Is God something that can be understood through observation?

Question

Proponents of Intelligent Design certainly seem to think so. They seem to think that the idea of an "Intelligent Designer" is scientific. This would certainly seem to place "God" within the universe as an object of empirical study. What do you think? Can we learn about "God" using beakers and test tubes? Is it conceivable that an "Intelligent Creator" might someday be a necessary part of some scientific theory? What are your thoughts on this issue? I'll probably ask this question in a few different categories to get some different answers and perspectives. I write this question because I saw an article in my local paper advocating intelligent design in science classes. I'm definitely writing a letter to the editor. :D

Answer 1

Well this really depends on who's God you are trying to test. Many people define God in such a way that he can never be understood and can never be proved or disproved. Many of the advocates for intelligent design do in fact define God in such a way. Intelligent design is really just creationism under another name, and, like creationism, it is not science. Science depends on observation and evidence. Scientific theories need to be disprovable and they need to make predictions. Intelligent design accomplishes neither of these. In the many debates I have found myself in, many ID advocates fall back on "God did it" as an explanation. Such an answer is not disprovable if God is an all-mighty being who is beyond our comprehension. Also, it is not possible to predict the actions of such a God.

Creation should be taught in a theology class (and this means all religions, not just Christianity) and kept out of the science classroom. There is a reason why you see zero articles about ID/creation in peer-reviewed science journals. Creation is not science and it's as simple as that. Please write a letter to your editor expressing outrage at the idea of introducing intelligent design into the science curriculum.

Answer 2

It's not that an intelligent designer is scientific but rather that scientific study - particularly the field of quantum mechanics and physics - concludes that an intelligent designer is 'necessary'. Those on the religious side of the 'science v religion' argument, use this new found study as a 'told you so' argument, whilst the scientists, who defined the necessity of an intelligent designer shy away from the term 'God'. Science itself does not propose to study directly (whether in test tubes or beakers') the "intelligent designer" itslef, what they do concede however is that the study and discovery of quantum mechanics and physics suggest heavily that an intelligent designer is absolutely necessary for their own findings to be conclusive and true. A victory for the religious folk and an unexpected conclusion for the scientist. An interesting question and one which will no doubt receive a lot of responses. Good luck with your letter to the editor!

Answer 3

There are three camps in this discussion:

My God as I understand him is the only way to believe in Him and those conclusions I choose to take from what I read and hear are the correct conclusions and any disagreement from others is to be met with maximum resistance and intolerance.

God is bigger than how I understand him and is bigger than everyones understanding of him combined and some of Him can be revealed through different avenues of exploration including religion and science.

There is no God, or, we are God. Otherwise not much different from the first camp.

I choose the middle camp.

Answer 4

as i always believed that each one of us has his own journey that will lead him to believe or not in God either from religion books, observation, heritage and coincidence.
when it comes to science....each and every phenomena in our universe is scientifically explainable if not now then later.
God made this dilemma to make sure that we choose him on our own will not by see it to believe it which then will have no meaning but by looking at this huge build and see how complicated it is and believe this can't be a coincidence there must be great power who made this
when sir Darwin wrote his theory he wrote it in the science terms not in what he believed so keeping science separate from religion is always good idea to avoid burning people who will have new types of mental disorder or psychological problems

Answer 5

no he can not.