Atheists, if God used science instead of miracles, then would you believe in Him? [Spirituality & Religion]
22-25, F
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
astrosandorbits · 26-30, M
Science can't measure the supernatural and is thus biased in its conclusions it reaches. God's methods through the supernatural are outside of the realm of what science can measure. Things mentioned in religious texts such as the Qur'an's calculation of how much water and land constitute the earth is a scientifically measurable example used by God in his recitation. The Qur'an was written LONG before science even concluded how much land and water comprised the earth.
@astrosandorbits
Your first statement is not quite accurate.
Scientists do not engage with the issue of whether or not God exists.
Most say the existence of God is solely a matter for theologians and believers.
Around 98% of professional scientists are atheists.
Of the few who believe that a non-material spiritual being or consciousness might or could exist, most keep their mind open and undecided on the issue.
Most atheists accept the prevalent scientific theory of how the world came into existence - but we are aware that with advances in physics this could change - especially if the Universal Field Theory is ever resolved.
However, atheism and science have no causal connection with each other. They are independent but overlapping aspects of worldviews.
Your first statement is not quite accurate.
Scientists do not engage with the issue of whether or not God exists.
Most say the existence of God is solely a matter for theologians and believers.
Around 98% of professional scientists are atheists.
Of the few who believe that a non-material spiritual being or consciousness might or could exist, most keep their mind open and undecided on the issue.
Most atheists accept the prevalent scientific theory of how the world came into existence - but we are aware that with advances in physics this could change - especially if the Universal Field Theory is ever resolved.
However, atheism and science have no causal connection with each other. They are independent but overlapping aspects of worldviews.
astrosandorbits · 26-30, M
@hartfire thanks for your response! Can science measure the supernatural?
astrosandorbits · 26-30, M
@hartfire also, are you familiar with theoretical physicist Marcelo Gleiser?
@astrosandorbits
I love his books:
[i]The Dancing Universe[/i],
[i]The Prophet and the Astronomer[/i],
[i]A Tear at the Edge of Creation[/i],
[i]The Island of Knowledge[/i],
and [i]The Simple Beauty of the Unexpected[/i].
He's one of the best educators on how science thinks.
I feel immense gratitude for his work.
I love his books:
[i]The Dancing Universe[/i],
[i]The Prophet and the Astronomer[/i],
[i]A Tear at the Edge of Creation[/i],
[i]The Island of Knowledge[/i],
and [i]The Simple Beauty of the Unexpected[/i].
He's one of the best educators on how science thinks.
I feel immense gratitude for his work.
astrosandorbits · 26-30, M
@hartfire You had mentioned that my first statement was not accurate. My first claim was that science can not measure the supernatural. You then agreed that science can not measure the supernatural.
The way you rephrased the question was rather fitting because that ultimately is what the supernatural is: in essence the supernatural goes beyond the laws of physics by which we know the world. For instance, whether or not one believes in the stories of Jesus healing others from the dead, could science measure this? It is supernatural in the sense that it defies natural laws of physics by which we use to explain the world.
As far as Gleiser goes, have you read his bit on opposition to atheism in that it goes against what science is?
I appreciate the chat :)
The way you rephrased the question was rather fitting because that ultimately is what the supernatural is: in essence the supernatural goes beyond the laws of physics by which we know the world. For instance, whether or not one believes in the stories of Jesus healing others from the dead, could science measure this? It is supernatural in the sense that it defies natural laws of physics by which we use to explain the world.
As far as Gleiser goes, have you read his bit on opposition to atheism in that it goes against what science is?
I appreciate the chat :)
@astrosandorbits
Atheism does go against science in one respect only.
Science does not take a position on either the existence or non-existence of god; it tends to hold all things open. Even a hypothesis supported by overwhelmingly strong evidence is only considered likely to be true until something definitively disproves it.
God can neither be proved nor disproved by the methods of science since they apply only to the natural world.
Atheism holds that there is no god and that no god and nothing supernatural is possible.
As I said before in different words scientists are not necessarily atheists, and vice versa. They are too separate and independent sets of thinking which overlap.
I am an atheist and I support the findings and methods of science. I am not, however, of sufficient genius to be as open minded and flexible as the great physicists.
Atheism does go against science in one respect only.
Science does not take a position on either the existence or non-existence of god; it tends to hold all things open. Even a hypothesis supported by overwhelmingly strong evidence is only considered likely to be true until something definitively disproves it.
God can neither be proved nor disproved by the methods of science since they apply only to the natural world.
Atheism holds that there is no god and that no god and nothing supernatural is possible.
As I said before in different words scientists are not necessarily atheists, and vice versa. They are too separate and independent sets of thinking which overlap.
I am an atheist and I support the findings and methods of science. I am not, however, of sufficient genius to be as open minded and flexible as the great physicists.