For Christians, Atheists, Agnostics, and everyone else.?

Question

Give a scientific (please, no Bible verses) explanation for God's existance or non-existance. Please, no bashing of other religons or beliefs.

Thanks for the answers so far, and I know God can't be proven or disproven, I just want some facts pointing one way or the other.

Answer 1

Science deals with material things. God is immaterial. You cannot put God in a beaker and test him in a lab. However, you can use arguments like the Cosmological Argument, or the Teleological Argument, which point to God's existence using science. There is not enough room here to spell these arguments out. I suggest researching them on the internet. www.reasonablefaith.org is a good place to start.

str.org - has valuable resources.

Also, www.leestrobel.com has little videos answering questions that concern God's existence. I imagine you'll find this last link the most helpful.

Answer 2

Are you an Agnostic? I've been taught that agnostics believe God might be real, but there's no way to know for sure. So If you believe God might be real, you are an agnostic. Is Atheism just as unprovable as Christianity? I think you are comparing apples to oranges. Atheism is the opposite of theism, not Christianity. The way you phrased your question puts atheists at a real disadvantage. I'm not an atheist, but I don't think they believe they can "prove" that something doesn't exist: how could you? You would have to know everything about everything to do it. What they believe is that the evidence is so overwhelming that there is no way a rational person could or should believe in God. Christianity makes claims about what happened in history which could, at least in theory, be proven. Of course theory and reality are not the same thing. I can't 'prove' Christianity is true any more than an atheist can 'prove' that God doesn't exist. But the reasons we can't aren't the same. I hope this helps and I also hope I haven't butchered the atheist position. If I have, please forgive me.

Answer 3

God, as an entity, can neither be proven nor disproven. On the other hand, neither can Santa Claus, Unicorns, FSM, or anything else to which you add the clause "It is beyond human ability to understand."

The "works" of God, on the other hand, are not so immune to scrutiny. (By "works", I mean the idea that God does and has done certain things to elicit certain human behaviors. These are said to include: Creation of Heaven and Hell, answering prayers, healing the sick, sending Christ to earth, performing miracles etc. and differ by religion.) Since these "works" take place in our world, they are easily disproven. There are many studies, for example that show prayer doesn't do anything that chance alone doesn't do. So the real question is: If there exists a God beyond all human perception, but does not affect our world in any way, why should we care?

Answer 4

Okay, the simple reason for the argument that there are no gods is this: If there were gods, then there could be no science because every single study ever performed would be subject to interference from gods. Simple things such as adding pure sodium to water not always have the expected chemical reaction as a result, because those chemical reactions would have to add the disclaimer "findings are subject to the will of the gods and are not guaranteed to be able to be reproduced."

Fortunately, chemical reactions occur as predicted, and hence your refrigerator keeps your food cold, your microwave will warm your food, your car will run with unleaded gasoline, and all of the appliances in your home that are in good working order will turn on and work when supplied the necessary electrical or chemical power.

Now, although this does not prove that no gods exist anywhere in the universe, it definitely proves that they do NOT take an active participatory role here on earth.

Here's a few links to the sodium/water experiment, if you've never heard of it. On earth, the results are ALWAYS explosive.

http://www.powerlabs.org/chemlabs/sodium.htm
http://www.allatoms.com/SodiumWaterExpt/NaExp.htm
http://www.theodoregray.com/PeriodicTable/Elements/011/index.html

all of the other reasons are purely logical, just as the reasons for god's existence are purely speculative.

Answer 5

There is no evidence that supports the existence of god. All there is is a lack of evidence for alternative explanations of some questions.

Over the last 1000 years science has provided natural explanations to hundreds of questions that had previously been answered with 'God Did It' To say that the currently open questions are all answered by 'God Did It' and will not have natural answers as all the other ones have turned out to have is to be incredibly blinkered.


There is as much evidence for the existence of dragons as for the existence of god. How many people seriously be live that dragons exist? (But you can not ever prove their non-existence, which is the argument a lot of theists like to fall back on.)

Answer 6

I can give a logical explanation that applies directly to God (and probably to Allah too--can someone tell me in a message if Allah is defined as both perfect and a creator too?) and proves he cannot exist as defined. Science can merely reduce the probability of a deity existing because it can rule out things that people incorrectly assume are the work of said deity, but with some simple logic, I can disprove God completely:

==================

I can say with 100% certainty that God (capitalized to mean the Christian god), as Christians define him, doesn't exist. I can say this because God, as he is defined, is a self-contradiction, and a self-contradiction can't exist.

Example: one can also say with 100% certainty that a square with 21 sides does not exist. Not because one has searched every iota of existence without finding it, but because a 21-sided square is impossible, being a self-contradiction. Same thing with someone who weighs 150 and 250 pounds at the same time--a self-contradiction by definition cannot exist.

I'm going to prove that the Christian God is a self-contradiction like the examples above, and therefore ALSO can't exist:

The Christian God is defined as perfect, and also as a creator (it isn't really important what God created or didn't create, just that he created something). To be perfect is to be complete. To be complete is to lack nothing. Desire can only exist when there is a lack of something (that something is what is desired). Therefore, since God is perfect, he desires nothing. Since he desires nothing, obviously he would not desire to create anything. A perfect being would do nothing but exist, because actively DOING something would imply a desire (to do whatever it is), which a perfect being cannot have by definition.

Therefore, an entity who is both perfect and a creator is a self-contradiction that cannot exist, just like a 21-sided square. Since Christians define their god this way, one can say with absolute certainty that this god does not, indeed, cannot exist.

P.S. Gummy: "Evidence follows faith?" That's the silliest thing I've ever heard. Real evidence requires no faith--only our five senses.

Answer 7

Let me start by just making the statement, that there must be a beginning and an end to all things, when a child pushes a toy car, it starts to roll, if the child stops pushing it stops rolling and when he restarts pushing it it goes one again. Plato stated that the universe must have a source of all things, a source where all things are created. Aristotle took it one step further and called this thing the uncreated creator. Something or someone had to start the initial movement, and that someone controls how it continues to move, and that someone will bring it to a stop.
To those who believe out of faith, that someone or something is God. To those with no faith they have nothing to believe in.
So unmoved mover, is therefore a necesity, that creator of all things is a necesity, since there has never been proof otherwise yes even with science, that we all came from one source.
Have a great day and God bless those who beleive and especially those who don't.

Answer 8

What would you accept as proof?
If you were shown a mysterious light in the vague form of a human, would you be convinced?
Seeing is not believing.
'Proof' can only come through reasoning.
Even simple reasoning.
An elementary scientific rule is nothing moves unless an exterior force acts upon it.
The universe is moving.
Its not just moving, but moving intelligently.
Referring to scientists, The New York Times comments: “They have Ph.D.’s and occupy positions at some of the better universities. The case they make against Darwinism does not rest on the authority of Scripture; rather, it proceeds from premises that are scientific."

Answer 9

So far, everything we observe in the universe has a naturalistic, scientific explanation; and those that we once thought had supernatural causes turned out to actually have a natural explanation.

If everything is governed by the laws of physics, what purpose does god serve?

Answer 10

lol, right, i know where you are going with this, but there is no proof either way. there is just no way to fit God into the equation of the universe, not just life, heaven or hell, this planet and how it was created, but also to all the other billions of galaxies, stars and planets. he can't fit into the equation of self. the only it could come close to fit, is if it (God) was a type of energy flow, a "life force", but it would be the string that connects everything, everyone. and, if that were so, "he" would not be able to create, destroy, love, hate; it wouldn't have emotion. at least as we know the equation, i mean i'd love to prove God is or isn't real, so we as people can just get over it and move on.