So no one can “prove” by the materialist’s limited definition of “proof” that God is, but that however does not mean there is not evidence for such a being…they just will not accept empirical evidence as valid…
Here is my definition of the materialist by way of analogy. They are a person inside a small corner of an infinitely huge box with total and sole faith in their quite limited perceptual faculties, their limited instrumentation that they intelligently design, and by experiments they always and only intelligently engineer.
They, having no possible (not just improbable) way of knowing by these means that there even is an outside or beyond the box (except perhaps SOME theoretical quantum physicists) make assertive assumption based declarations of what may be outside of or beyond their box.
All we absolutely know for sure (scientifically speaking) is NO ONE can “prove” by any means (empirical or purely material) that there IS NO GOD…I am sure you agree with that (I hope)! One thing philosophical reason has given us is that there are 15 or 20 lines of reasoning that indicate there must be a God/god/creator/designer etc., and absolutely zero that indicate there cannot be one.
Now listen carefully…
Because millions throughout the ages have personally experienced God/gods/higher intelligent force etc., (as well as other phenomena outside of what YOU would call the natural order), observed the effects of such a being, tested what He has claimed and found it to be true…(regardless of whether or not you have)! This historically verifiable fact alone (not even considering other things like the purely prescient nature of Biblical prophecy, and other matters) IS empirical evidence that there is a God…
Any open minded objective person with even a shred of intellectual integrity cannot dismiss the mountain of empirical evidence over the ages and then accept and live by premises for which there is none and truly be considered a rational person…
I know we all can rationalize, that’s not what I am saying, I am saying the materialist though verbaly denying “faith”, accepts any number of premises as true or obvious without as much as a single shred of evidence that they are true…yet reject many for which there is evidence they are true…
Let me pose a scenario to you (all this by the way is to help us learn to actually use actual critical thinking and not just ever thinking up newer criticisms, for there is a stark difference)
All of science (and I KNOW this is a fact) and ALL scientists only experience, have ONLY observed, can ONLY demonstrate, and in addition ALL tests ever done or devised to test this ONLY show that life comes from previous life…(called in Biology the Rule of Biogenesis)
Evolutionary Biologists, Vance and Miller, in their book, Biology for You (Philadelphia, Lippincott, l963), admit that, “All the forms of plants and animals that we have studied in biology, produce their young from their own bodies, and in no other way“. Did you hear that? They said, “in no other way“! THAT is what objective demonstration, objective observation, and testing still have ONLY shown us.
The contemporary Encyclopedia Americana (Grolier, Scholastic, 2000) says, “Biologists are now not only in virtual unanimous agreement that all life derives from preceding life, but that the parent organism and it’s offspring are of the same kind“.
In other words, all that science can really “prove”, or has observed, or demonstrated, and that all tests ever done confirm, is that cows bring forth cows, roses bring forth roses, and so on. Now maybe due to some environmental situation or by the interaction by an outside intelligent force (such as man) a new variety of rose comes about but in fact it IS and ever will be a rose.
So from this smattering of scientific testimony, a definite conclusion comes to light!
Contrary to the popularized, politicized, neo-Darwinian dogma… within any given type of creature (cats, dogs, turtles, people, etc.), members only reproduce other members of the same creature from relations with members of their own kind! There simply are no biological examples of Darwin’s poly-phyletic morphism anywhere in the world after almost 200 years of alleged scientific consideration and 100 years of collecting 1000s upon 1000s of examples. In other words, it has never been shown, never experienced, never observed, never demonstrated, and ALL tests done refute it…yet this totally assumption based conclusion is sold and imposed on innocently inquiring minds through drill and repetition and highly motivated propaganda campaigns in the media and textbook/curriculum development….IMO that it is an established fact…
When Joseph Goebbels said, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State (or in this case the educational neo-Darwinian pedagogues) can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State (in this case these pedagogues) to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy …” he applied his hypothesis and found (as many Ad-men, politicians, salesmen and others) that it indeed was a powerful tool used to "shape" public opinion. We all in some form or another, to some degree, have been victimized in just this way.
As far as so-called evolutionary science, let the data dictate the theory and stop using the theory to shape the interpretation.
Paul