science can't prove God non-existent

raddmadd

Registered Member
#1
hm, I don't know, I came up with this theory. The theory is that God can not be proved non-existent by science.

A broad definition of science would be the study of things around us (people will probably argue this, but you get the point of what I'm talking about, if thats not your definition of science then I guess we're talking about two different things.)

In the scriptures it talks about how God is above His creation, God is above what is around us, God is above science. God is not illogical but He is above logic, He is above what makes sense. So how can we disapprove God with things that are below Him? How can I use logic and sense to prove that He doesn't exist when He is above it? Trying to dissaprove God through science is like getting a deaf person to judge whether someone can sing or not. The only way to prove or dissaprove God's existence is by using things at God's level. What are things at God's level? Miracles done by Him, faith, etc. faith is not God, but it is a spiritual thing. Miracles are not God, but they are in the same area of God, the same category you might say. So I guess only spiritual things are included to figure out God's existance, not things around us. Not the physical world. So with this theory I see no point in scientists bringing up new discoveries to try and prove God non-existent, because it doesn't make sense to try to prove that Someone above logic doesn't exist by using logic.

So basically, the replies I'm looking for aren't ones saying that God doesn't exist, and trying to prove it, but rather focusing on this theory. I've thought of things wrong with it. So discuss your thoughts and the holes in the theory. With saying that, whether your Christian, Atheist, etc. you can reply to this. I figure that the most problems people will find in the theory are brought up by misunderstanding it, I don't know how well I explained it.
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#2
hm, I don't know, I came up with this theory. The theory is that God can not be proved non-existent by science.

He/She/It also cannot be proven through faith, but I'll try and stick to the topic.

Your theory has a few holes, one main gaping one so let me continue here.

In the scriptures it talks about how God is above His creation, God is above what is around us, God is above science. God is not illogical but He is above logic, He is above what makes sense. So how can we disapprove God with things that are below Him? How can I use logic and sense to prove that He doesn't exist when He is above it?
This statement is based on the opinion that the scriptures are true and accurate, which also cannot be proven. So immediately, your theory shut me off because this is the gaping hole. This argument is basically using faith to argue scientific possibilities seeing as the scriptures cannot be called anything but the words of a group of religious believers.

Trying to dissaprove God through science is like getting a deaf person to judge whether someone can sing or not. The only way to prove or dissaprove God's existence is by using things at God's level. What are things at God's level? Miracles done by Him, faith, etc. faith is not God, but it is a spiritual thing. Miracles are not God, but they are in the same area of God, the same category you might say. So I guess only spiritual things are included to figure out God's existance, not things around us. Not the physical world.
Then let me ask you this: How do we know when God sings? Assuming God is the singing that the deaf person (science) can't hear, of course. You're making assumptions once again based on the scripture image of God. The bottom line is no one knows a single truth about God or any other divine creator(s) out there, if any. So this is mainly a Christian theory and one that can't offer much debate outside of Christian circles.

So with this theory I see no point in scientists bringing up new discoveries to try and prove God non-existent, because it doesn't make sense to try to prove that Someone above logic doesn't exist by using logic.
You think it's bad for them to try? Or is it because you're afraid of the possibility that they may prove some sort of higher order, a possible system of being (highly improbable) that may even reach outside our universe?

Also, you are once again assuming that God is the figure the scriptures describe.

So basically, the replies I'm looking for aren't ones saying that God doesn't exist, and trying to prove it, but rather focusing on this theory. I've thought of things wrong with it. So discuss your thoughts and the holes in the theory. With saying that, whether your Christian, Atheist, etc. you can reply to this. I figure that the most problems people will find in the theory are brought up by misunderstanding it, I don't know how well I explained it.
Like I said, the main problem is that this theory is founded on the idea that the scriptures tell the truth. We might as well be arguing the the "truthiness" of the bible before we bother answering this.
 
A

AdventChild01

Guest
#3
Just look around, the animals, the earth, the planets...who do you think created that?
 

raddmadd

Registered Member
#4
hm, I don't know, I came up with this theory. The theory is that God can not be proved non-existent by science.
He/She/It also cannot be proven through faith, but I'll try and stick to the topic.

Your theory has a few holes, one main gaping one so let me continue here.



This statement is based on the opinion that the scriptures are true and accurate, which also cannot be proven. So immediately, your theory shut me off because this is the gaping hole. This argument is basically using faith to argue scientific possibilities seeing as the scriptures cannot be called anything but the words of a group of religious believers.



Then let me ask you this: How do we know when God sings? Assuming God is the singing that the deaf person (science) can't hear, of course. You're making assumptions once again based on the scripture image of God. The bottom line is no one knows a single truth about God or any other divine creator(s) out there, if any. So this is mainly a Christian theory and one that can't offer much debate outside of Christian circles.



Like I said, the main problem is that this theory is founded on the idea that the scriptures tell the truth. We might as well be arguing the the "truthiness" of the bible before we bother answering this.
Yeah, i getcha. But my point is, when I say that God is above all, how can you prove that what I'm saying isn't true?

Basically, if I say that grass is red, scientists can prove this wrong by studying the grass (lol observing it whatever.) Thats using things around us to figure out the truth, but if someone says the Truth is above us, then how can we figure out whether what they are saying is true or not?

You think it's bad for them to try? Or is it because you're afraid of the possibility that they may prove some sort of higher order, a possible system of being (highly improbable) that may even reach outside our universe?

Also, you are once again assuming that God is the figure the scriptures describe.
I never said that. And if I was afraid that wouldn't be very good faith. And I've been studying telekinetics and manipulating atoms for years ;) lollllllllllllllll

Just look around, the animals, the earth, the planets...who do you think created that?
God!!! 0= lol.
 

Merc

Certified Shitlord
V.I.P.
#6
AdventChild, that logic has never worked and it's useless in any discussion that is trying to be intellectual.

Radd, the final point of this discussion is that God cannot be proven and cannot be proven wrong because we have no evidence of God (or even Jesus's) existence and we have no evidence against his existence. So where does that leave us? It leaves us with two choices: faith or no faith, it's simple.
 

Gavik

Registered Member
#10
Yeah, i getcha. But my point is, when I say that God is above all, how can you prove that what I'm saying isn't true?
Then why don't you just spam that everywhere so you'll be right about everything?

Basically, if I say that grass is red, scientists can prove this wrong by studying the grass (lol observing it whatever.) Thats using things around us to figure out the truth, but if someone says the Truth is above us, then how can we figure out whether what they are saying is true or not?[/quote]

Some grass IS red

It's time for the Raddmadd' Logic Quiz!

Just answer yes or no!

1-Global Warming is a serious political issue

2-Internet smilies convey emotion

3-We're fighting them over there so we don't fight them here

4-Your daughter has intercourse with herpes ridden kittens on a regular basis

If you answered anything to the questions above, then you're wrong, because the truth is above you! Thanks for playing.


Science uses facts to draw conclusions, where as religion tries to support an already asserted idea with faulty information. If you can't even prove the color of grass, then why doesn't it matter if religion was just made up by tribesmen to explain why it rains sometimes.