Why is science needed to shore up belief in existence of God

[pointus]

Have just recently stumbled on this site (30/05/2008) and find the name of the site (Evidence for God from Science)interesting. Why do arguments for god's existence need to be validated by science? Can it not just be taken on faith that god(s) exist?

Why science? Can we use astrology, numerology, clairvoyance, rythmic chanting, etc to prove that god(s) exist? If not why?

Can science also be used to show that many of the claims of the theists are untenable? For instance;

1) If we had a sample of Jesus's biological material today, what would a DNA analysis reveal about his parentage?

2) Genetic studies indicate human origins to have been in Africa about 100,000 years ago. How does this reconcile with the Abrahamic view that human origins is in the Judean desert; Adam&Eve, original sin, etc?

3) Science reveal a very old earth and a very very old universe. Do the same techniques used to validate the existence of god as per this site be used challenge the fact of an old earth, old universe?

[Kurieuo]

Personally, I get the impression you have a very narrow perspective as to what comprises "science".

[pointus]

Personally, I get the impression you have a very narrow perspective as to what comprises "science".

How did you come by this assessment of my understanding of science? Is science not used to to investigate parentage, to determine the age of rock, to calculate the distances of stars, etc. Why could these same tools not be used to investigate the issues I raised above?

What broader "science" would you use to undertake such an investigation?

[Kurieuo]

Personally, I get the impression you have a very narrow perspective as to what comprises "science".

How did you come by this assessment of my understanding of science? Is science not used to to investigate parentage, to determine the age of rock, to calculate the distances of stars, etc. Why could these same tools not be used to investigate the issues I raised above?

What broader "science" would you use to undertake such an investigation?

Science can be understood as any branch of knowledge dealing with a body of facts or truths in a systematic way. The term can mean much more than the physical sciences.

[UtahTex]

Actually, "Science" is specifically understood as :

sci·ence
—noun 1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.

So implying or actually stating that Faith based belief in God is a "Science" does not fit the definition.

[Himantolophus]

Well, most people think that science and the Bible are opposite ends of the spectrum. I think the purpose of the site is to show that there can be harmony between believing in the Bible and believing in science. Correct me if I'm wrong...

[Kurieuo]

Actually, "Science" is specifically understood as :

sci·ence
—noun 1. a branch of knowledge or study dealing with a body of facts or truths systematically arranged and showing the operation of general laws: the mathematical sciences.
2. systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.
3. any of the branches of natural or physical science.

So implying or actually stating that Faith based belief in God is a "Science" does not fit the definition.

Thanks for helping to support my point UT. Let's quote the rest:

4. systematized knowledge in general.
5. knowledge, as of facts or principles; knowledge gained by systematic study.
6. a particular branch of knowledge.
7. skill, esp. reflecting a precise application of facts or principles; proficiency.

(http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/science)

Theology is a science. Philosophy is a science. Mathematics and physics are sciences. Empirical observation and experimentation (at least under laboratory conditions) is perhaps quite the new comer to the scene of sciences.

[Kurieuo]

Well, most people think that science and the Bible are opposite ends of the spectrum. I think the purpose of the site is to show that there can be harmony between believing in the Bible and believing in science. Correct me if I'm wrong...

No, that is correct.

A main purpose I see this website serving is not just attempting to show harmony between belief in God, Scripture and science, but also demonstrating in a positive way through the coherent and rational arguments presented that a Christian does not check out their rationality in order to believe in Scripture or Christ. This unreasonable divide between 'belief in God' and 'rationality' is a stigma I see came from the positivist movement within Modernity, especially through persuasive rhetoricians as Freud and Immanuel Kant.

[TimM1104]

Have just recently stumbled on this site (30/05/2008) and find the name of the site (Evidence for God from Science)interesting. Why do arguments for god's existence need to be validated by science? Can it not just be taken on faith that god(s) exist?

Why science? Can we use astrology, numerology, clairvoyance, rythmic chanting, etc to prove that god(s) exist? If not why?

See Pointus, I myself believe the important thing to note is, if there is a creator God, YHWH, and he created the universe he himself created Science. Science is his making and it is elliquently designed. The thing we discover via Science is beautiful, and very precise which in turn lets us see how awesome God is on making something like this.

In this day and age people see the beauty of science, but ignore the maker of it. Knowing the "Evidence for God from Science" help's us see how much more awesome God is. Just knowing that God created this. (But this is all of course in my own oppinion)

Now what I wonder is, how would you see god in rythmic chanting?

Astrology has been used to see god's work(IE the wisemen knowing where jesus was born), numerology? isn't that mathematics? A science? I really don't understand your question?

Can science also be used to show that many of the claims of the theists are untenable? For instance;

1) If we had a sample of Jesus's biological material today, what would a DNA analysis reveal about his parentage?

2) Genetic studies indicate human origins to have been in Africa about 100,000 years ago. How does this reconcile with the Abrahamic view that human origins is in the Judean desert; Adam&Eve, original sin, etc?

3) Science reveal a very old earth and a very very old universe. Do the same techniques used to validate the existence of god as per this site be used challenge the fact of an old earth, old universe?

1. The key point is we don't. Seeing what Jesus' DNA was would be interesting. BUT we don't have his DNA nor do I think we would have it.

2. (I don't know enough on this statement to say anything. Never heard "Origins to be in africa", but I think it has to do with the whole Old Earth. God made the world in 6 time periods.)

3. I don't believe this site has challenged old earth, old universe thing? But then again this is my first post in the past 3 years.

A tricky thing to get though when we get "Evidence for God from Science" its not like we are going to take a little bit of God and stick him in a test-tube.

It is more we are taking the science we have and saying "hey look God did that" or taking the science we have and going 'how could god fit into Darwinism? Could Darwinism be the truth? Or is there a flaw? It can't fit with God'

You know? Seeing how God does or does not fit with science and talking about which should change? Is the theory wrong, or is it wrong that the theory can't fit with God, or is our God false?(Which I am sure is not that case) Cause if our God is the creator God, science has to fit him, because he made it.

But anyone feel free to correct me if I am wrong. ^^

[Lufia]

Personnaly i was brought to Jesus because of science. I have read a book about the universe and i saw how enourmous, wonderfull, awesome it is. Also i learned about the physics laws ( gravity, nuclear force etc) and how perfect it is up there in the universe. Then i learned about all 'the coincidences' with earth: her place in solar system, her angle, the moon, distance with sun etc. All those are essential for life on earth. And i dont talk about the water or the marvel of dna or the human eye. So learning about it was stunning for me , it was a spiritual big bang for me lol. It was a starting point for thinking about spirituality for me. A very deep thinking. i could continue about my story but dont think it is the right place for it so i'll end this by telling that science and religion can indeed go very well together.

[Himantolophus]

Then i learned about all 'the coincidences' with earth: her place in solar system, her angle, the moon, distance with sun etc. All those are essential for life on earth.

not to argue or anything but this point always seems to bother me. The Earth seems to be in these perfect positions for life, but it only seems that way because we exist! If it wasn't like that, life wouldn't be on this planet in the first place to argue about God or science. Also, out of the billions of planets in the Universe, the chances of finding at least one other planet with these "perfect" conditions is certainly possible, if not certain. Luckily, one of them is Earth.

[TimM1104]

Then i learned about all 'the coincidences' with earth: her place in solar system, her angle, the moon, distance with sun etc. All those are essential for life on earth.

not to argue or anything but this point always seems to bother me. The Earth seems to be in these perfect positions for life, but it only seems that way because we exist! If it wasn't like that, life wouldn't be on this planet in the first place to argue about God or science. Also, out of the billions of planets in the Universe, the chances of finding at least one other planet with these "perfect" conditions is certainly possible, if not certain. Luckily, one of them is Earth.

Interesting point. I am not sure if it is probable of finding another planet with this perfect conditions though. It's like DNA, it is POSSIBLE, to find another person with the same DNA, but not plausible. It is possible to find another planet, but I don't think it is plausible to think there is another planet with these conditions.

But you do have an interesting point though Himantolophus. Not sure if I agree with it. I am still thinking this world is unique and perfect, but I will agree if this world doesn't exist we wouldn't or if it existed somewehre else, we very well may be having this conversations over there. But I do think it is not a very probable setup we have here. Kinda cozy though I have to admit..

[Kurieuo]

Then i learned about all 'the coincidences' with earth: her place in solar system, her angle, the moon, distance with sun etc. All those are essential for life on earth.

not to argue or anything but this point always seems to bother me. The Earth seems to be in these perfect positions for life, but it only seems that way because we exist! If it wasn't like that, life wouldn't be on this planet in the first place to argue about God or science. Also, out of the billions of planets in the Universe, the chances of finding at least one other planet with these "perfect" conditions is certainly possible, if not certain. Luckily, one of them is Earth.

I disagree, even if out of billions of planets. The book Rare Earth also backs this conclusion and the authors aren't on our side.

This is what the whole argument from fine-tuning is about - we shouldn't even have one Earth. The fact we do is quite astounding given such improbable conditions necessary.