Scientific Evidence that God is real!

[gluadys]

The thing that interests me is, if you know you can't prove God exists, but you still need to believe something, what do you believe?

It is not a matter of what one believes, but who one believes in.

 

[Gottservant]

Well said.

What other thoughts are you able to add?

 

[theFijian]

Yes how yet it doesn't stop man from using science to make supernatural claims like the Big Bang (clearly supernatual) and abiogenesis (extremely supernatual) and even a wolf turning to a whale (that's a greater miracle than Jesus turning water into wine)

Then there is the supernatural string theory with 11 dimensions and the supernatural stuff called dark matter and dark energy and the supernatural multi-universe.

Science doesn't make supernatural claims, nor can it. Humans make supernatural claims and attach them to natural phenomena, as you did there. Just like people thought lightning was caused by Zeus getting angry.

 

[kellhus]

Well said.

What other thoughts are you able to add?

You're awfully bitter when people disagree with you. His contribution is perfectly valid, you're tolerance of it is all that is lacking here.

 

[Gottservant]

You're awfully bitter when people disagree with you. His contribution is perfectly valid, you're tolerance of it is all that is lacking here.

I'm afraid you have read bias, where there is none.

The conversation can continue without you, if you would prefer to say nothing.

 

[kellhus]

I'm afraid you have read bias, where there is none.

The conversation can continue without you, if you would prefer to say nothing.

Why would I prefer to say nothing? I can continue posting just fine.

 

[gluadys]

Well said.

What other thoughts are you able to add?

We spend too much time bickering over doctrine and too little time nurturing faith and right action. James 1:27 is a good guideline.

 

[Smidlee]

Science doesn't make supernatural claims, nor can it. Humans make supernatural claims and attach them to natural phenomena, as you did there. Just like people thought lightning was caused by Zeus getting angry.

Science is done by humans. Of course today we have a better understanding of lightning so we don't consider that supernatural. Now how stars are formed is still unknown which scientist believes it's cause by the Big Bang just like those who thought lightning was caused by Zeus. Man today is the same as man in the past.

 

[theFijian]

Science is done by humans. Of course today we have a better understanding of lightning so we don't consider that supernatural. Now how stars are formed is still unknown which scientist believes it's cause by the Big Bang just like those who thought lightning was caused by Zeus. Man today is the same as man in the past.

So you're saying that the Big Bang was supernatural because you don't understand it? God of the gaps is terrible science and terrible theology.

 

[kellhus]

now how stars are formed is still unknown which scientist believes it's cause by the Big Bang

Scientists do not believe stars were formed in the Big Bang. You are only exposing your ignorance of even the basics of the topic.

And I have no idea where you got the idea that stellar development is some great mystery. It isn't. We have telescopes that can observe it taking place.

 

[Smidlee]

Scientists do not believe stars were formed in the Big Bang. You are only exposing your ignorance of even the basics of the topic.

And I have no idea where you got the idea that stellar development is some great mystery. It isn't. We have telescopes that can observe it taking place.

All man's theories of how to create a new star requires stars already exist. (ex: star can be create in theory by supernovas which were stars)They have no idea how you go from the Big Bang (no stars) to stars and galaxies.

 

[Dunban]

Science is not even designed to "measure" "God" so this is a nonsensical pursuit.

 

[Fascinated With God]

All man's theories of how to create a new star requires stars already exist. (ex: star can be create in theory by supernovas which were stars)They have no idea how you go from the Big Bang (no stars) to stars and galaxies.

The cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation shows the universe at a state where matter was still pulling together from a nearly uniform state. There are small variations in the CMB, the map looks spotty. That was the beginning of gravity pulling together the mass into clumps.

Quasars are so bright and so far away because that is the startup of a galaxy. All galaxies started out as quasars billions of years ago.

So we can see the progression of matter from starless to star filled.

 

[apple2345]

It leaves out the actual theological principles in defining God's eternal nature. One of those would be the asiety (utter independance) of God.

I have to agree with this comment. The video lacked any clear direction towards Christ as well. I did like the comment made about thermodynamics, but that was about it. The video itself was not very aesthetically pleasing to watch, which made it a little difficult.

Although, I have to disagree that there is no need to pursue proving the existence of God.

I believe that there are people called to serve God in the scientific arena. What better way to work towards evangelism than learning to speak the language of the one you are attempting to bring to Christ.

Not everyone has a literary learning style and so for them, I can very much appreciate that there are those who are called as evangelists to this group.

I don't know that I think this is the best video for that objective though.

But, the most important thing about this subject, I think, is to not be negative and assume that someone has to come to know God a certain way and that they can't use the field of science to encourage their own or someone else's faith.

It is a worthy venture to pursue especially in our present day and age.

 

[Fascinated With God]

Hear, hear! Especially when theism is so dramatically on the rise in the sciences, even as religious attendance plummets.