I would say it's evidence that we have scientific laws and that our universe governs in a designed and orderly fashion. But to go even further back. We know that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. It's scientific law that this is true. Something had to create matter and energy that was beyond science (God). To believe that there is no God, one must have faith that something beyond science did not create all that exists. It also means someone must by faith, believe that something against what we know about science for some reason somehow created everything through an unknown and unproven method. For me it would make sense that our universe was created by a designer as it is orderly and is governed by scientific laws. There must have been a will and a reason for its creation as I don't believe that it could have happened without a will and for no reason. My belief indirectly supports God's existence through science. Gleaning from what we know, something supernatural must have created matter and all that exists within our universe.
Fundamentally this is an incorrect statement as science relies on measurement to make proof. Gods by their definitions are immeasurable and thus science cannot speak of them.
That's not scientific reasoning, that's personal belief and philosophy. Science would say that we do not know yet.
God is provable through science. Science demands a creator and evident through our scientific laws. We can't physically put God in a test tube, but we know He exists.
I would say it's evidence that we have scientific laws and that our universe governs in a designed and orderly fashion. But to go even further back. We know that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. It's scientific law that this is true. Something had to create matter and energy that was beyond science (God). To believe that there is no God, one must have faith that something beyond science did not create all that exists. It also means someone must by faith, believe that something against what we know about science for some reason somehow created everything through an unknown and unproven method. For me it would make sense that our universe was created by a designer as it is orderly and is governed by scientific laws. There must have been a will and a reason for its creation as I don't believe that it could have happened without a will and for no reason. My belief indirectly supports God's existence through science. Gleaning from what we know, something supernatural must have created matter and all that exists within our universe.
It's developing a belief through scientific reasoning. The fact that scientific law states that matter cannot be created or destroyed demands that something beyond the constraints of scientific law (God) must have created all things in existence.
Water has no taste - the impurities in the water do.
It's developing a belief through scientific reasoning. The fact that scientific law states that matter cannot be created or destroyed demands that something beyond the constraints of scientific law (God) must have created all things in existence.
Then prove God through science. Of course, you realize that will require you to produce objective, testable evidence that does not require a priori faith that it's real first, right? So when you manage to do that, you can win the Nobel prize and be wealthy.
Be sure to let us know when you manage it.
I believe the term 'god' is essentially a redundancy in describing causal relations.
The problem is you're leaving really big holes open, as in, who created god?
Actually, it's the argument from ignorance. You look at the world and you can't come up with a better explanation, therefore you pick the one that you find most emotionally comforting. That's not science, that's logical fallacy.
Incorrect. It's taking what I know about science and believing what is plausible regarding something that no scientist has proven and can study. By your logic, is it not equally true for atheists to believe some kind of self propagation method for the creation of matter and energy?
Laws that may or may not be correct. Personally, I subscribe to chaos theory. After all the research I've done on the universe, I see no "order". I see things that eventually fall into something that could be considered "order" (gravitational orbits, etc), but they sure as **** didn't start that way. In fact, the more I learn about the universe, the more unrealistic a "creator" becomes.I would say it's evidence that we have scientific laws and that our universe governs in a designed and orderly fashion.
Well actually, it canBut to go even further back. We know that matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed. It's scientific law that this is true
Something beyond science? This doesn't make any sense. Aside from that, what then created "god"?. Something had to create matter and energy that was beyond science (God).
Or we accept that we do not know all there is to know.To believe that there is no God, one must have faith that something beyond science did not create all that exists. It also means someone must by faith, believe that something against what we know about science for some reason somehow created everything through an unknown and unproven method.
For me, it makes absolutely no logical sense whatsoever as it is not ordered and our understanding of "laws" changes as we gain knowledge.For me it would make sense that our universe was created by a designer as it is orderly and is governed by scientific laws.
Why must there be a will and a reason? A meteor doesn't fall from the sky due to will and reason.There must have been a will and a reason for its creation as I don't believe that it could have happened without a will and for no reason.
You mean, gleaning from what YOU know, and how YOU understand it.My belief indirectly supports God's existence through science. Gleaning from what we know, something supernatural must have created matter and all that exists within our universe.
It's sad how little you know about science then.
Offensive one liners mean nothing. I'm a student of molecular biology, not that it matters. Blatant personal attacks will be ignored.
I have to get ready for school now, I'll reply to stuff later.
Offensive one liners mean nothing. I'm a student of molecular biology.
Incorrect. It's taking what I know about science and believing what is plausible regarding something that no scientist has proven and can study. By your logic, is it not equally true for atheists to believe some kind of self propagation method for the creation of matter and energy?
*ding*
Unfortunately science doesnt understand exactly how the universe came about, but you're still reverting to 'God' as an essential argument for things that are not explicable. Just because science doesnt know yet doesnt mean you need God to explain it.
I see GOOD religions as a useful tool to apply mankind's benevolence toward his fellow man...and it's "truth" doesn't have to be provable to be worth believing..
The real question is, why does it bother you so much?No, we don't currently know exactly how the universe came about. We have some good ideas, some of which are testable and some of which are not. We may never know exactly because it's likely to be beyond our ability to study directly. One-time events cannot be replicated. However, many people are afraid of admitting that they don't know something so they just invent a comfortable solution to the problem, whether it has any evidence whatsoever to support it. Don't know how something happened? GODDIDIT! It's a nice, convenient placeholder explanation until we find the real solution. Of course, the people who hold these kinds of irrational beliefs to begin with will just move their GODDIDIT explanations elsewhere. Instead of admitting they were wrong and God didn't actually do it, or anything else, they just keep stuffing God into smaller and smaller holes and redefining God to make it harder and harder to disprove.
But how is that any better than having a cult of unicorn believers as a useful tool? Why not come up with a tool that does away with all the irrational magical thinking and simply allows people to be benevolent toward his fellow man? Or woman? Accepting a load of crap because it's got a few specks of diamond dust mixed in makes no sense. Get rid of the crap and keep the parts that actually work.
UtahBill said:What does it hurt to allow people to believe whatever it takes to remove fear of the unknown from their lives? Do you really want all the preachers to suddenly become unemployed? You know where they will go next, either politics or Wall Street...
The tool you speak of would be magical itself, if you expect the natural man to be benevolent to others. We are born self centered and have to be taught to be otherwise.
What does it hurt? It's useless for one, spending your life on your knees asking an imaginary friend to do things for you is pointless. You're much better served being on your feet doing things to correct your own life. It's like asking Santa Claus for a pony. No matter how many Santa's laps you sit on, you're almost certainly not getting a pony and if you do, it's certainly not coming from Santa.
Further, religion can be extremely harmful, what about parents who would rather pray to God than take their kids to a doctor? You end up with a lot of dead kids that way, none of them have ever been demonstrably healed by any sky daddy. Like it or not, beliefs inform our actions, people act upon what they believe and when you believe in irrational things, you act irrationally. It sure wasn't atheists, acting on their lack of belief in god(s) that flew planes into the World Trade Center. When you believe crazy, irrational things, you're more likely to take crazy, irrational actions.
Simply because it makes you feel good doesn't make a belief any more worthwhile. I'm sure racists feel good about their racism. Does that make racism a good thing? Certainly not. I'm sure the crazy guy who thinks he's Napoleon gets great emotional satisfaction out of believing that, he's still wrong. No matter how much emotional comfort you might get from a wrong belief, it doesn't stop it from being a wrong belief.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?