Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Does God Exist?

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by brotherstein on September 18, 2009 19:07:23 UTC

Both of your arguments are specious. Firstly, in Scientific Proof of God's Existence, Marco Biagini states, "The existence of these mathematical equations implies the existence of a personal, conscious and intelligent Creator." Put simply, "Why?" I see no connection between the existence of mathematical equations, no matter how profound, implies the existence of God.

Secondly, in Why God Isn't Real, Fizzmick statements are based solely on Christian theology. With the vast and different conceptions of God that exist today, why would any (supposedly) learned individual limit oneself to the Christian view?

Personally, I believe God exists. Firstly, I believe that there is a difference between good and evil, between truth and falsehood, and between right and wrong. I see no way this can be so unless there is some a priori "something" that polarizes reality to make this so. I do not claim to know the nature of this "something", and I label it "God" for convenience. I do not claim that this God is sentient.

And this is the crux of the matter. Science involves observing physical phenomena, things that our five senses reveal to us. God has not revealed him/her/itself to these senses, despite the many claims that phenomena reveal the presence of God. God is a matter of faith, which the Bible says is belief in things unseen (and no, I'm not a Christian). Simply put, God is not at present subject to scientific observation.

I will even go so far as to say that those who espouse so-called intelligent design are perilously close to blasphemy, in that they are ascribing a matter of faith (things unseen) to things that are seen. In fact, they are simply displaying their mental inadequacy.

One final point: My belief in God (or something) is simply that - belief. I don't KNOW if God exists. I might be wrong, but if I am, my argument would then imply that there is no fundamental reason to choose truth, right, and good over falsehood, wrong, and evil. Murder, for example, is not wrong, it simply is a bad choice based on the likely consequences to the murderer.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins