Barber and Customer conversation on "Does God Exist?"

A man went to a barbershop to have his hair cut and his beard trimmed. As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation. As the barber began to work, they began to have a good conversation. They talked about many things and various subjects. When they eventually touched on the subject of God, the barber said,”I don’t believe that God exists.”

“Why do you say that?” asked the customer. “Well, you just have to go out in the street to realise that God doesn’t exist. Tell me, if God exists, would there be so many sick people? Would there be abandoned children? If God existed, there would be neither suffering nor pain. I can’t imagine a loving God who would allow all of these things.”

The customer thought for a moment, but did not respond because he did not want to start an argument.

The barber finished his job and the customer left the shop. Just after he left the barbershop, he saw a man in the street with long, stringy, dirty hair and an untrimmed beard. He looked dirty and unkempt.

The customer turned back and entered the barber shop again and he said to the barber,”You know what? Barbers do not exist.”

“How can you say that?” asked the surprised barber. “I am here, and I am a barber. And I just worked on you.”

“No!” the customer exclaimed. “Barbers don’t exist because if they did, there would be no people with dirty long hair and untrimmed beards, like that man outside.”

“Ah, but barbers DO exist!” answered the barber. “What happens is people do not come to me.”

“Exactly!” affirmed the customer. “That’s the point! God, too, DOES exist! What happens is people don’t go to Him and do not look for Him. That’s why there’s so much pain and suffering in the world.”

A Practical Man's Proof of God Existence - Proof 4 (Bayes Theorem)

A BRITISH physicist has calculated that the mathematical probability of God existing is two-to-one in favor.

But even though some scientists might find these odds exceptionally high, Dr Stephen Unwin was surprised. As a committed Christian, his own faith had persuaded him previously that there was a more than 90 per cent chance that God really existed.

Dr Unwin, a graduate of Imperial College, London who studied for his doctorate at Manchester University, used the 200-year-old Bayes' Theorem to calculate that there was a 67 per cent chance that God existed.

He weighed the existence of evil and suffering against miracles, divided into supernatural events and miracles that occur when prayers are answered. He also factored in free will, humankind's innate goodness and sense of morality and the many philosophical arguments both for and against the existence of God.

Bayes' Theorem is named after Thomas Bayes, an 18th-century English mathematician who was also a Presbyterian minister. The theorem emerged in the 20th century after a group of mathematicians decided there must be more to probability than tossing a coin.

Bayesians believe that probability is the level of partial belief that something is true on a scale of nought to one hundred. Dr Unwin, who is now resident in the US having been sent on secondment to the Department of Energy, where he was employed to calculate the probability of nuclear s, has his own consulting company in Columbus, Ohio, where he specializes in risk analysis and risk management.

He spells out his argument for the probability of the existence of God in a new book, The Probability of God: A Simple Calculation that Proves the Ultimate Truth, to be published in the UK on April 30.

The equation calculates "posterior probability" by multiplying "prior probability" by the "likelihood function". This is represented mathematically as P(G|E)=A.P(G).P(E|G). In the equation, G is the proposition that God exists and E is the evidence.

Dr Unwin, 48, said: "Bayes's Theorem works by looking at the evidence around and calculates whether the evidence would be more likely to be produced if the proposition, G, was true or false. I lined up a series of areas of evidence, some in favor of the truth of the proposition and some not in favor."

He said his analysis started from a position of "absolute ignorance" as to whether God existed. "Most people, when they address these things, have an established view and want to eliminate uncertainties. I wanted to go to the areas commonly debated and embrace rather than eliminate the uncertainties."

---

My views:
Keep everything aside and think this way. There could be two possibilities, one god exists and other he doesn't. If he exists then all relevant theories of hell and heaven, must be true too else not. Now assuming that he doesn't exists and so does his theories of hell and heaven, we can start living a criminal life, since we'll never be put up in hell as there would be no record of our crimes after we die. We can start living selfishly. But doing so, will make living this life too. Moreover, in case if god would be existing and so does our crime record up to him then it would be hell afterward too. So its better to live a spiritual life committing nice and good causes on earth, making it livable for others too.

In other words, since there is no proof of god's non-existence too. It is at least 50% that he exists, so if we can't spent money on god and temples/churches, we can better use our money for orphans, old age homes, poor peoples and needful persons. Because if other 50% (which says that he don't exists) goes false, then we would be having no more time to do good things again.

A Practical Man's Proof of God Existence - Proof 3

A third scientific proof that the atheist is wrong is seen in the second law of thermodynamics. In any closed system, things tend to become disordered. If an automobile is driven for years and years without repair, for example, it will become so disordered that it would not run any more. Getting old is simple conformity to the second law of thermodynamics. In space, things also get old. Astronomers refer to the aging process as heat death. If the cosmos is "everything that ever was or is or ever will be," as Dr. Carl Sagan is so fond of saying, nothing could be added to it to improve its order or repair it. Even a universe that expands and collapses and expands again forever would die because it would lose light and heat each time it expanded and rebounded.

The atheist's assertion that matter/energy is eternal is scientifically wrong. The biblical assertion that there was a beginning is scientifically correct.