Does God prove the existence of Science? (moral, beliefs, evolution)

[Scuba Pete]

What are your thoughts?

[meogi]

I don't really understand the question I think... by switching the two words, it makes no sense.

[Jayhawker Soule]

God-talk has a way of doing that ...

[Scott1]

I do agree that the question makes little sense, but I think I know what you're getting at.

Faith and science: "Though faith is above reason, there can never be any real discrepancy between faith and reason. Since the same God who reveals mysteries and infuses faith has bestowed the light of reason on the human mind, God cannot deny himself, nor can truth ever contradict truth." "Consequently, methodical research in all branches of knowledge, provided it is carried out in a truly scientific manner and does not override moral laws, can never conflict with the faith, because the things of the world and the things of faith derive from the same God. The humble and persevering investigator of the secrets of nature is being led, as it were, by the hand of God in spite of himself, for it is God, the conserver of all things, who made them what they are."

[Scuba Pete]

Yes there is a point to the question.

[robtex]

Netdoc one complication. Science is the study of what exists or as www.hyperdictionary.com says "science is the ablity to produce solutions in some problem domain"

God is a higher being believed to exist but unproven. There are theories ideas and stipulations with varying levels of validity and continuity to them but in the end no physical proof.

Knowing that It is illogicial to say that a belief which is unprovable can "prove" a study.

So my answer to your question at this time is to say that God is incapable of proving science to man. based on the stipulations that God is a blief that is unprovable and science is a vessel for ascertaining information and an unprovable entity is not capicable in-and-of-itself of proving that which is known to exists.

What may be an alternate theory and I may be wrong but I am wondering if you were trying go this way....is to say that God ---based on belief ---has created the world and used science as his medium. That evolution, the laws of nature that science hasa uncovered are a formula put into motion by a higher power and may or may not be micro or macro manged by such a said power.

Understand though that it is still a belief and not a fact because of the inclusion of an inproven element.

As a species we run on beliefs daily and maybe don't always acknowledge them. or instance as I drive home from work I believe various autos on the road will do various things at various times based on observations. They are beliefs though because I cannot see the driver or read his mind. I see the car next to me slowly edging closer to my lane and believe that even though the driver has not turned on the signal that he/she will switch into my lane and I adjust my driving speed (as opposed to randomly adjusting my driving speed) to accomodate the auto. That happens to me eveyday...Texas ain't a big blinker state.

I believe that my dog has love for me and his way of showing it is by licking my legs and hands all the time and following me around and sometimes sleeping in my room at night. In this lifetime I will never prove that my dog loves me. To me my belief is satisfing enough and I have a strong love for my dog.

A belief is a committment to a theory before it is ablity to be known is accessable or the where the ablity to know is never accessable.

Reading death row cases is a good way to illustrate this point. I made a post about the scott peterson case on my plea against the death penalty yesterday. In it I said I was not supportive of putting a man on death row on circumstanial evidence alone. I do however believe from what I know that he is guilty as do the jurors who convicted. Some jurors and people who know Mr Peterson may believe they have a motive. In this lifetime there will very unlikey be proof that Scott killed Lacey but in the end there is still Lacy's lifeless body and evidence that she was killed. Just by someone who at this point is unprovable but believable. God is like that to me. I also think that may be where you are going with your question. Science and the world around us has led me (and you?) to believe there is a God that made a world through some systmatic approach. As it has been said we will never know if there is a God until we die and even than it is a belief that we will know if there is a God as opposed to a proven reality.

Without beliefs we would function as a race and as an indivdual at a severly dimished capicity. I can drive home today comfortable in my bliefs that lane switchers don't use blinkers all the time and that my dog loves me go to sleep and wake up the next morning and feel content in my belief without having to prove either to anyone.

The danger with religion is when someone or some group feels the insecurity that comes without a proof on an enitity that is unprovable instead of realizing that we go day to day month to month year to year making short and long term decisions based on belief and that it is actually normal and beneficial for man at times to operate this way.

[Scuba Pete]

There are no complications and while the question may NOT make sense to many here, it DOES make sense. More sense than the reverse hypothesis. Not being able to get your mind around a concept does not invalidate the concept.

[Scott1]

Originally Posted by NetDoc

There are no complications and while the question may NOT make sense to many here, it DOES make sense. More sense than the reverse hypothesis. Not being able to get your mind around a concept does not invalidate the concept.

Normally, I enjoy a good tap-dance, but how about you just let us in on your little secret!

[Jayhawker Soule]

Originally Posted by NetDoc

Not being able to get your mind around a concept does not invalidate the concept.

And being able to warp your mind around a concept does not validate the concept.

[Scuba Pete]

It's not a tap dance.

I have always contended that God designed and implemented the rules that govern what we refer to as "science".

Consequently, scientists are studying God, whether they want to admit it or not.

So, if God is in full control of these physical rules and processes, is Science real?