My argument to prove God exists (I)

I am starting a series to show proof that God exists, although there may be many examples of cases on the internet to show proof or at least a just cause to believe there is a God I am looking beyond the usual philosophical realm. So what I will be doing is taking a look at all factors, factoring in probabilities much in the same way as gambling odds etc. Once I cannot continue further (or simply run out of ideas) I will place all that I have come up with on a MS Word document or PDF for you to download and hopefully inspire you to type down your concepts to display for others.
And hopefully we can cure atheism which is the most horrid, evil mental illness known to mankind.
Praise be upon the only God whose unity is one by all without exception. Amen

The Argument From Anthropology
(this is probably not strictly anthropology in relation to the accepted purely scientific understanding)

Although with society today we see the likes of identity politics, in that people will categorise themselves into categories not of their own choosing or creation. But rather that of the political and social establishments of the day which are not concrete, but rather temporary. They do this to be politically correct and socially compliant even though they may not personally approve of the groupthink or hivemind of these categories and their actions.

It is fair to say that all humans have a complex and individual personality, but it would be absurd to say that such a complexity could have emerged from nothing and with no cause. The atheist would claim that personalities are formed through environment, circumstances, experience and DNA, but if that was truly the complete case then personalities could be manufactured according to the states' needs and wants. And if that was the case would the individual personality simply approve of its use by the state and be in full agreeance with it? If the answer uniformly is "yes" then we are seeing slavery and moral relativism as factors. While we cannot erase the factor of fear in relation to politics (of violence and other physical harm) or social (abandonment and isolation) realms, the reality is that moral relativism cannot be enforced. Yes you can force people to obey, but you cannot force them to approve.

Whether they are bribed or whether they are terrorised they will mostly hold the same opinion, there is an individuality within them that is not a result of mental and physical circumstances, but spiritual. Whether you wish to call that factor spirit or soul it is not self made and the only reasonably logical explanation to me is that it is the result of a higher entity. Some may say that our individuality is a result of our parents along with environment, circumstances and experience but if that was the case we would be clones of our parents and indeed to an extent everyone else in our society. And indeed it would be the groupthink/hivemind society which would be continuously replicating because everyone would be predisposed to replicate their parents. There would have been no great thinkers or doers because the level of education or free thought would have never risen. Nor would the level of aspiration or even imagination, people would still believe the Earth is flat (if they had the concept of a planet) and the inventions we take for granted in modern life would never have been invented.

If the atheists and evolutionists had their way we would be still living in caves...but under their control. In fact we would be little better than baboons and feral dogs.

As we have seen in history (and indeed today) people can be compelled to act against their own beliefs, opinions, and wishes due to physical acts (whether it be of bribery or terror) but control of ones' thoughts as an individual being can never be enforced or known to be enforced. But we are seeing attempts at that with various pharmaceuticals and police looking for "thought crime". It is not the individuals' belief that is being curtailed but rather their ability to act on their individual belief.

It can be said that the human personality (that being the result of spiritual, mental and physical factors) would need to be made by an entity or being with the same and actually greater, complex personality which would have factored in autonomy. As we are created in the image of God and have the ability to aspire we would have to look at examples of a 'greater whole' of the personality of God that we can comprehend.

An example can be found on the 'Tree of Life' which gives us 10 aspects of God, there are 10 sections (or sephiroth) and each individual section is overlooked by an aspect of God. The reference to the Tree of Life can be found in Kabbalah teachings, and there are four worlds regarding the Tree of Life in the Kabbalah
They are;
Atziluth (Emanation)
Briah (Creation)
Yetzirah (Formation)
Assiah (the world of action, what we refer to as the physical)
But Assiah has Tebhel (Immanent) and Cheled (Transcendental)

There is no doubt that we are born with unique personalities, though we may have them altered or changed by the likes of environment and the people we associate with. Or else things such as mental illness, drug addiction and even peer pressure or coercion. The fact is we are born with a unique personality which existed before we were exposed to various elements which we may of interacted with. The uniqueness of the personality comes from our soul, regardless of our external appearance we will hold true what we 'feel is right' or else what our 'gut instinct' says. We all hold some thought of intuition but whether we enact on it or not is another matter depending on circumstance, but circumstances regarding our physical and mental factors can be altered.

The circumstances of spiritual factors regarding our soul cannot, even if you look at atheism you will see people hating God. The atheist will proclaim that God does not exist and yet have a hatred for this great being, this can be only said and seen  in a personal relationship. To hate God makes as much sense as hating Mickey Mouse.

And yet atheists will accept Mickey Mouse as an animate being because to them Mickey Mouse can exist in psychological, aesthetical, emotional and even physical (like some guy in Disneyland dressed up in an outfit, although it cannot be THE Mickey Mouse it is a suitable proxy). But all these facets of Mickey Mouse can only be symbolic, this is because these facets do not come from or are even created by a single independant animated entity. If you examine it, the existance of Mickey Mouse came into being through the emanation, creation, and formation in the mind of Walt Disney before it 'came' into the physical realm. You also have to factor in consultants and staff who helped fine tune the final but yet evolving product.

You might argue that the existance of God came about through a simular measure, to that I would say that the existance of religion and denominations can be said to have come about through similar measures. But you cannot forget about the consultants and staff required to propagate and 'sell' the religion or denomination. A church without clergy and parishioners could not open, but a church without the support staff (whether paid or voluntary) could not survive. There would be no one to help or aid the clergy, parishioners, or maintain the church and its grounds. A belief in the existance of and in God does not require actors or an audience or stagehands or even a theatre. It does not require these things because God is infinitely greater than mankind and its inventions (whether they are psychological, aesthetical, emotional or physical).

Mankind may have a concept of something, it may visualise how that concept may look like, and it may even draw up plans on how this concept will come into the physical realm. But the reality is that these plans fail or distort from the original concept. Essentially they are plans from other plans which were from other plans. Mankind cannot create nature, yes it may corrupt, distort, imitate and re-invent nature but it cannot create nature. Mankind has yet to create a new species with an amount of chromosomes that no other species has, this shows that only a greater entity could have brought the concept of the universe into physical reality. A greater entity with greater intelligence and greater experience. Even if all the thinking abilities and intelligence of all humans were to be collectively contained within a single brain, mankind would be no better off than it is today.

Unless mankind realises that itself is a creation, indeed a self replicating creation like other mammals then it will ignore the very thing that differentiates us from the other mammals besides our physical attributes. And that thing is our soul, if we had no soul then we all would be sociopaths. And if that was the case then you and I would not be here as history would have gone extinct and disappeared some time ago.

Existance does have an "order of things" and we can see this in nature, it is mankind that is increasingly collectively seeking to alter this. In fact what we are seeing today is the collective attempt to install a new collective 'god' under the title of "humanity" and applying labels to its methods such as 'evolution' and 'progress'. But words like 'evolution' and 'progress' have been redefined into different contexts much like the word 'racism'. What is written in an English language dictionary may not be the same as taught in a university because the context has changed, their definitions may come from a political dictionary or a psychological dictionary and even then the definitions may be differing in each subject due to the vested interests. Much like the different denominations in the various religions will push their own specific beliefs, if these beliefs were not so separately specific then there would be no need for separate denominations.

A demonstration is the word "transsexual", what is its definition? Is it someone who "identifies" as the opposite gender? Is it someone who has had surgery to 'be as' the opposite gender? Or is it something different? People can make as many lofty pronouncements and definitions as they want, but at the end of the day you cannot change your sex/gender. You can have surgery, hormones and various forms of 'counseling' to help you identify as the opposite gender, but if a clone was made from your DNA it would be the same gender as you were born. In the same way that whatever lifestyle you choose to live or else are caught up in, you will have a sense of right and wrong that cannot be altered.

However that does not mean that 'mankind' will not try to 're-invent' itself, but this is not actually the case. When people scream and wail "for humanity!!!" they are only reflecting an extreme minority of human beings at any given time. As for 're-inventing'? You can only re-invent what you, yourself have actually invented. That is everything from concept to physical reality, everything from emanation to creation to formation to physical action (whether it be producing a product or implementing a method). It is easier to redefine language than to re-invent that of the physical, and that is what we are seeing today. We have no right and wrong, instead we have moral relativism which is not about "the greater good of humanity" but rather a comfort blanket for solipsists.

 People whether they be of various racial groupings, ethnicities, or bloodlines will be judged to be civilised, uncivilised, or 'evolving'. However this is not likely to be a judgment based on their intelligence but rather their material gain, a city full of skyscrapers will be deemed to be more civilised than a village full of huts. Even though the city will be overpopulated, have high levels of crime and suicide in addition to isolation with the mandatory loneliness. The city will be deemed more successful and more civilised than the village, but it is the village from which the basis of civilisation came from. In regards to religion the more people that are adherants of that religion, the more prone that religion is to dissent, apostasy, fragmentation and splintering. In relation to God the best mindset is K.I.S.S. (Keep It Simple Stupid), short, sharp answers will give people something understandable to work with as they begin their own quest or own research. I started this project to present an argument that there is a God. I do not care about how many aspects it has, how many people view God or don't view it. I suppose one of my main motivations to write this are the repeated worn out arguments used by those faithful to God in the hope of converting others to their particular faith.

To that I say:
No.1 - You are serving God, not your sect.
No.2 - Don't do something because others are doing it. I especially see this among Christians handing out CHICK Tracts on the street, don't bother because everybody has seen then, they convince no one because they are the sort of comics written for 5 year olds and you come across as arrogant because it makes it look like you think everyone is as stupid as you.
You can do better than this, did God give you a brain? THEN USE IT!

*i think im done with anthropology*

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Question:

Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God? And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn?

Answer:

There are three distinct questions here, these are;
a.) Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
b.) And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God
c.) And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn? Or else are not just human beings who have taken upon themselves the title of God or else have had it placed upon them?

Each question logically follows from the one before it. But before we start, we need to resolve a background issue.

What is Proof?

In asking this question, we're basically asking "What kind of proof will be good enough? How much proof is needed?". When we talk about proof, we're talking about establishing some degree of certainty about something.

Scientific knowledge is based on repeated observations, but scientific knowledge is only one kind of knowledge. 
Other kinds include historical knowledge, philosophical knowledge, moral knowledge and personal knowledge. 
These types of knowledge lie outside the bounds of scientific knowledge.

For example, take historical knowledge.
Can you prove that King Henry the Eighth existed? Using the scientific approach of observation and repeatable experiments, this would be impossible. But using historical methods, it is certain that he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This phrase is the key. While not one person living today has ever seen King Henry the Eighth, we know he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why in law courts, a jury must be convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

So, when we look to prove whether God exists today, a scientific approach will not work. The amount of proof needed is enough so that we can say: "God exists beyond a reasonable doubt".

The Question Restated

We can now restate the questions as such:

Is it reasonable to accept that there is a 'Higher Being' behind this universe? If so, how do we know 'what' or 'who' the Higher Being is? Is There A Higher Being?

a.) Can this Higher Being be proven to exist with using the Bible?
b.) How do you know there is only one Higher Being?
c.) Have there been others who have tried to take the place of the Higher Being?

There are many different arguments for the existence of a Higher Being, none of which rely on the Bible, and none of which can be scientifically proved. Here are a few:

The Argument From Design

When we look at anything which has a design, we rightly conclude that it had a designer. Somebody designed chairs for a purpose.
Let's use this as an example; You walk into an empty room and have a need to sit down, as there is no furniture and have a need then you want a solution - this is emanation. Next you envision that a chair you suit your need and imagine the shape, height and colour of the chair - this is creation. But for your creation to come into being you have to 'blueprints' in order to decide the construction of the chair - this is formation. From that all that remains is the physical action in order to make the chair.
You can add somebody designed a glove to fit over a hand, if one has cold hands or else needs to have them covered then any solution requires a design and has to be practical so it can be used by a variety of human beings and can be replicated if it was designed by human beings for the use of human beings.

We can look at the universe, the complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe but sustains it today through its design. In other words it is the design that sustains itself due to the emanation, creation and formation that is behind the design which could only come from a designer. It would go against the laws of mathematics that the universe came in existence by accident or some random event.

Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -20 degrees to +50 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. 
The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.

And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.

And then in particular we have human beings, we show an unbelievable amount of design which replicates. Same anatomy as can be seen in regards to the likes of medicine and surgery, we also have life spans which governs our biological being. Even though humans try to prolong their lifespan through various means it does not extend 'life' as they knew it. In order to extend their life people will have all manner of surgeries, all manner of implants and take all manner of drugs, but from all this they will change from their personality nature and end up as drug induced robots and zombies without life.     

Human beings were not designed to be immortal and neither was any other form of physical life on this Earth. If we were immortal then we would not reproduce as designed, but if we did this Earth would be overpopulated and the likes of murder and utter poverty would skyrocket on a global scale and most (if not all) animal species would be extinct due to hunting caused by hunger.

The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

The DNA code informs and programs a cell's behavior; All instruction, all teaching and all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, as in binary code like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Just as you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three billion lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the persons body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

Let us continue...

Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 37 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.

Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.

Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.

Much of life as a whole may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change - on earth or in galaxies far from us.

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable? And when anomalies occur they can correct themselves. This points to a Designer.

"The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence."
Dinesh D'Souza, What's So Great about Christianity; (Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2007, chapter 11)

Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said,
"Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998)

We can also compare the universe to the likes of a railway system, at any given time all over the Earth there are thousands of trains on a multitude of railway tracks. There may be accidents and collisions but in comparison to the amount of journeys this is in fact a fraction. Likewise in the universe there may be collisions between comets and rocks of various placements and sizes. Considering the amount of rocks and comets in the universe the mathematical odds that this planet should have been hit and ultimately destroyed defies the laws of mathematics.

As we see we find ourselves with the intuition that random, unplanned, unexplained accident just couldn't produce the order, beauty, elegance, and seeming purpose that we experience in the natural world around us. More notable is that the components within the order have the ability to replicate and reproduce within the segments of the order. Examples are humans reproducing with humans, dogs reproducing with dogs, plants reproducing with plants usually by pollination (which can require division of the sexes) or else asexually as seen in the likes of plant grafts or else by 'splitting'. As we see these days because of political correctness and the continuous redefining of words and terms there are those who claim cross breeding within a species is 'evolution'. It is not, the amount of chromosomes has not changed.

In terms of reproduction there cannot be interbreeding between various species because of the various number of chromosomes between the species. The DNA/RNA of each creature will not ultimately absorb that of any other, it may be 'absorbed' with the aid of various chemicals and drugs. But then the problem will be two fold; the first problem is that the receiver will constantly need chemicals and drugs in order to keep the absorbsion. The second being that the constant ingestation of chemicals and drugs will either kill the receiver or else have them in a continuous sickly condition.

"Look round the world; contemplate the whole and every part of it: You will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the productions of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since, therefore, the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence."
 - Hume 1779

Design type arguments are largely unproblematic when based upon things nature clearly could not or would not produce (e.g., most human artifacts), or when the intelligent agency is itself ‘natural’ (human). Identifying designed traces of ‘lost’ human civilisations could in principle be uncontroversial or even nearly trivial. If we are confronted with something which nature unaided by an intelligence truly could not or would not produce (e.g., a DVD player), a design conclusion of some sort is very nearly inescapable. The unproblematic nature of such arguments has often been appropriated as a foundation for analogous inferences concerning (things in) nature. But in cases involving design in (or of) nature itself inferences are more problematic. Things actually in nature presumably are among those things which nature could or would produce, the intelligence in question would typically presumably not be within nature, and our everyday types of design inferences would appear to be wide of the mark.

But despite the variety of spirited critical attacks they have elicited, design arguments have historically had and continue to have widespread intuitive appeal—indeed, it is sometimes claimed that design arguments are the most persuasive of all purely philosophical theistic arguments.

Cosmological arguments begin with the bare fact that there are contingently existing things and end with conclusions concerning the existence of a maker with the power to account for the existence of those contingent things. Teleological arguments (or arguments from design) by contrast begin with a much more specialised catalogue of properties and end with a conclusion concerning the existence of a designer with the intellectual properties (knowledge, purpose, understanding, foresight, wisdom, intention) necessary to design the things exhibiting the special properties in question. In broad outline, then, teleological arguments focus upon finding and identifying various traces of the operation of a mind in nature's temporal and physical structures, behaviors and paths. Order of some significant type is usually the starting point of design arguments. Various advocates have focused on different types, levels and instances of order, have suggested different logical connections between order, design and designer and have pursued different levels of rigor

Design Inference Patterns

The historical arguments of interest are precisely the potentially problematic ones—inferences beginning with some empirical features of nature taken as (or argued to be) design-indicative, and concluding with the designedness of, and a designer of, the phenomena in question. A standard but separable second step—the natural theology step—involves identifying the designer as God, often via particular properties and powers required by the designing in question. Although the argument wielded its greatest intellectual influence during the 18th and early 19th centuries, it goes back at least to the Greeks and in extremely clipped form comprises one of Aquinas's Five Ways.

Design Arguments Example:

Entity 'A'  (stone) within nature is like specified human creation 'B' (concrete) in relevant respects because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent non-human agency. Like effects typically have like causes (or like explanations, like existence requirements, etc.) Therefore it is (highly) probable that 'B' has 'A' precisely because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent human agency. But as to item 'A'? If you were in find a stone in a riverbed for example, would you know how old it is and how it was created?

On a theistic level it can be argued that as man was created in the image of God; then man too will create in the image of God. Whether that be by reproduction or replication in relation to animate (such as children) or inanimate (such as concrete) 'objects'.

 Some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are design-like (exhibit a cognition-resonating, intention-shaped character). Design-like properties are not producible by (unguided) natural means—i.e., any phenomenon exhibiting such properties must be a product of intentional design. Therefore some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are products of intentional design. And of course, the capacity for intentional design requires an agency of some type. An agency of some type would have to refer to a Higher Intelligence or Higher Being or as we commonly say... God.

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?
[I just wish to state that this work is comprised of various writings and I will give references at the end of this work to the best of my knowledge.]

Question:

Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God? And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn?

Answer:

There are three distinct questions here, these are;
a.) Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
b.) And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God
c.) And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn? Or else are not just human beings who have taken upon themselves the title of God or else have had it placed upon them?

Each question logically follows from the one before it. But before we start, we need to resolve a background issue.

What is Proof?

In asking this question, we're basically asking "What kind of proof will be good enough? How much proof is needed?". When we talk about proof, we're talking about establishing some degree of certainty about something.

Scientific knowledge is based on repeated observations, but scientific knowledge is only one kind of knowledge.

Other kinds include historical knowledge, philosophical knowledge, moral knowledge and personal knowledge.

These types of knowledge lie outside the bounds of scientific knowledge.

For example, take historical knowledge.
Can you prove that King Henry the Eighth existed? Using the scientific approach of observation and repeatable experiments, this would be impossible. But using historical methods, it is certain that he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This phrase is the key. While not one person living today has ever seen King Henry the Eighth, we know he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why in law courts, a jury must be convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

So, when we look to prove whether God exists today, a scientific approach will not work. The amount of proof needed is enough so that we can say: "God exists beyond a reasonable doubt".

The Question Restated

We can now restate the questions as such:

Is it reasonable to accept that there is a 'Higher Being' behind this universe? If so, how do we know 'what' or 'who' the Higher Being is? Is There A Higher Being?

a.) Can this Higher Being be proven to exist with using the Bible?
b.) How do you know there is only one Higher Being?
c.) Have there been others who have tried to take the place of the Higher Being?

There are many different arguments for the existence of a Higher Being, none of which rely on the Bible, and none of which can be scientifically proved. Here are a few:

The Argument From Design

When we look at anything which has a design, we rightly conclude that it had a designer. Somebody designed chairs for a purpose.
Let's use this as an example; You walk into an empty room and have a need to sit down, as there is no furniture and have a need then you want a solution - this is emanation. Next you envision that a chair you suit your need and imagine the shape, height and colour of the chair - this is creation. But for your creation to come into being you have to 'blueprints' in order to decide the construction of the chair - this is formation. From that all that remains is the physical action in order to make the chair.
You can add somebody designed a glove to fit over a hand, if one has cold hands or else needs to have them covered then any solution requires a design and has to be practical so it can be used by a variety of human beings and can be replicated if it was designed by human beings for the use of human beings.

We can look at the universe, the complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe but sustains it today through its design. In other words it is the design that sustains itself due to the emanation, creation and formation that is behind the design which could only come from a designer. It would go against the laws of mathematics that the universe came in existence by accident or some random event.

Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -20 degrees to +50 degrees . If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible.

The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.

And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.

And then in particular we have human beings, we show an unbelievable amount of design which replicates. Same anatomy as can be seen in regards to the likes of medicine and surgery, we also have lifespans which governs our biological being. Even though humans try to prolong their lifespan through various means it does not extend 'life' as they knew it. In order to extend their life people will have all manner of surgeries, all manner of implants and take all manner of drugs, but from all this they will change from their personality nature and end up as drug induced robots and zombies without life.     

Human beings were not designed to be immortal and neither was any other form of physical life on this Earth. If we were immortal then we would not reproduce as designed, but if we did this Earth would be overpopulated and the likes of murder and utter poverty would skyrocket on a global scale and most (if not all) animal species would be extinct due to hunting caused by hunger.

 The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

 The DNA code informs and programs a cell's behavior; All instruction, all teaching and all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, as in binary code like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Just as you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a thre9e-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Why is this so amazing? One has to ask....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

 Let us continue...

Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:

It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 37 degrees (Celsius).

Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.5

Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.

Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life-giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.

Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.

Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.

Much of life as a whole may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change - on earth or in galaxies far from us.

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable? And when anomilies occur they can correct themselves. This points to a Designer.

"The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence."
Dinesh D'Souza, What's So Great about Christianity; (Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2007, chapter 11)

Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said,
"Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998)

We can also compare the universe to the likes of a railway system, at any given time all over the Earth there are thousands of trains on a multitude of railway tracks. There may be accidents and collisions but in comparison to the amount of journeys this is in fact a fraction. Likewise in the universe there may be collisions between comets and rocks of various placements and sizes. Considering the amount of rocks and comets in the universe the mathematical odds that this planet should have been hit and ultimately destroyed defies the laws of mathematics.

As we see we find ourselves with the intuition that random, unplanned, unexplained accident just couldn't produce the order, beauty, elegance, and seeming purpose that we experience in the natural world around us. More notable is that the components within the order have the ability to replicate and reproduce within the segments of the order. Examples are humans reproducing with humans, dogs reproducing with dogs, plants reproducing with plants usually by pollination (which can require division of the sexes) or else asexually as seen in the likes of plant grafts or else by 'splitting'. As we see these days because of political correctness and the continuous redefining of words and terms there are those who claim cross breeding within a species is 'evolution'. It is not, the amount of chromosomes has not changed.

In terms of reproduction there cannot be interbreeding between various species because of the various number of chromosomes between the species. The DNA/RNA of each creature will not ultimately absorb that of any other, it may be 'absorbed' with the aid of various chemicals and drugs. But then the problem will be two fold; the first problem is that the receiver will constantly need chemicals and drugs in order to keep the absorption. The second being that the constant ingestation of chemicals and drugs will either kill the receiver or else have them in a continuous sickly condition.

"Look round the world; contemplate the whole and every part of it: You will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the productions of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since, therefore, the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence."
 - Hume 1779

Design type arguments are largely unproblematic when based upon things nature clearly could not or would not produce (e.g., most human artifacts), or when the intelligent agency is itself ‘natural’ (human). Identifying designed traces of ‘lost’ human civilizations could in principle be uncontroversial or even nearly trivial. If we are confronted with something which nature unaided by an intelligence truly could not or would not produce (e.g., a DVD player), a design conclusion of some sort is very nearly inescapable. The unproblematic nature of such arguments has often been appropriated as a foundation for analogous inferences concerning (things in) nature. But in cases involving design in (or of) nature itself inferences are more problematic. Things actually in nature presumably are among those things which nature could or would produce, the intelligence in question would typically presumably not be within nature, and our everyday types of design inferences would appear to be wide of the mark.

But despite the variety of spirited critical attacks they have elicited, design arguments have historically had and continue to have widespread intuitive appeal—indeed, it is sometimes claimed that design arguments are the most persuasive of all purely philosophical theistic arguments.

Cosmological arguments begin with the bare fact that there are contingently existing things and end with conclusions concerning the existence of a maker with the power to account for the existence of those contingent things. Teleological arguments (or arguments from design) by contrast begin with a much more specialised catalogue of properties and end with a conclusion concerning the existence of a designer with the intellectual properties (knowledge, purpose, understanding, foresight, wisdom, intention) necessary to design the things exhibiting the special properties in question. In broad outline, then, teleological arguments focus upon finding and identifying various traces of the operation of a mind in nature's temporal and physical structures, behaviors and paths. Order of some significant type is usually the starting point of design arguments. Various advocates have focused on different types, levels and instances of order, have suggested different logical connections between order, design and designer and have pursued different levels of rigor

Design Inference Patterns

The historical arguments of interest are precisely the potentially problematic ones—inferences beginning with some empirical features of nature taken as (or argued to be) design-indicative, and concluding with the designedness of, and a designer of, the phenomena in question. A standard but separable second step—the natural theology step—involves identifying the designer as God, often via particular properties and powers required by the designing in question. Although the argument wielded its greatest intellectual influence during the 18th and early 19th centuries, it goes back at least to the Greeks and in extremely clipped form comprises one of Aquinas's Five Ways.

Design Arguments Example:

Entity 'A'  (stone) within nature is like specified human creation 'B' (concrete) in relevant respects because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent non-human agency. Like effects typically have like causes (or like explanations, like existence requirements, etc.) Therefore it is (highly) probable that 'B' has 'A' precisely because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent human agency. But as to item 'A'? If you were in find a stone in a riverbed for example, would you know how old it is and how it was created?
On a theistic level it can be argued that as man was created in the image of God; then man too will create in the image of God. Whether that be by reproduction or replication in relation to animate and potentially animate (such as children) or the inanimate (such as concrete) 'objects'. The fact is that man has never created anything out of nothing, despite the claims of atheists who hold that 'something and everything came from nothing' and no amount of scientific 'theories' will ever make it come true or establish it as fact.

The only fact is that the creations and designs of mankind were and are based on 'objects' that were never designed or created by mankind. Some things in nature (or nature itself, or else the cosmos) are design-like (exhibit a cognition-resonating, intention-shaped character). Design-like properties are not producible by (unguided) natural means—i.e., any phenomenon exhibiting such properties must be a product of intentional design. Therefore some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are products of intentional design. And of course, the capacity for intentional design requires an agency of some type. An agency of some type would have to refer to a Higher Intelligence or Higher Being or as we commonly say... God.

While mankind may make 'original' inventions or come up with 'original' ideas and concepts, the fact is that these inventions, ideas and concepts did not come out of absolutely nothing or even a basic nothing. It was a need, potential problem or else a 'void' that gave rise to these things. It was instinct, previous knowledge, new knowledge, imagination and practicality that combined to attempt to fill the void. Unless the origin of each factor in this can be traced to its very beginning, as well as the circumstance as to why these factors interact and to what degree. Then mankind cannot claim to come up with an 'original' solution to an 'original' problem because the problem and solution are not original but variants which have changed, continue to change and will change. While the physical components of a problem can be empirically measured, the circumstances behind them cannot be completely measured but only mitigated.

Applying infinite regression will only reveal that mankind is not the original designer or manufacturer of anything. Yet nature still functions and reproduces with design which points to an original designer who would not be a human being and certainly would be a Higher Being in regards to intelligence and ability. The only comprehensible answer to this is ultimately God.