• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Can science disprove the existence of God?

leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
One should come out of the petty routine arguments. Does one believe in the existence of leprechauns, minators, fairies and aliens?
Regards
Click to expand...
It is a hypothetical. I am pointing out that in the same way that it is impossible to provide empirical evidence for the absence of unicorns from all of existence, it is impossible to provide empirical evidence for the absence of God from all of existence. Your house example was silly, as we are discussing an open system, not a closed one ... as I explained before.

I was not trying to be rude at all. I asked you honest questions and I would appreciate an honest answer. Whether or not people believe in unicorns or leprechauns is completely irrelevant when speaking about empirical evidence. So, do you now understand why it is impossible to provide empirical evidence of the absence of anything in an open system ("existence" in this case)? I am happy to explain further, but please be respectful and don't dismiss questions simply because they disprove your claim. That is childish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Noa
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
paarsurrey said:
One should come out of the petty routine arguments. Does one believe in the existence of leprechauns, minators, fairies and aliens?
Regards
Click to expand...
I'm sure there are some who believe in these things, btw. But, I fail to see why belief would be relevant to this conversation. Many people have believed in things that turned out to be false, and many more refused to believe in things that turned out to be true. We are talking about evidence, and the number of people who believe something has no bearing on its validity.
 
Robert.Evans

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
paarsurrey said:
Why? Please
Regards
Click to expand...
You think that there is not an original? There has to be an original. Is that not all important in art? Who wants the copy? We are created in the Image (the copy) not the Source. The Source is teh Absolute. It is that which is the ultimate original. How can there not be? to say there is not is to ignore time. He shows us much through time and its properties
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Robert.Evans said:
You think that there is not an original? There has to be an original. Is that not all important in art? Who wants the copy? We are created in the Image (the copy) not the Source. The Source is teh Absolute. It is that which is the ultimate original. How can there not be? to say there is not is to ignore time. He shows us much through time and its properties
Click to expand...
Why would you assume that creation (as you put it) is bound by the same laws as a painting?!
 
Robert.Evans

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Demonslayer said:
These are invisible elephants. Prove they are not in the room. You can't.
Click to expand...
Obviously. But there is always evidence left, because these invisible elephants are intelligent and you need intelligence to create complex things. The next room is the 'luck' room and nothing much happens in there, just rubbish, as that is all luck can do without some parameters brought about through intelligence
 
Robert.Evans

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
9-10ths_Penguin said:
But it is.

If God has a measurable effect on the world, then we could use this fact to draw scientific conclusions:
- "X will be one way if God exists and another way if God doesn't exist."
- we go and observe X.
- X was found to be ____, therefore God (does/doesn't) exist.

Any observable or measurable effect that God has - or is predicted to have - can be used to point to something that we can drop into the place of X. If God can't be demonstrated or refuted scientifically, then God has no observable or measurable effects.
Click to expand...
We can measure it.
1. God is an evolving consciousness and therefore everything will have to develop over time. It does.

2. There is no God and it is all luck. That is not possible as everything is too complex.
 
Demonslayer

Demonslayer

Well-Known Member
Robert.Evans said:
Obviously. But there is always evidence left, because these invisible elephants are intelligent and you need intelligence to create complex things. The next room is the 'luck' room and nothing much happens in there, just rubbish, as that is all luck can do without some parameters brought about through intelligence
Click to expand...

Does this make sense to anyone? I can't make heads or tails of this.
 
Robert.Evans

Robert.Evans

You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
leibowde84 said:
How does this apply, specifically?
Click to expand...
I don't know what we were referring to, but, God is, for me, an evolving consciousness. So everything follows thoughts that have gone before in higher realms of consciousness. What we see here, the universe, is that same thought process replicated in physical terms (with errors). Nothing new happens here even though it is completely free. We, everything, just follows its own Self.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top