Can God's existence be scientifically proved?

[Mr Walker]

Why would you presume people who don't believe in god haven't had the same sort of experiences as those who do believe in god - but they arrived at a different conclusion as to what those experiences were of/represent?

This argument about the believer's "god experience" is simply a case of special pleading.

We have had this discussion before, but using your argument if I have had an "elephant experience' I have no better knowledge of the existence or appearance of elephants than one who has never encountered an elephant in the flesh. That is patently untrue. A physical encounter with anything gives a huge amount more data than can be transferred in any other way, including even video. So one who encounters god does have a "special case".

If you encounter god in the flesh you can no more disbelieve in god's existence than you can disbelieve in elephants after encountering one. Unless of course, in either instance, you are totally irrational, and allow persistent disbelief to overcome the evidence of your own eyes. So generally, a non believer won't have had an actual god experience, or they would be a god believer. (or rather a god knower)

[Frank Merton]

The problem as I see it is that the Heavens do not declare the glory of God. There is no hint of him out there.

[Mr Walker]

None of us "share the same experience" with the degree of certainty you imply. The only "sharing of experience" we have is through explanation - language.

People can agree a similarity of experience based on this communicating of concepts and emotions, but they can never know those experiences are of the same thing. Please note that I am speaking of experiences which are totally subjective, with no physical component.

Rather, all people have identical experience of the external environment (which is not dependent on, or alterable by, human perception) but they interpret it individually and communicate that difference .

[Almagest]

We have come a long way I agree. Are you proclaiming that the origin of the universe has been measured to such pinpoint accuracy that we can all go home and rest assured that God has been dissolved?

Not at all. I'm stating that just because science doesn't have all the answers doesn't mean that it's work is mere speculation. Some things are established fact, and the Big Bang is one of them. The Universe doesn't deal with absolutes.

[Mr Walker]

Go back to what you said here...

What I am arguing, is that you cannot have a true understanding of any experience - even your own experiences - unless that experience can be objectified through a medium. A "god experience" cannot be so objectified - it is absolutely subjective and therefore the experiencer cannot truly understand it to be "of god" - they can only believe it to be so.

Logically then, and as you actually state, no one can be certain of the validity and reality of ANY experience Which is both ridiculous and unsustainable in actual human existence Why cannot a god experience be objectified, if other experiences can be objectified "through a medium". Either every real physical experience can be validated, or none can .

[taniwha]

So its the Spanish Inquisition now. Get out the thumb screws. Please, just tell me how one goes about proving a negative, such as that elves don't exist? Evasion is too obvious a way out, and I can't really believe you are that dumb.

Posted Today, 01:58 AM

The problem as I see it is that the Heavens do not declare the glory of God. There is no hint of him out there

Until science shines its light on something new does it cease to exist?

Edited January 21, 2014 by taniwha

[Mr Walker]

If you can't define it, how do you know it is love?

Because it is indefinable. LOL

[Mr Walker]

How else do we know God, but by direct knowing? Reason and Logic can lead to abstract intellectual decisions, but that's distinctly separate from "knowing".

The same way we know anything, such as our partner our bedroom, our parents or our dog. Through ongoing personal connection and development over time, giving knowledge understanding predictability..

[Mr Walker]

No he hasn't. It's only proof that you are not thinking with your brain but with your desires. You can't prove a negative. Prove to me elves don't exist.

Well I can't because they do. I thought everyone knew that. They have an historical enmity with dwarves.

[taniwha]

Not at all. I'm stating that just because science doesn't have all the answers doesn't mean that it's work is mere speculation. Some things are established fact, and the Big Bang is one of them. The Universe doesn't deal with absolutes.

Absolutely. Science has a long way to go before understanding completely the flesh and bones of the universe.

Edited January 21, 2014 by taniwha

[Mr Walker]

Don't tell me you have the arrogance to enter a debate of this sort without knowing what, "You can't prove a negative" means.

Actually you can prove a lot of negatives. eg I am not 12 years old. I do not exist. I am not a man. All demonstrably false. What you cannot prove are beliefs or concepts for which no evidence is available.It is quite possible to prove that god exists if god does exist; and it is equally possible to prove he does not, if he does not. I can prove that elves do not physically exist by showing how the concept was developed in human history and literature but that wont stop someone continuing to believe in them. Dwarves are harder to disprove because of course they DO truly exist, and I know a number personally

[Mr Walker]

What does god have to do with spirituality?

Do you think, or believe, that people cannot be spiritual unless god exists, or unless they believe god exists?

Do you believe there cannot be a concept of soul without a concept of god?

Human spirituality, the soul, and god, are all human constructs which are coexistent and co-dependent One can believe in one and not another but our capacity and tendency to believe and construct these and other concepts is universal Our abilty to believ in god allows us to be spiritual.l It is the same capacity used in different ways.

[Einsteinium]

How else do we know God, but by direct knowing? Reason and Logic can lead to abstract intellectual decisions, but that's distinctly separate from "knowing".

That is why it is called faith in God, or belief in God. If it was possible to KNOW for certain that God exists, then there would be no need for faith or belief.

[Einsteinium]

Actually you can prove a lot of negatives. eg I am not 12 years old. I do not exist. I am not a man. All demonstrably false. What you cannot prove are beliefs or concepts for which no evidence is available.It is quite possible to prove that god exists if god does exist; and it is equally possible to prove he does not, if he does not. I can prove that elves do not physically exist by showing how the concept was developed in human history and literature but that wont stop someone continuing to believe in them. Dwarves are harder to disprove because of course they DO truly exist, and I know a number personally

Sure, but the burden of proof lies with the one making the extraordinary claim. If I claim that elves exist, then it is up to me to prove they do exist, not up to everyone else to prove that they do not exist.

[Etu Malku]

Sorry, I'm a little late to the party . . . I'll comment on those who commented on my post;

The short answer: No.

Think about it, you can't "prove God exists" due to the very nature/definition of God.

You cannot prove a 'negative' but you can certainly prove a positive, and if there exists a god then He can make himself known objectively.

What if god only appears to those who want him to and the many mental decisions of his non existence by people, are distancing them selves from him.

What about all the people that want Him to and He doesn't appear?

People may not physically be distancing them selves from god ( if he created everything, then he cant be apart from anything because he is everything), just mentally not allowing them selves to have a relationship with him.

It takes two to have a relationship.

What if life is a choice, what if god allows those to die who don't consider a life after death, that cant see the blessings in life, the bountiful resources that we have when shared, the riches in moderation. what if he lets you die because he made you with a mind that can comprehend more than you have, that can contemplate god but choose not too.

What about all the other religions then? They are just wrong and doomed? What about the little Buddhist child that gets killed by a car . . . he never has the chance to know this god and his . . . ahem, mysterious ways?

If your not happy with life, maybe your life from a baby to a wrinkly old person is your chance to make that decision to live in the next life or die in this one.

You are aware that there are a multitude of unhappy believers in god?

Maybe every one no matter what ideas they contemplated in life, chooses life at the end. Every one of us has thought life is unfair, that if god existed then why is their so much bad in the world but when your last moment comes, when you feel your last breath and every thing fade to black, will your last thought be 'God id like some more please'?

And to what end is this plea? What kind of reincarnation, immortality are you asking for and why do you think only Christians deserve it?

God cannot be "proven", yet there is such a thing as "direct knowing". It goes beyond mere belief or conviction, into an abiding certainty.

Faith maybe? What exactly is "direct knowing?", if this were a reality and actually did happen, wouldn't you think there would be objective proof that god exists? But, it doesn't and there isn't.

An abiding principle that is the motivating force within all that is. I would assert that a daisy, or a squirrel, with absolutely no education has certainty about "gods" existence. It's only rational (haha) mankind that can muster the temerity to question god's existence.

That's a pretty long stretch there . . . squirrels with expanded consciousness?

There's nothing bold about questioning the existence of something that has changed the course of human thinking . . . especially something that is by all accounts absent objectively.

As for the 'motivating force' idea . . . well, IMO god is a meme and an archetypal structure. The force that shapes the universe is also memetic and without intelligent guidance, which is not to say things don't survive and change because of optimum choices, indeed they do and which is why you & I are here.

[Davros of Skaro]

Romans 1:19-22

19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Romans%201:19-22

[Etu Malku]

Romans 1:19-22

19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.

http://www.biblegate...=Romans 1:19-22

What does quoting scripture prove? Nothing . . .

[Davros of Skaro]

What does quoting scripture prove? Nothing . . .

Then you are just looking, and not seeing.

[Dark_Grey]

Then you are just looking, and not seeing.

His point is that you can't use the Bible to prove that the Bible is right. That's just silly circular logic.

[Davros of Skaro]

His point is that you can't use the Bible to prove that the Bible is right. That's just silly circular logic.

Are you so blind that you cannot see what's in front of you right this second?

[taniwha]

His point is that you can't use the Bible to prove that the Bible is right. That's just silly circular logic.

I think the bible is one more good example on how deeply man expresses significance to a higher power. I dont think science has been designed to debunk God or to prove God.

Every culture in history has questioned their place and purpose in the universe.

No one need be upset. For many it is inevitably human nature to accept God into their lives.

[Etu Malku]

Quoting the Christian bible is as useful as me assigning spiritual significance to Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion" . . . he says there is no god, I say he is an authority on the subject, therefore there is no god.

The "Satanic Bible" of Anton LaVey says there is no god, therefore there is no god.

Dr. Michael Aquino's "Diabolicon" was purportedly a spiritual vision that he related, it states that the fallen angels are the good guys and Yahweh and his angels are the bad guys and will lose in the end.

I mean really, what does any of this prove objectively? Nothing, that's what.

Myself and millions of others want to objectively experience this so called Abrahamic god . . . I think it's time that His Almighty-ness stands up and is counted among his herd.

[bendigger0]

Imbeciles aren't able to frame thoughts coherently, to themselves or others. Yet, does an imbecile have knowledge of God? Not what he/she has been taught or told, but what is known intrinsically. Not intellectually, but viscerally. Since science cannot prove the existence of God, those who rely exclusively upon science for their knowledge, cannot know God, intellectually. Yet some maintain that every portion of existence knows God. Every atom, quark, etc., knows God implicitly. Knows their relationship and participation of/with God. In the whole of this Earth, it is only the feeble mind of man that can rationalize a way around the knowledge of God's all-pervasive presence. You will say it's a matter of belief, because you are locked into an intellect. Perhaps, in this way, an imbecile is greatly more knowledgeable than yourself.

[Etu Malku]

Would someone that wasn't indoctrinated into the idea of the Abrahamic god, know this god? Almost certainly not.

Do we find Taoists all of a sudden disclaiming Taoism because they had a Christian epiphany . . . no. A Tibetan monk leaving the monastery because he 'found' the Abrahamic god? Once again . . . no. Why?

Because if a person was born and never introduced to a religion, (s)he would not find Christianity's god out of the blue, it would never occur to him/her. The real fools are those that fall into the trap of self-delusion, the Dance of Maya. They no longer take responsibility for their actions, they place themselves in the imaginary hands of something perceived as 'greater' than they, and thus they perpetuate their delusion.

[bendigger0]

It sounds like you're saying that the notion of God's existence is a self-indulgent delusion, for fools?