Please use science to prove God exist

[FearGod]

Um. Define God so we know "and" start or test on what we are trying to find proof for.

If there is no definition from the other side (not the religious), an idea of some sort so that scientific test can be used, how do you expect to find god with proof?

Ex. If there is no car in front me, then that car does not exist. What car? Are there properties of this invisible car that I can use to start my investigation that it doesnt exist regardless the claims that it does?

God does exist with the proof, but those who don't want to believe won't see it and even will refute it.

 

[allfoak]

The problem is that those seekers find very different Gods. So, either God manifests Himself as an elephant-headed creature or as a good looking redeemer depending on where you live, or the claims of the average seeker to have found God are highly unreliable.

What is more plausible?

Ciao

- viole

Everyone is different.
If i spoke to you like you are a child you would likely ignore me.
If i spoke to you in a language you didn't understand what benefit would it be to you?

God is not limited to one individuals understanding.
If that were true then God would not be God.

So the problem that you seem to have here is easily solved once you stop thinking that God cannot be all things to all people.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

1) My point was that the problem with your proposal lies with a "hidden" assumption concerning meaning
2) The first neuroimaging study I worked on used "a religious person's tools (such as their def. of words...)" as a foundation of the study. Plenty of other studies I and others have worked have done the same.

Are you saying scientist use religious tools to proove God?

Wouldnt it be helpful if they used their own objective methods of discovery? If so, what are they?

EDIT

Ex. If there is no car in front me, then that car does not exist. What car? Are there properties of this invisible car that I can use to start my investigation that it doesnt exist regardless the claims that it does?

A scientist can use religious attributes to this invisible car, books, archeology, to test the "negatives" of this invisible car. What tests does the scientist have for himself that can proove God exist "objectively"? Would he use the religious definition of this car or objective ones he finds based on his tests?

If he cannot find anything, define it, or test it and are just depending on religious def. how can he "objectively" proof God exists and even to know what a God is?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Science can only discover physical matter, spiritual stuff is scientifically undetectable. Scientifically you cant even proof that there are other persons beside you, so i think it will be even harder/impossible to prove that there are, not material or physical, but spiritual persons.

Since this Is true, why would anyone want proof for God? Unless they had another proof in mind that is not religjous nor scientific?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

God does exist with the proof, but those who don't want to believe won't see it and even will refute it.

I understand. My position is towards the one who seeks proof by science. In what way does he define the object and thr proof to where his question can be answered from a "scientific" perspective not a religious one.

 

[FearGod]

I understand. My position is towards the one who seeks proof by science. In what way does he define the object and thr proof to where his question can be answered from a "scientific" perspective not a religious one.

For example there are some facts in the quran which proves God's existence which was misinterpreted by the ancient
scholars and those who don't wan't to believe will reject it and even will try to refute it.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For example there are some facts in the quran which proves God's existence which was misinterpreted by the ancient
scholars and those who don't wan't to believe will reject it and even will try to refute it.

Youre talking from your religious point of view. I believe in spirits and the question applies to me too. However, not all of us refute a claim that does not exist materially. We know it as a claim or belief, nothing more.

Lets think outside of our own point of view for a minute. If you did Not believe God exist "and" you only believe he does by evidence, how would you define this god that you want proof for? What tests woule you accept will give you objective proof he (she or it) does exist?

EDIT

Remember. In this analogy you are looking for scientific proof not personal experiences etc.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

It came with a guarantee from the Galactic Trading Company. It's amazing how small they've made it now, the early God detectors were much bigger:

Was it made China? US? India? Those companies have a tendency to find multiple gods based on who made the company and designed the technology.

 

[viole]

Everyone is different.
If i spoke to you like you are a child you would likely ignore me.
If i spoke to you in a language you didn't understand what benefit would it be to you?

God is not limited to one individuals understanding.
If that were true then God would not be God.

So the problem that you seem to have here is easily solved once you stop thinking that God cannot be all things to all people.

Ok, but if we are all different, why does the god we find correspond, in the vast majority of the cases, with the god of our culture? Why doesn't the elephant headed god reveal Himself to people in India and to people in Alabama with the same rate?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Was it made China? US? India? Those companies have a tendency to find multiple gods based on who made the company and designed the technolgy.

I believe this particular device was manufactured by the Space-alien Cat People on the planet Littatrey, which is somewhere in the Naff Nebulous.

 

[Skwim]

Well, science has discovered part of god.

.​

 

[FearGod]

Youre talking from your religious point of view. I believe in spirits and the question applies to me too. However, not all of us refute a claim that does not exist materially. We know it as a claim or belief, nothing more.

Lets think outside of our own point of view for a minute. If you did Not believe God exist "and" you only believe he does by evidence, how would you define this god that you want proof for? What tests woule you accept will give you objective proof he (she or it) does exist?

EDIT

Remember. In this analogy you are looking for scientific proof not personal experiences etc?

Yes it's evidences which is proved by science and not personal experiences.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Yes it's evidences which is proved by science and not personal experiences.

As a scientist who is going off of objective tests to proove God rather than religious test and evidence (archeology that proves people believe in God. Personal experiences. Written books by people about God), what would those objectives test be?

How would you define God (person, it, animal, whatever your test results come up as) objectively using your tests and objective evidences?

 

[allfoak]

Ok, but if we are all different, why does the god we find correspond, in the vast majority of the cases, with the god of our culture? Why doesn't the elephant headed god reveal Himself to people in India and to people in Alabama with the same rate?

Ciao

- viole

Because our understanding is often limited to our culture.
Most of us in Alabama would reject the elephant as an hallucination.
As those in the east would reject the Christian God.

Culture is a strong medium of influence.
It is also a very limited medium.
By medium i mean that our culture is in the middle of God and us.
We use what we have learned growing up to interpret our experience.

It is limiting but most will never rise above their culture.
It is just a very big cult with lots of little ones within.

What one is capable of knowing about God is limited to our understanding of ourselves.

 

[FearGod]

As a scientist who is going off of objective tests to proove God rather than religious test and evidence (archeology that proves people believe in God. Personal experiences. Written books by people about God), what would those objectives test be?

How would you define God (person, it, animal, whatever your test results come up as) objectively using your tests and objective evidences?

Why do you think we need to know how God looks like, having in mind that he exists in his world and not ours?
We can't reach the stars then how can we reach God ?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Why do you think we need to know how God looks like, having in mind that he exists in his world and not ours?
We can't reach the stars then how can we reach God ?

From a scientific perspective, we cannot. However, this is not from my point of view because I don't believe God exists. This is to those who ask for scientific proof of his existence. (Stepping out of my shoes here)

If God exists (he, she, it) and any scientist, I'll include myself, want to test his actual existence, how would we do so?

What tools would we go by to figure out the objective existence of God? (Speaking to the people who want proof not to the religous).

Are people who need proof going off of how the religious define God?

If so, wouldn't that be like me going by the Bible to proove the God of Abraham doesn't exist? It's counter productive.

We can't use the religious' evidence and claims to proove the non existence of God. So, what can we use?

And how do we define God from our point of view not the religious?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

We can't use the religious' evidence and claims to prove the non existence of God. So, what can we use?

I don't think we can, so we have to allow for the possibility that God exists.
Alternatively one can become ignostic.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ignosticism

 

[Willamena]

...start or test on what we are trying to find proof for.

This is actually the hardest part. Existence isn't a proper predicate.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I believe this particular device was manufactured by the Space-alien Cat People on the planet Littatrey, which is somewhere in the Naff Nebulous.

Haha. I had to actually think about that. What qualifications do these Space-alien Cat People have that makes other God-Dector companies less effective in their equipment? Should I go with the Dog-Faced Android Company? Their results is rather interesting. But I trust the Spoctonic Brain-n' Company. Every God, to them, is a figment of our imagination.

Interesting, huh?

 

[FearGod]

From a scientific perspective, we cannot. However, this is not from my point of view because I don't believe God exists. This is to those who ask for scientific proof of his existence. (Stepping out of my shoes here)

If God exists (he, she, it) and any scientist, I'll include myself, want to test his actual existence, how would we do so?

What tools would we go by to figure out the objective existence of God? (Speaking to the people who want proof not to the religous).

Are people who need proof going off of how the religious define God?

If so, wouldn't that be like me going by the Bible to proove the God of Abraham doesn't exist? It's counter productive.

We can't use the religious' evidence and claims to proove the non existence of God. So, what can we use?

And how do we define God from our point of view not the religious?

What is your field in science ?