This Messageboard will be shut soon. Please go to
New Messageboard to continue your discussions.
We want to hear from you... A query that needs an answer, a word to uplift the people, a statement of concern that needs prayer, a cry for help...
God bless you...
Yes, probabilistic
Scientist Finds Scientific Proof God Exists 
God Almighty is beyond proof 
But what if...
The problem is ..... (Interested )
Cannot prove a negative (Eveline How)
To Eveline and Seeker, On Pascal's Wager (Interested )
|
Dear Interested
That is the conclusion I arrived at after the long discourse with the atheist. He sounded like with the scientific method, he could "prove" that God does not exist. His words: how can you believe in a God which could not prove himself scientifically. I've always remembered your probabilistic thinking, and that was at the back of my mind as our discourse continued. Due to my lack of knowledge of statistics, I could only evaluate the so-called Scientific Method via logical arguments. The Scientific Method cannot be so foolproof. The only "foolproof" discipline I can think of is Mathematics. Eventually I concluded that the Scientific Method helps neither the theist, nor the (surprise!) atheist. The primary reason is the Scientific Method is based on observation, i.e. you can only judge by what you know. Another reason is the Scientific Method is based on an inductive mode of reasoning, i.e. specific to general. A 100% certainty is impossible using the Scientific Method since there is always a chance that that something we do not know (which therefore could not be imputed into the Scientific Method) can actually change the conclusion. Not unless we can claim to be omniscient. That means, anyone who depends on the Scientific Method as a reason for his belief (be it atheist or theist) must seal his belief with an element of faith. This is not a problem for the Christian since our belief does include faith, but a problem for the atheist. The atheist cannot say with certainty that God does not exist. If he believes thus, he is also guilty of the "crime" he accuses Christians of committing - i.e. that of depending on a nebulous concept known as "faith." The person in the best position out of this conclusion is, of course, the agnostic ("sit on the fence"). However, personally I think Agnosticism is a poor excuse for laziness or fear of committment. Anyway, I agree with your thinking that the matter of determining whether God exists or not does entail a measure of probability. In the end, the person deciding on the matter has to balance the options and make up his mind. It is futile to demand 100% proof because no one is going to get it. The only way to know for sure is to (pardon the bluntness) die and find out once and for all, but that may be too late for some people. -eveline
|
Messages
Outline:
To Eveline, by Interested , 11/15/00
Reply on a small matter by Eveline How, 11/16/00
Yes Eveline, you've got it! by Interested , 11/16/00
One major flaw, To Eveline by Interested , 11/16/00
On the Pascal's paper, To Eveline by Interested , 11/17/00
Back to Antioch's Home Page