Scientific Evidence of God?

Certainly we can say it is a relation of the human psyche as we always choose with a guide. Our guide is our good. Where your treasure lies, there is your heart also. Our good can be perceived as far or near, but perception is not knowledge.

 

Which is where we disagree... I do not believe it just a matter of my good being my good and your good being you good. God is God regardless of how you or I see him... is is what he is period.

 

Neither you nor I can produce any evidence of god, absent our own being.

 

Such is true, but when you are given a list of names it is necessary to check out their area of knowledge. In my view a preachers with science degrees will not fit the category I would trust on issues related to god and science.

 

What you have just said here seems self contradictory. You say check credentials but priest scientist cannot be trusted in their own area of expertise, which is matters of god, (priest) and science, (scientist).

What I am saying is reputation is not evidence.

 

Thank you for the clarification of the book. I still think it's one of the best out there, and am currently reading a web site that does refute it... because I'm crazy that way I have serious qualms with one article that obviously shows someone trying to disprove what he does not want to believe, but several others are doing a good job of reasoning things through. I love a challenge In it's defense, the man who wrote it did not start out as a christian when he wrote it. His research lead him to change his mind... so calling him another christian apologist is really not fair

That being said perhaps I should have taken more time to better state my position on science. You are right that there are lots of credible things in science and I concede I did not state it that way. Let me retry... There is a difference between scientific laws like gravity (the law of falling) and theories, (evolutiuon). Scientists talk about evolution like it is a law, which even scientifically it is not... it is still a theory.

Even with laws like gravity, we now know that in a vacuum gravity can sometimes not apply. But you are right in the fact that we can contrive an experiment that repeated over and over again will produce the same results. We can not do this with evolution... at least with macro evolution. NO ONE has ever seen one species change into another, even (if not especially) in the fossil record. The best we can do is say " that's a bird... that's a lizard... and this one looks like an odd mix between the two." Not proof or even enough for a law... which still makes evolution a theory.

I appreciate the rebuttal and making me better clarify my stance on science and how evolution fits into it. All that being said this is my belief....Evolution could be proven as true, and I would still believe God exists. Aliens could land in my back yard tomorrow and I'd still believe in the Bible. explaining why would take this more off topic, but once again, I see no reason why God and science can not co-exist.

 

and you never will simply because you have already decided the issue.

This is why I generally don't even bother with these discussions.
non-Christians and atheist can be the most stubborn and illogical people.

"Because I don't agree with the premise I won't even bother looking at the content of the book."

Spoken like a true devotee of science and the scientific method of research and investigation.

and they say Christians are closed-minded.

 

At least indirectly if you use the word god in communication, that symbol represents a place in a neural model, regardless your definition.

 

I have admitted that science is not going to prove God... but why does someone who seeks out religion have to abandon critical thinking and reason?

rea·son

   [ree-zuhn] Show IPA
noun

the mental powers concerned with forming conclusions, judgments, or inferences.


This is not the same as scientific method, although it is used in it. over the past 20 years I have read and studied, and I consider myself a very scientific person, and my conclusion judgement and inference from a vast range of experiences is that God exists. You do not have to agree, but don't tell me there was not reason and critical thinking involved in it.

Now I will concede this... there are a lot of Christians that do follow blindly without reason and critical thinking. but there are also lots of atheists and scientists who do as well.

 

anyone mentioned Higgs Bozon yet?

 

Belief in god is not evidence of god, it is evidence of belief.

Knowledge is being shared. Can you share god with me?

 

Evidently, what about it.

 

It might show us what was before 'creation' and before Bible starts describing things. There is also small chance, that there are other universes which have their own Higgs field. What does Bible say about other universes? Maybe only one god created our, but there are others creating other stuff?

 

If something exists how is it before creation?

 

How am I supposed to know?

God existed before creation. Then what is god? A force? Energy? Magnetic field?

Since higgs field gives everything mass, before everything, there had to be only mass-less objects. Like protons I believe? I don't remember which one doesn't have any mass.

 

You are not suppose to know although we might be able to. The question was designed to get you to expound your thoughts on the subject.

To a dog at a picnic, gravity is god as food falls from the sky. To a human being our good is our god.

 

What does the idea of goodness have to do with an all knowing omnipotent god?

Goodness, like morality is subjective to the individual and has nothing to do with wether or not a deity exists and it certainly is not proof of it. You use the term our out of context as many people would not agree with your statement. Your post should have read "To me my good is my god."