paarsurrey
Veteran Member
What is wrong with that? It is a part of human history.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Failure of science to find God; itself a proof that one true God does exist
- Thread starter paarsurrey
- Start date
What is wrong with that? It is a part of human history.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Sadly not.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
While I agree with much of your premise, your conclusion is not supported by it.
Science must fail to find God. Science must also fail to prove the non-existence of God. Science deals with natural phenomenon and God, by definition is super natural. That's like trying to measure ohms with a ruler.
Science must fail to find God. Science must also fail to prove the non-existence of God. Science deals with natural phenomenon and God, by definition is super natural. That's like trying to measure ohms with a ruler.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Why should you be sad?
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Please elaborate you view point.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
The simplicity of this plum evades a few, but there is really nothing to elaborate on. It's elegance is inherent within it's simplicity. Maybe the definition from Dictionary.com will help you to understand...
su·per·nat·u·ral   [soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl]
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to God or a deity.
3. of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.
4. of, pertaining to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult.
su·per·nat·u·ral   [soo-per-nach-er-uhl, -nach-ruhl]
adjective
1. of, pertaining to, or being above or beyond what is natural; unexplainable by natural law or phenomena; abnormal.
2. of, pertaining to, characteristic of, or attributed to God or a deity.
3. of a superlative degree; preternatural: a missile of supernatural speed.
4. of, pertaining to, or attributed to ghosts, goblins, or other unearthly beings; eerie; occult.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
If God has any effect at all on the natural, he is theorectically susceptible to science.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
God created the rules the world operates on: the physics, the chemistry, the plate tectonics and even the evolution. This is obvious to me but lost on others.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
Because your argument is flawed, and you refuse to see it. "God was never said to be discoverable by science. We have yet to find God via science. Therefore God exists."
Now, replace god with leprechauns, Frodo Baggins, the Tooth Fairy, etc etc. Argument still works, therefore they all exist.
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
How would you support that?
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
I support it completely! Any God can create a man... it takes a real God to create evolution and see what happens. That's a God with some faith!
PolyHedral
Superabacus Mystic
Only if he did it on the first attempt.I support it completely! Any God can create a man... it takes a real God to create evolution and see what happens. That's a God with some faith!
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
We are probably the first sentient species here on earth, but I doubt we're the last. I also doubt that we're the only sentients in the universe. God only knows... and I mean that!Only if he did it on the first attempt.
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Because your argument is flawed, and you refuse to see it. "God was never said to be discoverable by science. We have yet to find God via science. Therefore God exists."
Now, replace god with leprechauns, Frodo Baggins, the Tooth Fairy, etc etc. Argument still works, therefore they all exist.
Did I present that argument? I don't think so.
Gjallarhorn
N'yog-Sothep
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Science is not designed for that; hence it cannot find the one true creator God.
Quran mention it clearly:
[6:102] The Originator of the heavens and the earth! How can He have a son when He has no consort, and when He has created everything and has knowledge of all things?
[6:103] Such is Allah, your Lord. There is no God but He, the Creator of all things, so worship Him. And He is Guardian over everything.
[6:104] Eyes cannot reach Him but He reaches the eyes. And He is the Incomprehensible, the All-Aware.
[6:105] Proofs have indeed come to you from your Lord; so whoever sees, it is for his own good; and whoever becomes blind, it is to his own harm. And I am not a guardian over you.
The Holy Quran Arabic text with Translation in English text and Search Engine - Al Islam Online
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Because your argument is flawed, and you refuse to see it. "God was never said to be discoverable by science. We have yet to find God via science. Therefore God exists."
Now, replace god with leprechauns, Frodo Baggins, the Tooth Fairy, etc etc. Argument still works, therefore they all exist.
God was never claimed by religion to be discoverable by science; if religion would have claimed that then the failure of science in this connection would have been meaningful.
It is always reason supported by revelation that could reach to the one true God.