what do religious people say about science trying prove the existance of god?
if you're religious or not, what do you say or think about science trying to prove the existance of god? please let me know its for my R.E homework.
- 1 decade agoBest Answer
We don't need to be a genius to work out that there is a God. Here is a little something I paraphrased from something else, have a read.
I will prove that God exists by showing that the other alternative (big bang, evolution, etc…) does not have credence.
Since the argument against creation comes from the possibility or chance, of things just coming into being through the chance of things happening through large amounts of time passed, let us examine that concept.
The probability that an event will occur is usually denoted as “p”, and the value of p can range from zero (meaning that it won’t happen) to one (meaning that it is certain to happen). Theoretically cosmologists might pursue smaller values of p because it costs them nothing to write down numbers of paper, but in the real world, cost is usually a controlling factor.
So a cosmologist can come up with a totally ridiculous figure of probability, assuming that an event can occur. For instance; “there exists … a probability of a little less than 1 chance in 10 to the power of 80 that the hot air arising from the flames on a gas stove, instead of dissipating throughout the room, could bunch together inside a small volume element, move toward you, and burn a hole through your chest and into your heart”. The problem with this logic is that gas molecules move at random and do not stick together. So although as much as you like to think it might happen, it never will. This means that we could come up with a perceived figure of probability such as 1 chance in 10 to the power of 80 for something that will never happen.
It is said that there is a 1 in one million chance of someone winning the lottery every week. That means that the chance of 1 person winning the lottery is p=1. But if one was to take a ticket every week of their life, their chance of winning it would be p=0.000001. Since the chances of winning it are so low, why do they keep taking that ticket? It is simply because there is that chance there. BTW do not gamble!
By using the illustration of the lottery, it shows how chance is relative to reality, the possibility that it could happen. We know that the chance of one person winning it is a certainty.
Should an assumption of chance be related to cause for existence as some cosmologists have agreed upon?
Of course they say time is what makes existence possible by chance but the arguments are weak that this is so. Take for instance that all interactions in the real world use up energy, so as time goes by useable energy is continually depleted. As a result, long periods of time do not necessarily lead to increased likelihood; they will, on average, lead to “decreased” likelihood that anything at all will happen.
In cosmological terms, the parallel situation is that in any particular part of the universe there will only ever be a finite amount of energy and a finite number of particles available for interaction. Any accomplishments of chance will have to come early in the process, while there is still enough useable energy available and the particles are still in a position to interact.
Chance can only be applied to events that can happen – chance cannot magically make things happen that are physically impossible.
- 4 years ago
I don't think trying to prove god's existence with science is unethical-silly maybe, but not unethical. Finding remains of "Noah's Ark" will not by itself prove god exists any more than the Bible or the Shroud of Turin does. Science says nothing about god or the supernatural. Science relies on observable evidence that is testable, verifiable, and falsifiable. Scientific experiments need to be repeatable and able to make predictions about any future results obtained. Since god is apparently beyond the realm of observable, testable, verifiable and falsifiable, how could any experiment be constructed to objectively say one way or the other if in fact god does exist? It can't. The best science can do is explain the world around us in natural terms and thus render god un-needed and improbable.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Well, science doesn't, but apologists think that science does prove it, and they end up using logical fallacies, and you rarely see it converting scientists, just people who know little about science.
Isn't it fascinating that the person above me says science proves Islam, yet "The Case for a Creator" says science proves Christianity.
Apologists never bother to explain why God, who must be just as complicated if not more then his creation, exists on his own with no creator. And the conditions may seem perfect, but if you realize there are literally trillions of planets out there, then it seems more likely that one would have these conditions.
Religious people assume that they don't have to explain where their god came from. By their logic, an omnipotent and omniscient god couldn't "just exist" it would have to have a creator. Being eternal doesn't mean he doesn't "just exist". Of course most theists will completely ignore this.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
as posted on an earlier post about the Scientific process science is a very poor method of proving God's existence. Science looks for physical explanations and God by definition is metaphysical.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- 1 decade ago
I don't know if religious people want scientists to try or not, but I can tell you science isn't interested in trying to disprove God. It's not a fruitful field of research, and most scientists are rather result oriented. Someone would have to come up with a testable hypothesis about attributes of God which would be measurable. Experiments would have to be devised to try and measure the effects of those attributes, and the experiments would need to be repeatable by other scientists.
"Science" isn't an institution. It's a methodology.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
"Science" is not trying to prove the existence of god. Period.
Science isn't trying to disprove the existence of god, either.
Science DOESN'T CARE about god -- the christian one or any other one.
Science is about finding testable, verifiable natural explanations for natural phenomenon. That's it.
There may be some wayward individuals who have at one time done science, then go off half-****** on some delusional quest to "prove" some god's existence...but when they do, they're not doing science.
- supertopLv 71 decade ago
God is not subject to the laws of science, but there are many implications that there must be a Creator. The living cell is too complex to have originated by chance or accident. There are many conditions that must be just right for a planet to be favorable to life.
- Dave FlemingLv 51 decade ago
It is said if you have been blessed, it was from God. All prayers are answered by God, if you have any answered prayers, God answered them.
Most Christian ethic is based on; if you want anything out of life, it will come from God.
I suppose you might think that the word here is Religion.
God Bless YouSource(s): me
- AutumnWynd777Lv 71 decade ago
Real Christians don't need science to prove the Existence Of Lord GOD Almighty. We have Faith. Hebrews 11 (Amplified Bible) 1NOW FAITH is the assurance (the confirmation, [a]the title deed) of the things [we] hope for, being the proof of things [we] do not see and the conviction of their reality [faith perceiving as real fact what is not revealed to the senses]. 6But without faith it is impossible to please and be satisfactory to Him. For whoever would come near to God must [necessarily] believe that God exists and that He is the rewarder of those who earnestly and diligently seek Him [out].Source(s): The Holy Bible
- Sam ILv 61 decade ago
God's existence is proven by common sense.
doesn't need much calculation .. just common sense.