I am sure people thought long ago that we would never be able to walk on the moon and we did. Surly one day we would be able to create a vehicle to travle to heaven or whatever.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AjnW68qZzn0lE2qYT6noLl_sy6IX;_ylv=3?qid=20071127084650AApIz0S
2007-11-27 08:32:57 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
"Surly one day we would be able to create a vehicle to travle to heaven or whatever."
What a good idea, let's start to develop one right away, where should we start?
2007-11-27 08:36:11 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Very strong arguments have been made that any being worthy of the title "deity" would not fall within an empirical domain (see David Hume). If this is true, scientific atheism is not a rational position, since it asks for evidence where none can be given. But, if God cannot be shown to exist by science, that means such a being produces no measurable effect in space/time, which means said deity is irrelevant even if it does exist.
2007-11-27 22:02:45 · answer #2 · answered by neil s 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
Science cannot prove a negative. In other words, if there is no scientific method to prove that X exists, then the lack of method does *not* prove that X does *not* exist.
Furthermore, if the nature of X is divinity, one must ask oneself, does X *wish to be* detected? With the scores of mythos --be it Christian, Pagan, Hindu, you name it-- detailing the nature of Divinity as intelligent enough to avoid detection, then the very nature of Divinity is one whose existence cannot be proved scientifically. The question, "Does Divinity exist?", is therefore not scientific in nature, and in an odd way, science is pretty much on the side supporting the probability of Divinity's existence by simple fact of its methods supporting the questions which lends Divinity's existence at least *some* probability. Of course, one is also free, scientifically, to believe in the equally probable non-existence of Divinity (X), but belief in a non-existence of X is supported by the same methods that support the idea that the existence of X is equally *probable.*
2007-11-27 16:51:38 · answer #3 · answered by Ruadhán J McElroy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It simply means that God is outside the realm of scientific observation and testing, therefore science has no say in whether he exists or not. It's like asking what is beyond the universe.
We can, however, point to logical reasons or indirect evidence for a creator God but ultimately, it's a matter of faith.
2007-11-27 16:46:51 · answer #4 · answered by paul h 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Are you kidding me?!?!
lol, there is no possible way anyone will every be able to make a vehicle that can go to heaven. And of course there is a God.Jesus Christ. Read the bible, and if you don't believe that is true, read some of the chapters, in those chapters it states things that were to come, and the bible was written before these things happened and they happened. try to prove that. And it says what is to come, read revolutions it states what is happening at this moment.
2007-11-27 16:45:46 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, science never proves anything. It is about theories that explain evidence, and these theories are then tested. If something is proven then it is a fact, which is the basis for a scientific theory. The theory itself is there to explain, not to prove.
As for God, it is illogical to claim that a god does not exist, but it is acceptable to say that it is highly improbable. There is a point where absence of evidence becomes evidence of absence...
2007-11-27 16:38:53 · answer #6 · answered by Shinkirou Hasukage 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
We could prove god's existence indirectly if we could prove people are something more than robots. Currently scientists are closing in on the brain and its more subjective feature... "mind".
If we find that the mind is an illusion, and merely a natural byproduct of a highly developed brain... that would be a huge blow to the quest for proving a god's existence. Finding the opposite though - that minds are more than just a clump of brain cells... that would be a big discovery for theists.
2007-11-27 16:40:58 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
In my opinion, God is non-existent. Science doesn't prove everything, we're only human, what we say really has little or no validity. I still think God was a way to explain science back in the day, therefore, he is not real. Who knows, though..
2007-11-27 16:37:57 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wish that we could just make something and go to Heaven. BUT, Heaven is more of a state of being. You are with Christ. It's not something you can touch right now. Plus, God is so holy that the mere sight of Him would kill a mortal body.
It's ok to just believe in Him, not ever putting your finger on proof. Relieving really.
2007-11-27 16:41:00 · answer #9 · answered by ....... 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Those people could still look up at the night sky and see that there was a moon. Not so for Heaven.
2007-11-27 16:37:16 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋