If God can not be proven in scientific way, is He unscientific?

[questfortruth]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Re-formulated thesis: "I believe, that there is bottle, inside which is all knowledge of reality: "in vina veritas" (the Greeks have said). If people would drink out that bottle, they can not be atheists ever again. "

Proof:
Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. The definition of word "God": Any Omniscient Being is God. But God is not atheist. The definition of word "atheist": one who rejects the God (look the definition of word "God" above). "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

 

[Hildeburh]

Who cares, does everything that gives meaning, connection and identity in our lives need to be explained by science?

 

[exchemist]

No theory in science is ever "proven", so lack of "proof" of God's existence would not disqualify it from being a scientific concept. Science deals in evidence, not proof.

However the lack of reproducible evidence for any God hypothesis does make it an unscientific idea.

That does not mean that scientists must be atheist. It just means that any conception they may have of God lies outside the scope of science, and that any discussion of God in science is inappropriate.

 

[exchemist]

Who cares, does everything that gives meaning, connection and identity in our lives need to be explained by science?

Indeed, no it doesn't.

 

[Altfish]

Yes, gods are unscientific.

 

[Samael_Khan]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

It isnt that if a God exists science cannot prove him. Science constantly makes discoveries and it could be the case that science cannot prove God yet but can possibly prove God in the future.

 

[Maximus]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

There are many logical arguments for the existence of a Creator. We could start with the fact of our existence.

It is much easier, in my opinion, to show that the opposite view (atheism) is false; it is an irrational position, arrived at only through logical confusion and muddled thinking.

However (from the Eastern Orthodox perspective, as you likely know), the full, true nature of God is beyond the comprehension of finite minds (though certain attributes can be discerned).

 

[Heyo]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

From "Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God" I deduce that you see omniscience as the defining characteristic of a god.
With that definition we can set up a scientific experiment. We assume such an omniscient being exists. If it is omniscient it will know that we are conducting an experiment. It would also know how to influence the experiment (or know that it is impossible to influence ->Case 2). It would also know if it is wiser to not influence the experiment (Case 3)
Experiment: wait for exactly one day for a prediction of the next 3 earthquakes with a magnitude above 3 that will be reported on the news here on this OP.
When that prediction fails to appear or fails to be accurate we have shown one of three things:
Case 1 : such a being does not exist or
Case 2 : such a being may exist but it is our fate to believe it doesn't exist or
Case 3 : such a being may exist but it is better for us to believe it doesn't exist.

 

[Galateasdream]

Basically, yes. God cannot be a scientific hypothesis. Doesn't mean God doesn't exist, or that there cannot be good evidence or argument for God, merely that science precludes non-naturalistic explanations pretty much by default.

 

[stvdv]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

If God can not be proven in scientific way, is He unscientific?

IMHO:
Science is "below mind"
Spirituality is "beyond mind"

Hence Spirituality can not be proven by Science

 

[Erebus]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

Omniscience doesn't automatically preclude atheism.

An omniscient being that didn't believe in any other gods could still be an atheist if they also didn't consider themselves to be a god.


As for whether or not gods are scientific, you can certainly study them in a scientific way. You would generally treat them as cultural or psychological phenomena though. I know that god concepts have been a point of interest for anthropologists, psychologists and neuroscientists.

 

[Polymath257]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

Do you believe a human can know absolutely everything? If not, your argument for the existence of God fails.

 

[HonestJoe]

If God can not be proven in scientific way, is He unscientific?

No, because the word “unscientific” has a clear set of definitions and none of them cover that. It should also be noted that this doesn’t relate to the actual content of your post.

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

That is technically true but not for the reason you suggest. Atheism is a belief and if a person knew absolutely everything, they couldn’t believe anything by definition. They couldn’t be a theist either. They would know the answer to the unknowns that underlay our beliefs.

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

Someone being omniscient (especially as a hypothetical) wouldn’t automatically make them a god and certainly wouldn’t automatically make them the specific Christian God you’re thinking of. Proposed proofs for the existence of some kind of all-knowing and/or all-powerful being should be kept entirely separate from any kind of religious belief or doctrine.

 

[Mock Turtle]

There are many logical arguments for the existence of a Creator. We could start with the fact of our existence.

It is much easier, in my opinion, to show that the opposite view (atheism) is false; it is an irrational position, arrived at only through logical confusion and muddled thinking.

However (from the Eastern Orthodox perspective, as you likely know), the full, true nature of God is beyond the comprehension of finite minds (though certain attributes can be discerned).

Last sentence - which is very convenient - for those who believe such. The fact of our existence speaks of what? That life has a way of promoting itself? What would be the opposite - death promoting itself?

 

[epronovost]

Who cares, does everything that gives meaning, connection and identity in our lives need to be explained by science?

Well yes it does. If we are to understand who and how we are we need to study how we think, how we relate to things, how our identity is molded. Such knowledge has numerous application be it to cure mental illnesses, improve education, mitigate cognitive bias and prejudices, etc. To derive good theories we need a proper methodology. Thus yes, science must study and explain what gives meaning, connection and identity in our lives.

 

[Polymath257]

There are many logical arguments for the existence of a Creator. We could start with the fact of our existence.

How, precisely, is that evidence for a conscious creator as opposed to the working of natural forces? Or would you consider those natural forces to be a 'creator'?

It is much easier, in my opinion, to show that the opposite view (atheism) is false; it is an irrational position, arrived at only through logical confusion and muddled thinking.

Please demonstrate that. I'd love to see your argument.

However (from the Eastern Orthodox perspective, as you likely know), the full, true nature of God is beyond the comprehension of finite minds (though certain attributes can be discerned).

I'm hearing the Church Lady saying 'Isn't that convenient!'

That seems like a nice way to avoid the issue as opposed to actually dealing with the facts as we can see them.

 

[Twilight Hue]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

We could go the route of a paradox by asking a simple question...

"Is God an atheist"?

 

[Stevicus]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

I think it's conceivable that God could be "proven" in a scientific way, but it might require a more elaborate, scientifically-oriented explanation of how a singular being called God actually "created" the universe.

For example, we start off with "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

It would seem to me that whoever wrote this sentence is implying that he or she had first-hand knowledge of this event. Even if the intended audience were a bunch of ignorant goat-herders who couldn't possibly understand the mechanisms and processes God used in "creating" the heaven and the earth, they should at least have something beyond just some mysterious "magic" that we shouldn't even try to understand.

That's probably where it becomes "unscientific," since the entire message and presentation of religion is that we're supposed to believe that we are fortunate and blessed recipients of some entity's benevolent "magic," and we're supposed to just have faith and leave it at that. Anything else is "beyond our comprehension" and some "mystery" that we shouldn't try to investigate or solve scientifically.

That being said, your hypothetical about a human knowing absolutely everything, this would mean that such a human would know and understand all the "science" of creation to the point where it wouldn't be a mystery. To that human, it wouldn't be "magic," but an actual physical process which can be measured and observed scientifically.

 

[Audie]

To my opinion, the perfect proof can sound something like that:

Thesis: "If a human would know absolutely everything, then he can not be an atheist."

Proof: Indeed, such one is Omniscient one, thus, he would be God. But God is not atheist. "you are Gods", says Bible at least in two verses: in Old Testament and in New Testament.

Ah so all of science is unscientific. This is a revelation.

 

[Audie]

It isnt that if a God exists science cannot prove him. Science constantly makes discoveries and it could be the case that science cannot prove God yet but can possibly prove God in the future.

Holy mother of god, how many times must we say
that science is not capable of proving ANYTHING!!!!!