Just wondering, because Atheists seem to think so.
2006-10-10 12:19:54 · 30 answers · asked by Saban Nation 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Could I have some details Why Not? Or do you have them?
2006-10-10 12:23:53 · update #1
Look down Paul.
2006-10-10 12:24:32 · update #2
Urban: What do you mean be "removing God?" Is that like pretending he doesn't exist? Very scientific.
2006-10-10 12:29:21 · update #3
Jessie: I'll look for that book.
2006-10-10 12:30:48 · update #4
Gods Gift: Please do not answer any more of my questions until you have finished the 3rd grade. Thank you.
2006-10-10 12:33:48 · update #5
I gave you a good rating on this question. However I have never meet an atheist that thought that, or one that would, would have to have a low I.Q. to think such a thing. So to answer your question; NO!, Also science hasn't proven the existence of God, but for that matter either has religion.
2006-10-10 12:33:10 · answer #1 · answered by Kelly L 5 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Science has damned near been able to prove that God doesn't exist. Warning: you can't prove a negative, so God survives because his non-existance can't be absolutely proved.
But!
1. Is God a necessary construct? Can we explain the universe without necessitating God as part of the explanation?
2. If we remove God from the universe, does it continue to work normally? (If we remove God and the universe works the same way, we can say that God is not a necessaryconstruct, and, by inference, we can say that God does not exist according to proof by contradiction).
If both 1 and 2 cannot be rebutted, instead of a proof God does not exist, we have a very strong inference that God does not exist, which is as close as you can get to proving a negative.
2006-10-10 12:25:15 · answer #2 · answered by urbancoyote 7 · 4⤊ 2⤋
Has science proved that: the tooth fairy, Santa, flying apes from the moon, etc do not exist? The proof that god does not exist is the fact that there is no proof for him existing. It does not exist till you prove it does. If things were seen as existing because no one proved they don't exist, then anything that anyone makes up would be seen as true (ex: FSM, pink unicorns, god, Santa, etc.). You can not prove FSM does not exist, or pink leprechauns from the 4646th dimension. So scientifically god does not exist by default. You can not prove something does not exist, so technically science can never prove anything does not exist. That is why your argument does not work. But because he has not had any proof of existence, he can not be seen as existing.
2006-10-10 12:28:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
It depends on how you define "god".
If you think of god as being in the sky and looking like some old white dude, I think it's safe to say that science has proven that THAT doesn't exist :-)
I don't see how science and "god" contradict eachother, if you define "god" as "the first mover" or "the big fractal" or whatever. It's been a long time, but I read an excellent book once called "Quantum Theology" which provided a very good paradigm of god (even the Christian god) and science coexisting.
2006-10-10 12:26:56 · answer #4 · answered by Jessie 5 · 4⤊ 2⤋
You're thoroughly confused, kid.
There's no gang of scientists working on the problem of disproving Santa's existence, and there's no Santa non-believers who believe that scientists have disproven Santa's existence.
I'll bet you can't find a single atheist who says that scientists have proven that God does not exist. Withdraw this silly question.
Later: Nope - there's no sign that guy below me is an atheist, and I'm betting he's just kidding anyway. The fact is that you just invented that "atheists seem to think so" stuff - it's a figment of your confused imagination, as the responses to your question so clearly demonstrate. Atheists don't believe that there are scientists trying to disprove Santa's existence, or god's - that silly belief is your delusion, not ours.
You're flat wrong. Admit it.
2006-10-10 12:21:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
No. For many writers and scientists, their not being able to disprove is enough for them to choose to believe. Example: C.S.Lewis, an Atheist who became a Christian.
Some of my thoughts, here: Atheists cast something other than a creator in the role of God: money , power, celebrity or influence. So they do believe in and seek this perverted version of God which mirrors the ego.
Atheists will never know if they are correct; they will wink out.
Believers will know they were right to see God's potential each day in everyone and everything when He welcomes us home.
This is a much happier ending/ beginning.
2006-10-10 12:55:44 · answer #6 · answered by Charlie Kicksass 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It's impossible to prove a negative.
Infantile people will always need to believe that God is out there ready to spank them when they are naughty but grown ups control themselves without the fear of some big daddy in the sky.
2006-10-10 12:27:57 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
Science deals with measurable data. It cannot prove or disprove the existence of God.
2006-10-10 12:27:17 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 1⤋
Science, if it can be considered an entity, has NEVER tried to prove or disprove the existence of God. They exist independently and are not mutually exclusive.
2006-10-10 12:24:31 · answer #9 · answered by dunno 2 · 6⤊ 1⤋
And, further to your question, have the religious been able to prove that god does exist?
2006-10-10 12:28:56 · answer #10 · answered by gjstoryteller 5 · 3⤊ 1⤋