English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Science: "systematic knowledge gained through observation and experimentation".
I'm NOT asking if the Bible is wrong. I'm NOT asking if "x" religion is wrong.
I want you to use observation and experimentation and then... answer this question.
Job 42:5 (The Bible)

2007-02-14 01:48:33 · 16 answers · asked by Gabo 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

16 answers

amen! you cannot use science to prove God is not real!!Keep up the good work!!God bless you!


They can to co-exist.All things are possible with God.Omnipotence means all-powerful.Omniscience means all-knowing.There is no reason why they cannot co-exist.Do not be so bull-headed.

2007-02-14 01:52:57 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Scientific methods are very good at proving that something exists or is true or can be explained--but science can never really prove that something does not exist.
Religious believers may explain the existence and the workings of all sorts of natural phenomena in terms of God and His works. But proponents of science look for other explanations for these same things--and generally hold that such explanations, once they are tested scientifically and seem to hold up to such scrutiny (through observation and experimentation), do not require the invocation of the existence of God.
Such scientific results do not in any way "prove" that God does not exist--they only demonstrate that there are other explanations for the phenomena in question.

2007-02-14 02:25:26 · answer #2 · answered by clicksqueek 6 · 0 0

Science, no, math, yes.

Free will is a necessary consequence of the existence of a meaningful deity (meaningful in the sense of being relevant, not moot).

Free will is an impossibility in the universe in which we find ourselves. The mind is a process of the brain, which is a computational structure. The choices the mind makes are then computable. This is not free will.

Thus, either no deity exists, or the deity that does exist is entirely moot. Since a moot deity would not fit most definitions of 'deity' in the first place, the assertion that no deity exists is mathematically sound.

2007-02-14 01:53:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

No. Non-existence can't be proven. For instance, you can't prove that the tooth fairy is not real. Your argument might be that you put the coin under the pillow.That doesn't mean that the tooth fairy didn't put a coin under other pillows.
Existance, in order to be believable must be proven. By not being able to prove non-existance, is certainly now proof of existance.

2007-02-14 02:10:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You might just as well ask: "Can you prove with science that mermaids do not exist? Can you prove with science that dragons do not exist? Leprauchans, unicorns, monsters, fairies, santa claus, easter bunny, etc etc...?" So if we cannot prove the non existance of these things, then what? They must exist???

One does not need to prove things don't exist, for the umpteenth time now, it is the burden of those who claim something exists to provide proof of its existance.

Learn to think.

2007-02-14 01:57:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I'd mention something about proving a negative, and the burden of proof being in your lap... but this question is up here every day and if you haven't noticed by now that its becoming as common as the daily moronic "why are there still monkeys" question.

2007-02-14 01:54:55 · answer #6 · answered by billthakat 6 · 0 0

LOGICAL CONCEPT OF GOD

My first question to the atheist will be: "What is the definition of God?" For a person to say there is no God, he should know what is the meaning of God. If I hold a book and say that ‘this is a pen’, for the opposite person to say, ‘it is not a pen’, he should know what is the definition of a pen, even if he does not know nor is able to recognise or identify the object I am holding in my hand. For him to say this is not a pen, he should at least know what a pen means. Similarly for an atheist to say ‘there is no God’, he should at least know the concept of God. His concept of God would be derived from the surroundings in which he lives. The god that a large number of people worship has got human qualities - therefore he does not believe in such a god. Similarly a Muslim too does not and should not believe in such false gods.

If a non-Muslim believes that Islam is a merciless religion with something to do with terrorism; a religion which does not give rights to women; a religion which contradicts science; in his limited sense that non-Muslim is correct to reject such Islam. The problem is he has a wrong picture of Islam. Even I reject such a false picture of Islam, but at the same time, it becomes my duty as a Muslim to present the correct picture of Islam to that non-Muslim i.e. Islam is a merciful religion, it gives equal rights to the women, it is not incompatible with logic, reason and science; if I present the correct facts about Islam, that non-Muslim may Inshallah accept Islam.

Similarly the atheist rejects the false gods and the duty of every Muslim is to present the correct concept of God which he shall Insha Allah not refuse.

QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE

The methods of proving the existence of God with usage of the material provided in the ‘Concept of God in Islam’ to an atheist may satisfy some but not all.

Many atheists demand a scientific proof for the existence of God. I agree that today is the age of science and technology. Let us use scientific knowledge to kill two birds with one stone, i.e. to prove the existence of God and simultaneously prove that the Qur’an is a revelation of God.

If a new object or a machine, which no one in the world has ever seen or heard of before, is shown to an atheist or any person and then a question is asked, " Who is the first person who will be able to provide details of the mechanism of this unknown object? After little bit of thinking, he will reply, ‘the creator of that object.’ Some may say ‘the producer’ while others may say ‘the manufacturer.’ What ever answer the person gives, keep it in your mind, the answer will always be either the creator, the producer, the manufacturer or some what of the same meaning, i.e. the person who has made it or created it. Don’t grapple with words, whatever answer he gives, the meaning will be same, therefore accept it.


THEORY OF PROBABILITY

In mathematics there is a theory known as ‘Theory of Probability’. If you have two options, out of which one is right, and one is wrong, the chances that you will chose the right one is half, i.e. one out of the two will be correct. You have 50% chances of being correct. Similarly if you toss a coin the chances that your guess will be correct is 50% (1 out of 2) i.e. 1/2. If you toss a coin the second time, the chances that you will be correct in the second toss is again 50% i.e. half. But the chances that you will be correct in both the tosses is half multiplied by half (1/2 x 1/2) which is equal to 1/4 i.e. 50% of 50% which is equal to 25%. If you toss a coin the third time, chances that you will be correct all three times is (1/2 x 1/2 x 1/2) that is 1/8 or 50% of 50% of 50% that is 12½%.

A dice has got six sides. If you throw a dice and guess any number between 1 to 6, the chances that your guess will be correct is 1/6. If you throw the dice the second time, the chances that your guess will be correct in both the throws is (1/6 x 1/6) which is equal to 1/36. If you throw the dice the third time, the chances that all your three guesses are correct is (1/6 x 1/6 x 1/6) is equal to 1/216 that is less than 0.5 %.

Let us apply this theory of probability to the Qur’an, and assume that a person has guessed all the information that is mentioned in the Qur’an which was unknown at that time. Let us discuss the probability of all the guesses being simultaneously correct.

At the time when the Qur’an was revealed, people thought the world was flat, there are several other options for the shape of the earth. It could be triangular, it could be quadrangular, pentagonal, hexagonal, heptagonal, octagonal, spherical, etc. Lets assume there are about 30 different options for the shape of the earth. The Qur’an rightly says it is spherical, if it was a guess the chances of the guess being correct is 1/30.

The light of the moon can be its own light or a reflected light. The Qur’an rightly says it is a reflected light. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/2 and the probability that both the guesses i.e the earth is spherical and the light of the moon is reflected light is 1/30 x 1/2 = 1/60.

Further, the Qur’an also mentions every living thing is made of water. Every living thing can be made up of either wood, stone, copper, aluminum, steel, silver, gold, oxygen, nitrogen, hydrogen, oil, water, cement, concrete, etc. The options are say about 10,000. The Qur’an rightly says that everything is made up of water. If it is a guess, the chances that it will be correct is 1/10,000 and the probability of all the three guesses i.e. the earth is spherical, light of moon is reflected light and everything is created from water being correct is 1/30 x 1/2 x 1/10,000 = 1/60,000 which is equal to about .0017%.



The Qur’an speaks about hundreds of things that were not known to men at the time of its revelation. Only in three options the result is .0017%. I leave it upto you, to work out the probability if all the hundreds of the unknown facts were guesses, the chances of all of them being correct guesses simultaneously and there being not a single wrong guess. It is beyond human capacity to make all correct guesses without a single mistake, which itself is sufficient to prove to a logical person that the origin of the Qur’an is Divine.

QUR’AN IS A BOOK OF SIGNS AND NOT SCIENCE

Let me remind you that the Qur’an is not a book of Science, ‘S-C-I-E-N-C-E’ but a book of Signs ‘S-I-G-N-S’ i.e. a book of ayaats. The Qur’an contains more than 6,000 ayaats, i.e. ‘signs’, out of which more than a thousand speak about Science. I am not trying to prove that the Qur’an is the word of God using scientific knowledge as a yard stick because any yardstick is supposed to be more superior than what is being checked or verified. For us Muslims the Qur’an is the Furqan i.e. criteria to judge right from wrong and the ultimate yardstick which is more superior to scientific knowledge.

But for an educated man who is an atheist, scientific knowledge is the ultimate test which he believes in. We do know that science many a times takes ‘U’ turns, therefore I have restricted the examples only to scientific facts which have sufficient proof and evidence and not scientific theories based on assumptions. Using the ultimate yardstick of the atheist, I am trying to prove to him that the Qur’an is the word of God and it contains the scientific knowledge which is his yardstick which was discovered recently, while the Qur’an was revealed 1400 year ago. At the end of the discussion, we both come to the same conclusion that God though superior to science, is not incompatible with it.


SCIENCE IS ELIMINATING MODELS OF GOD BUT NOT GOD

Francis Bacon, the famous philosopher, has rightly said that a little knowledge of science makes man an atheist, but an in-depth study of science makes him a believer in God. Scientists today are eliminating models of God, but they are not eliminating God. If you translate this into Arabic, it is La illaha illal la, There is no god, (god with a small ‘g’ that is fake god) but God (with a capital ‘G’).

Surah Fussilat:

"Soon We will show them our signs in the (farthest) regions (of the earth), and in their own souls, until it becomes manifest to them that this is the Truth. Is it not enough that thy Lord doth witness all things?"

[Al-Quran 41:53]

2007-02-14 02:56:47 · answer #7 · answered by PeaceKeeper 2 · 0 0

Well, if you go on the science path... You're supposed to try and prove a theory if you say that something DOES exist, not if you say that it doesn't exist. Stick to your Bible, darling!

2007-02-14 01:52:33 · answer #8 · answered by Offkey 7 · 0 0

No, but you can prove it with logic depending on your definition of god. For instance, omnipotence and omniscience can't coexist, so if god has those qualities then he does not exist. If your definition of god has no self-contradictory qualities then no you cannot prove he doesn't exist.

2007-02-14 01:52:54 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

True, unbiased science proves the existence of God.

2007-02-14 01:54:19 · answer #10 · answered by me45404 3 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers