Can God(s) exist without man?
553550
Yes but man cannot exist without God.
275843
I can give some information, but only God can convince you.\nI know this is really long, and I apologize in advance, but to follow the chain of logical reasoning takes a lot of words.\n\nAbsolute Proof for the Existence of God:\nThere’s a lot of really great evidence that God does in fact exist:\n1. The existence of God explains the universal longing of the heart.\nBillions of people have believed in a god, people of differing cultures and times, differing places and customs. Mankind is irreversibly homo religiosis, a religious creature. Even philosophies that had no god eventually had to invent one—this was clearly the case within Buddhism. The Buddha did not teach the existence of a deity, but the Buddha’s followers over the centuries converted Gautama Buddha himself into a god, and he is still revered as such by millions of Buddhists today.\n\nAnd this shift is also a shift to a personal deity. An abstract “force” does not satisfy the needs of the human heart—we need to know that someone is out there, not just something. This same shift was evident within Hinduism. The monistic impulse of Upanishadic Hinduism, with its highly philosophical Brahman, an abstract higher power, was overshadowed over time by devotion to individual, personal gods. We humans arrive on this earth incomplete, sensing a deep need within our souls for the divine. This is the “God-shaped void” in each heart.\n\nAtheism—the denial of God’s existence—simply doesn’t satisfy the longings of the human heart. Man cannot live without God. When people are denied a god, they invent one to satisfy their hearts. \n\n2. Humanity needs an ultimate point of reference by which we can determine our own meaning.\nThis is a point the braver atheists like Sartre have conceded. Their suggestion, of course, is that humanity has no meaning, no purpose, no ultimate significance. We cannot find our significance in ourselves—we long to exist for something greater. As was discussed in the previous lecture, if there is no God who exists and has spoken, we are left absurd creatures whose every action is arbitrary. It should come as no surprise that the fervor of UFO people seems so very religious in its zeal! They want someone to be out there, so that we can have a point of reference from which to consider our own existence! Those searching for extraterrestrial life often argue that humanity’s reason for existence—its purpose and destiny—will only be discovered when we make “first contact” with another life form. I would suggest that that other life form is the One that created us, that made contact for our salvation 2,000 years ago. We find our destiny only in him, for whom and by whom we were created.\n\n3. The existence of God best explains humanity’s sense of right & wrong.\nEveryone has an idea of the perfect, a concept of the good, true and beautiful. This deep moral sense, what C.S. Lewis called the Tao or the Law of Common Decency, had to come from somewhere. Compare the great moral systems of the world through the ages. They are remarkably similar. Faithfulness in marriage, honesty in speech, goodwill toward other people, not shedding human blood, honoring one’s parents—all are moral principles found in every society. Confucius died long before Jesus, but summarized his Law of Reciprocity (shu) by stating, “What you do not want done to yourself, do not do to others.”\n\nThis universal sense of right and wrong, what philosophers historically called natural law, cannot be explained very easily without appealing to humanity’s creation by a moral God. And these moral principles are not merely the products of human cultures. Were this so, we would see a lot more variation from one society to the next. But we find them, not only in every culture, but also ingrained in the human conscience. As Paul explained, God’s moral law is “written on their hearts” (Romans 2:15). This had to come from somewhere.\n\n4. The existence of G
409638
NO...\n\nWe live in a society that believe that they don't need God...So He is more or less letting those who don't believe they need Him...go without Him...\n\nThe rest of us who know we need Him...see His works all the time...and know He's always paying attention.
207936
He exists if you need him to exist. \n\nThere is no more proof that God exists then proof that he doesn't. \n\nDiscussing whether or not there is a God is only an argument of contrasting opinions where no one can win.
1014225
No one. God has always existed. Hard for the finite mind of a human to fathom but true nonetheless.
654591
nope.\n\nby the way, why would anyone believe a "god" created everything?\nwho created "god"\n\n\na man with a pen created god.
1077568
I think science has proved conclusively that God could not possibly exist. Except in the wildest and most insane imaginations of men.
293777
Good point...a agree with you ... created things cant be God ...whatever they are... men or idols... there is only God which is to be worshiped...
851729
There is no God.\n\nNext question.
1028794
Yes.  God can do anything including things that seem impossible to you and me.   I cannot concieve how he would do it, but then I am not God.  I can concieve, however, that an all powerful God could will himself unable to pick up a grain of sand (I know you were thinking of something a little larger).  And since He is all powerful, He could will Himself able to pick it up when it suited His plan.  I know this is lame circular logic, but so was your question.
214431
Presuming this, without God, there would be nothing to compare to in the whole creation to Godliness. Thus eliminating the possibility of it. Since we know what Godliness is like, this eliminates the possibility that your question has merit. Since God is Love, & not a chemical process, this elininates the other question.
354700
God is a man-made construct. Only through our arrogance would we perceive an all-powerful being to look like us.\n\nIf all religion ceased tomorrow and god was proven not to exist, the world would keep turning.
1029331
No. God createth and God taketh away. If you're going look at everything from a human or modern perspective, you'll run into much error.
131747
Religion is a means for mankind to reach God. \nGod doesn't need a religion to reach Himself. So God has no religion.
1030866
You do not have an understanding of the basic belief in a monotheistic G-d.  If something is infinite then it has no needs.  If there are no needs there is no use for slaves or servants.
1054887
Elaborate and clarify please.\nI think you'll find the main reason this question has not been answered is because no one can understand exactly what you're asking!\nIt seems almost as if you're asking if God has less understanding of the needs of the body and its cells than man does!!\nLet's put it this way, I have heard many of the theories of men that the body or its parts were lacking in this, that and the other, but I would contest that it is men's knowledgethat is lacking!\nWe only have to see this by their ridiculous promotion of the adult fairytale that calls itself, "Evolution of the Species"!!!\n\nWould you believe it??\nThey actually believe this Fairytale!\nNo wonderthe Lord said of them, "They will be turned unto fables"!\n\nI, personally, have scientifically disproved evolution, for one!\n\nAs for incomplete body cells, they would only be incomplete because the Creator has removed the material within the cell that made Adam invincible when God first created him!
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!