The tradjedy of only using logic to disprove Gods existance ?

Question

In the entire course of human history one mistake is made continually. It is the mistake of coming to conclusions after having used only what you have to conclude...that is all your efforts, your equipment and ur past experience as well as ur accumulated knowledge up until now. Examples abound. Medical science made absolute conclusions before the microscope. Then the microscope came and proved them wrong. Then before the X ray machine and after. Then came the atomic microscope which disproved many things the average microscope seemed to prove. Many concluded the earth was flat in the science world. Then the sun and new techniques proved that scientific theory wrong. Atheists-evolutionists are pre concluding with all and only what they have to make their conclusions...there are more means and ends to prove Gods existance...Jesus Himself...and they havent come upon the real ways of concluding...when they do...He will be there...smiling and arms open.....I know...Ive seen Him

Answer 1

Well said

Answer 2

several errors:

first:
You wrongly confuse scientists with athiests. Athiests dont necessarily need to believe in the scientific method, and many scientists believe in god.

second:
You make a false analogy between proving things in the physical spectrum and proving things in the spiritual spectrum. One can learn more about the universe with telescopes. They can even reach false conclusions with weak or faulty equipment. This is not true with god. There is no God-o-scope with which someone can draw faulty conclusions. The scientific community cannot draw conclusions about the existance of god because there is no evidence either way.

third:
Lack of evidence denying the existance of god does not equal abundance of evidence for the existance of one. Nor does that statement go the other way. If you always believe that the present way of thinking is faulty, then you will never believe anything until the moment when the scientific community (temporarily according to you) happens to believe what you do. With this kind of thinking, your mind is closed. One cannot have a closed mind when trying to explain things scientifically.

Answer 3

Good Point. I often use the argument that I will only accept scientific theories as fact once science no longer has anything to find out, wich will likley never happen. As long as they are still discovering, NOTHING can be 100% fact, for something can always change it.

God Bless.

Answer 4

Isn't that what you are doing? Except that science doesn't say these things are fact. You on the other hand use a 2000 year old book of dubious origin on which to base your 'fact' while denying superceding knowledge.

Answer 5

an adorable point of view! even i thing that testifying anyones existance through applicatiuon of logic is WRONG, Science itself suspects existance of aliens but is unable to prove it, then why aim at God? whatever they say or do, they should survey their own selves before pointing the finger and concluding, the ppl who are athesists themselves generally have a sense of superiority in questioning existance, do helkl with it, i say, Pascal has said if you believe in God, you'll lose nothing if God does not exist, but if you Don't believe in God, you'll lose everything in not believing in him!!

Answer 6

Your dissertation is good, even valid but... something's not quite right? You claim to be a 23 year old mystic, but that is forbidden by God Himself. Who is your true prince? Do you even know? God says, "My people die for lack of knowledge". In other words, if you don't read the Bible, you're subject to all kinds of deception. I hesitate to suggest that you are deceived by the prince of darkness. God does "not" lead us by our emotions or our senses. Please, please investigate your situation before it's too late!!
May your way be blessed and enlightening.

Answer 7

Lay off the drugs, honey.

Answer 8

It is foolish to try to disprove a myth. Why bother.