Can science prove the exsitence of God?

[drunktank]

pce wrote in an other thread:

"to have religion is to have faith. to have faith is to believe in something without having evidence. this is the opposite of science. science only assumes something is real once enough evidence is gathered pointinf to it. this is why science is the search for truth, and religion is something to make you feel good-as marx said an opium for mankind."


-

I thought it is something important enough
to be analysed in a different place.

I'm not surely the one
who will prove the existence of god.

In my language "have faith" means "believe strongly"
and the word "science"origins from there.

-

Science is:

1. observation
2. theory based on observation
3. experiments that prove theory

If we apply that method
to religion we have :

1. observation : claims that Jesus existed, etc.
2. theory : theology
3. experiments : a bottle of holy water doesn't stink even after 1 year (I've tried this one). The holy light of the Easter doesn't burn your hands.

If you believe in science,
you accept this theory
until you find another one.

(i have written this again, haven't I?)

(Edited by drunktank at 2:54 am on Aug. 4, 2001)

[pce]

drunktank, discuss this with you, i need to know what a few things are first....

what is: holy water, and the holy light of the easter?

[RedCeltic]

I know Drunktank should be the one to say what it is in his religion... however... in the Roman Catholic church... Holy Water is water blessed by the pope... It is used as one blesses themselves when entering the church. and used in bablismals. Also the Roman Catholics believe in the " Light of Easter"' being lighted in lent.. called "Lenten candles"

I'm only posting this because I've heard the same thing that Drunktank has said ... and while I have not tried it.. know the idea isn't something he made up.

[RedCeltic]

I have to admit my religous back ground manly so I can be open about something I practiced for some years... I was raised in Christianity both Lutheren directly from my mother, and Roman Catholic indirectly from my father. ( What I mean is that that I simply went to church and sunday school for Lutherens while my dad keeping his Catholic faith told me all he knew about it.)

Later I abandoned faith in Christ and joined the ever growing resurgence of the "old religion" or Paganism, wicca, witchcraft. I was what you would call a " Gardnerian"' for a time.. a member of a "garderian coven which practices under teaching of Gerald Gardner...

I learned alot about religion in those days...

I would like to know what others think of Paganism... Expecaly Drunktank who is of a religion I never studied and seems to be of an open minded religion.


(Edited by RedCeltic at 10:50 am on Oct. 6, 2001)

[pce]

if what redceltic says is true (which i'm sure it is) then i don't think the use of holy water and light of easter as experiments that prove theology, is right. instead, i think holy water floating (or holy light of easter not burning) should be the subject of the experiment first. there are many things that might determine why holy water would float (and i'd be interested to know how you did your experiment)

also, i think scientific method is this:

1) problem
2) hypothesis (theory)
3) observation/experiment
4) conclusion

when applied to science vs. religion

1) problem- earth, its inhabitants, the universe, etc. exist

2) hypothesis (theory)- they were created through god/evolution/the big bang/etc.

3)observation/experimtent- gathering of evidence for god/evolution/big bang/etc.*

4)conclusion- the universe, etc. was created by god/big bang/ evolution/etc.

* (i think the only way to prove this problem is through examination of evidence because i don't think there is any experiment that can be used)

i dont know what the conclusion is drunktank, but the reason i trust science more than religion is because science goes through this process, where as religion goes strictly by a book. who knows, maybe science will in the future prove the existence of god (until then i'll believe evolution ). this is why i like science, it is open minded. religion doesn't progress. this is why i call science the search for truth ( also see topic "science=truth? )

[pce]

sorry for not saying this earlier, i just wanted to add.....

religion never admits if it's wrong because it never examines itself, but science is constantly doing this.

[drunktank]

Hey pce,
That's what I'm telling you.

Theology IS science
and God CAN be proved scientifically.

-

Redceltic,

holy water in my religion
is water blessed from a priest
in the 7 of the January.

I tried putting it in a bottle
and it has not smelled ugly yet.

[Nickademus]

Quote: from drunktank on 12:48 pm on Aug. 4, 2001


Theology IS science
and God CAN be proved scientifically.

theology and science are very similary. they are both forms of logic based upon perceptions in life. however, as per my argument in the science = truth? forum the truth, if there is one, can never be found outside of subjective truth. but theology and science can confront each other. someone theologians believe that the existence of god has been proven, while some scientists believe the inexistance of god is proven. who is correct? both use very similar methods but their logic is different.

therefore, i believe that neither science nor theology can prove that god exists. however, both science and theology present humans with the means of subjectively justifying their faith, or lack thereof, in god.

[pce]

drunktank, i don't think theology is science because it just goes by the bible, it never doubts the bible. -am i wrong maybe?

and god can only be proven scientifcally IF god exists...

[pce]

[quote]Quote: from pce on 10:00 pm on Aug. 5, 2001
drunktank, i don't think theology is science because it just goes by the bible, it never doubts the bible. -am i wrong maybe?

...and therfore theology is fundamentally different from science

[Nickademus]

[quote]Quote: from pce on 7:03 am on Aug. 5, 2001

Quote: from pce on 10:00 pm on Aug. 5, 2001
drunktank, i don't think theology is science because it just goes by the bible, it never doubts the bible. -am i wrong maybe?

I'm not catholic or chrisitan for that matter but i dont think that the bible is doubted. however, i believe the meaning of the bible is often doubted. there are numerous interepretations of the bible and its passages. so in a sense, the bible isn't blindly accepted as truth

[pce]

nickademus, the bible might be interpreted differently, but i don't think it is ever doubted as a whole by theology, once againg i maybe wrong, and i'm sure there are exceptions.

also, drunktank, my dad studied chemistry and specialized in water. there are many factors that can cause water to smell when it's been in a bottle for a while.

1) if the water is in a plastic bottle, then if it is exposed to any kind of light, the molecules of the plastic will slowly break apart, mix with the water molecules and smell. (temperature and other things also effect this) if it is not exposed to light, smell will happen much later. if the water is in a glass bottle, this does not apply. both of these cases are true when you have treated water.

2) if the water is natural water (from a river, lake, well) then the smell will occur depending on how much organic matter (bacteria) is in the water. the more, bacteria, the faster will it smell, the less the bacteria the later will it smell. when in the water, the bacteria feeds on salt/other organic matter, grows, and after a while will make the water smell. water coming from different environment has different effects. also, the things from 1) also apply

i'd be interested to see which of these apply to your experiment or if i missed something. i am very interested to study this further, maybe you're right.....

[Guest]

Science can never proof the existence of god because god doesn't exists. It's just that simple. There were thousands of "proofs" for the existance of good and over the centuries science explained them nearly all. Religion always begins were science ends.

[drunktank]

Quote: from Guest on 2:23 am on Aug. 6, 2001
Science can never proof the existence of god because god doesn't exists. It's just that simple. There were thousands of "proofs" for the existance of good and over the centuries science explained them nearly all. Religion always begins were science ends.

I show you a light
and you tell me:
theres no light

[drunktank]

pce,
your point was nice,

but the holy water
in a small plastic bottle
didn't smell.

-

Also,

another unexplained thing
is the lighting of the holy light
in Jerusalem every Easter.

The Orthodox Priest of Jerusalem
enters a room.

Both he and the room are checked.

He goes in
and prays
and he comes
out with a flame
that everyone
can touch without being
burnt.

I have not did this test,
but many relatives of mine have.

You can go there,
and see it.

[pce]

drunktank, i'm afraid you didn't understand my point.

my point is that there are millions of factors that can lead to a "marvel". we may not always understand all of these factors, but once we discover them, they may be things we have never thought about. there is always reason for everything rooted in science.

your examples are nice too.

[pce]

....and just because we can't explain something, it doesn't mean it is the work of god.

this is how the greek gods which no one believes in now came about- isn't it

[drunktank]

Yes but you
accept a theory
until you find another.

It's a scientific rule.

[pce]

no you don't ACCEPT a theory, otherwise your eyes won't be open for another. you have to doubt it.

that's the rule.

[drunktank]

.. and many people believe
in the Greek Gods now