when I was in India, incredible experiments with mantra, Vedic Mathematics (from the Shulba sutras) etc. etc. etc.

But as always, I wonder if anyone will even bother to read this wall of text. Anyways, if you are intrigued at all, then I can most certainly advise some books - unchanged for thousands of years - that I am certain will prove to be something like you've never encountered before - at least.

Peace out man.

EDIT: I see several typos. Don't judge me by them plz - I wrote this quite fast.

Elaborate?

"Also, the Bible tells me that Homo sapiens are just over 6,000 years old and science shows me fossils of dinosaurs and homo erectus and bla bla."

first of all homo sapiens is a scientific term that support's evolution (walking on 2 legs), dinosaurs went extinct over 64 million years ago, the bible says the earth is about 6000 years old...

The bible also said the sun rotates around the earth, it's the opposite..

the bible is full of mistakes and it's clear that it's bullshit, can't we drop religion and improve as a species instead of this super stitious stuff?

Your first contribution indicates your incredible lack of logic and understanding of scientific method.

The rest is a hateful gust of trolling meant to derail this thread.

Unfortunately there's only one way to find out.

Since you CLEARLY stated the conditions of this thread, I think its only fair that all comments violating these conditions be removed. I have been banned for FAR less. I wrote a sincere post. It may be long, but with all the other crap around the chances of you even looking at it are diminishing by the second. 

Please explain to me what the use of prayer is? or any kind of contact to god...

The church sold spots for heaven to murderers and torturers for money, they let you confess your sins and if you make a nice deposit your sins are forgiven, priests are molesting little boys all over the world.

Religion is nothing... not even your high priests believe in god because surely that would stop them from molesting children.

Yes i know it's a sensitive issue.. but religion needs to die off as quickly as possible... Embrace logic instead of gibberish.

Freedom of speech does not apply to VGChartz, their are strict policies that need to be followed as stated in our user agreements. I have been banned for saying far less offensive things and have been warned for trolling simply by creating a thread that had a negative view of Sony. I deserved that ban and those warnings because it was considered trolling and I did create problems.

Fact is I have not seen any threads that weren't closed, moderated heavily and such that were pro God and persecuted Athiests. Such threads are in bad taste and violate the user agreement. I have seen posts within threads that are sort of contriversial however they never call other users immature, you get banned for calling a user a n00b so calling all athiests or Christians or the user base of VGChartz immature is clearly over stepping the line.

If you see a thread that unfairly targets athiests, report it and post your opinion in the thread. If you read other responses you quickly see I am not alone in this conclusion. Even non-Christian's and non-God believing people know that this thread is unfair and a direct attack on the beliefs of many users.

As for X-Box live motto "God is Great" and "God is not great" both are opinions, but neither should be thread titles. They are offensive to those users who hold different views.

Again this isn't an issue of free speech, its an issue of violating VGChartz policies and acting unproffessional. I wouldn't be as offended if say another user created this thread. I'd still report it and post however the OP is a writer for VGChartz and this thread is a violation of VGChartz policies, its not proffesional or appropriate!

Now this is precisely one of the things I was talking about. Ps3 was allowed to write a thread about "staying pure until marriage" since God says that's what's holy and whatever, and that thread was allowed to stay and prosper in spite of it being clearly put there to elicit strong reactions from both sides, but I post a thread that is criticising religion and that's a hand's off topic? you're allowed to push your religious beliefs but you're not allowed to insist they be put up for debate?

Also, you seem to be misinterpreting my intentions. I did not say science DISPROVES God's existence, I'm saying outright that nothing has PROVEN that God exists, so if people are going to continue to have faith and continue to keep it such a huge part of our culture, it should be subject to the same rigorous testing and have the same burden of proof that science has.

If people worldwide simply kept their religion and religious theories to themselves, using it as a means for hope and unity between one another, I'd happily leave them alone, but as long as we have people in America pushing to have intelligent design in classrooms, or trying to stifle scientific advancements (such as Stem Cell Research) or imposing their beliefs on others (Westboro Baptist church) and demanding respect, then they should have to earn it. I do not believe for a second that religion has earned the right to have it's tendrils in society as it has, so I offer an open ear to anyone who can offer supporting evidence for the Existence of God. I honestly want to hear what people have to say.

I should not be insulted for opening a discussion like this, and it's grossly unfair that I be asked to "shut it down before it gets out of hand". how would it get out of hand? Someone might be against religion and offend their sensibilities? How is that any worse than outright calling someone a whore because they have sex before marriage? How is that any worse than calling atheists immoral because they do not answer to a higher power? Would somebody explain why it's okay for religious people to be offended by criticism but the second an atheist gets defensive about their belief (or supposed lack thereof) being mocked, that's somehow wrong?

AS for the Big Bang, I don't know, I wasnt there. Science has theories and I Accept them as theories. they may be right, they may be wrong, but at least scientists say "we have this evidence, so we're going to follow that evidence towards what we feel is a logical conclusion." the bible says "God did this, end of story, question it and get beheaded." That's the key difference, Both institutions (science and religion) are offering answers to life and the universe, but only one is allowed to be scrutinized, while the other is allowed to continue teaching its lessons without any testing to back up their theories.

Again, this thread is to offer the same open criticism to both institutions, and I invite anyone who has any supporting evidence for God's existence to offer that for discussion.

There's no reason why we can't have nice things.

Say what?

200 years ago we couldn't prove/disprove that black holes existed, but that doesn't mean they didn't. There are lots of things in the universe that we cannot prove or disprove, that doesn't mean they don't exist. It only means we aren't advanced enough.

I believe in God. I also believe that the Big Bang is a perfectly plausible theory on the origin of the universe. God and Science are not mutually exclusive. Faith by its very definition cannot be proved, otherwise it would not be faith. The Bible actually confirms science on many occasions. It stated that the Earth was a sphere when everyone else thought it was flat. It said that it hangs in space revolving around the sun, when everyone else thought it was supported by 4 elephants on the back of a giant sea turtle. There are myriads of examples of the Bible corroborating science.

Well said, neither does it to religion.