Scientific proof of God.

  • Thread starter Thread starter Decimvs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m not denying the possibility of a God, but asserting that something must have existed prior to space and time as we know it does not prove a God.

I am telling you that this video will convince very few atheists or agnostics.
 
freethinker83 said:
I’m not denying the possibility of a God, but asserting that something must have existed prior to space and time as we know it does not prove a God.

I am telling you that this video will convince very few atheists or agnostics.
Click to expand...
the second video talks about far more than just space
 
The thing is, if there were hard scientific proof most scientists would accept it after giving it a critical review. Good scientists are open to new theories as long as there is strong evidence to back it them up. Good scientists also try to disprove their own theories.

I am a strong believer in both evolution and the big bang. If a theory with stronger testible evidence than evolution were to surface tomorrow I would likely abandon my belief in evolution immediately.

I’m not denying the possibility of a God–I am saying that what the vast majority of the scientific community considers proof does not yet exist.
 
Since science is finite and limited to man’s limited intellectual ability, I would submit that one cannot use science to prove God’s existence. It is a futile exercise. God is infinite and, therefore, cannot be fully grasped by our finite minds.

On the other hand, we can see signs that support our belief that God does exist. It’s just not the seeming “absolute” proof that folks who buy into science as the be-all and end-all of knowledge seem to demand.

In the end, we choose, as an act of our free will, whether to believe or not to believe. And in the end, forever, we will each be in heaven or hell. Period.
 
Scoobyshme said:
Since science is finite and limited to man’s limited intellectual ability, I would submit that one cannot use science to prove God’s existence. It is a futile exercise. God is infinite and, therefore, cannot be fully grasped by our finite minds.

On the other hand, we can see signs that support our belief that God does exist. It’s just not the seeming “absolute” proof that folks who buy into science as the be-all and end-all of knowledge seem to demand.

In the end, we choose, as an act of our free will, whether to believe or not to believe. And in the end, forever, we will each be in heaven or hell. Period.
Click to expand...
That is where people such as you and I differ. You can accept something based largely on faith, whereas I need hard evidence. I do think we are both ultimitely trying to find our place in the universe.

Peace

Steve
 
There’s a good science program explaining the anthropic principle on the Church Channel titled “Reasons to Believe” with astronomer Hugh Ross.

They discuss the 138 scientific constants and their conjoining effects that had to occur in order that sustainable life could exist on Earth.

Putting those 138 sequences together, is scientific proof of a Prime Mover.
 
Scoobyshme said:
Since science is finite and limited to man’s limited intellectual ability, I would submit that one cannot use science to prove God’s existence. It is a futile exercise. QUOTE]

I meant to add that I would not count this out. Go back as little as a century and people probably could not have imagined the things science is able to do today. We may someday have a way to prove it.

As I said, I am always open to the possibility. Believe me when I tell you I would like to believe I have the chance to experience eternal life with those I love.
Click to expand...
 
Is it reasonable to look for scientific proofs of God? Ultimately, science is the endeavor to understand our world. God is not the same as our world. He is the maker of it. C.S. Lewis said it well when he pointed out that you will no more find God in this universe than you will find an architect within the walls of a house He built. One may find evidence of his actions in this universe, but specific “proof” of Him is not likely to be found through the scientific method. Certainly there are arguments in favor of his existence, but one cannot find scientific proof of Him in the way we can prove mathematical principles.
 
I watched the first one, and quite like it. The second one is a bit longer 😃 so that one will have to wait a day or two until I can find some extra time.
 
freethinker83 said:
That is where people such as you and I differ. You can accept something based largely on faith, whereas I need hard evidence. I do think we are both ultimitely trying to find our place in the universe.

Peace

Steve
Click to expand...
Well, I think we are all built to search for and find truth. Truth exists, even if no one believes it. For example, a thousand years go, did anyone know about black holes in space? No. Because they didn’t know, they didn’t believe. Because they didn’t believe, does that mean they didn’t exist? No.

The study of how we “know” something is called epistemology. There are three basic ways in which we humans can “know” something:
  1. Direct experience (Examples: touch it, feel it, see it, etc.).
  2. Through logic. (Example: Lassie is a dog. All dogs are mortal. Therefore, Lassie is mortal.)
  3. Through faith. (Example: My wife loves me. Can I prove that scientifically? No. But I KNOW she loves me, beyond a doubt.)
Science is very limited. It is limited by our ability to grasp it. VERY limiting. Man is not that smart, except, perhaps, when compared to other earthly creatures. Don’t be too impressed by us. 🙂
 
Biedrik said:
Is it reasonable to look for scientific proofs of God? Ultimately, science is the endeavor to understand our world. God is not the same as our world. He is the maker of it.
Click to expand...
Understanding the universe is important however, because it teaches us about both the greatness and the love of God.

He created the entire universe for one purpose. Us.
 
Scoobyshme said:
Through faith. (Example: My wife loves me. Can I prove that scientifically? No. But I KNOW she loves me, beyond a doubt.)
Click to expand...
I would say that there is a big difference between faith and God and your wife’s love. You are able to see, hear, and touch your wife. She is able to tell you directly that she loves you. It is not the same with God. I know that some say God speaks to them in certain ways, but this has yet to happen to me. I would think that he would speak the loudest to someone such as myself.
 
Barbkw said:
Understanding the universe is important however, because it teaches us about both the greatness and the love of God.

He created the entire universe for one purpose. Us.
Click to expand...
This is not meant ridicule and is a serious question. How can you accept that the entire vast universe whose size no one begin to comprehend, in which the Earth is less than a spec of dust is all for us?
 
freethinker83 said:
This is not meant ridicule and is a serious question. How can you accept that the entire vast universe whose size no one begin to comprehend, in which the Earth is less than a spec of dust is all for us?
Click to expand...
Science (astronomy, astrophysics, molecular biologists, etc) is currently uncovering that information.

In addition, the production of earth like planets, that can sustain intelligent life are approximated out at less than one possiblity per galaxy (depending on the number of stars per galaxy) and then sucessive numbers of constants must exist or life can’t exist.

Scientists now know that the Milky Way galaxy actually runs itself short in star production yet was able to create one planet that could sustain life for a short window of time.

If you believe in current scientific knowledge about the Big Bang, Earth was eventually created out of an explosion or implosion that occured 4.6 billion years ago.
 
Barbkw said:
Science (astronomy, astrophysics, molecular biologists, etc) are currently uncovering that information.

In addition, the production of earth like planets, that can sustain intelligent life are approximated out at less than one possiblity per galaxy (depending on the number of stars per galaxy) and then sucessive numbers of constants must exist or life can’t exist.

Scientists now know that the Milky Way galaxy actually runs itself short in star production yet was able to create one planet that could sustain life for a short window of time.

If you believe in current scientific knowledge about the Big Bang, Earth was eventually created out of an explosion or implosion that occured 4.6 billion years ago.
Click to expand...
I don’t know where you get your number for Earth-like planets, but we are just now getting to where we are able to discover them. We have just now begun discovering Earth-like planets. I would bet a lot of money that many will be discovered over the next 20 years or so. You also don’t mention the possibility that moons of larger planets could be Earth-like.

4.6 billion years is the age of the earth, the big bang was 13 or 14 billion years ago. I’m just clarifying, not arguing.
 
Decimvs said:
youtube.com/watch?v=Sr5lY0TcdAw&feature=related
youtube.com/watch?v=ppIgFEFUpjw&feature=related

Two videos that prove the existence of God with science.
It’s so beautiful. Love showing it to atheist friends, of course they remain ignorant, and think they know more than the smartest minds of man.
Click to expand...
For those who claim that there is no Scientific Proof of the Existance of GOD so too is there no Scientic Proof to the contrary , Personally I see more value in Pascal’s Wager than in anything Richard Dawkins can opine about.

pax
 
Robert_Burns said:
For those who claim that there is no Scientific Proof of the Existance of GOD so too is there no Scientic Proof to the contrary , Personally I see more value in Pascal’s Wager than in anything Richard Dawkins can opine about.

pax
Click to expand...
I agree, you cannot prove something doesn’t exist. The same goes for fairies, Thor, bigfoot, unicorns, etc.

My biggest problem with Pascal’s Wager is choosing the wrong God. What if out of the thousands of choices throughout history I choose the wrong one?
 
freethinker83 said:
I’m not denying the possibility of a God, but asserting that something must have existed prior to space and time as we know it does not prove a God.
Click to expand...
There are only two possibilities:
  1. A closed Universe or multiverse scenario in which the Big Bang is caused by some prior universe. But this does not answer the question of what caused the Universe because then one has to ask what caused the prior universe and so on.
  2. An Uncaused Cause caused the Big Bang. In light of what we know about space-time and the evidence for the open Universe and its eternal expansion, this is a far more reasonable conclusion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top