People claiming to be scientists also claim to have incontrovertible proof that God does not exist. It is certainly true, that God's existence or non-existence is outside of science to prove or disprove, despite claims to the contrary.
The Bible itself regards the existence of God as self-evident truth and so itself does not try to demonstrate His existence. It does make comment though, on what God thinks of those who do not believe in Him.
Scientists who believe the Bible have God as part of their thinking and work. Great scientists of the past, including a number post-Darwin, including down to our present day, had and have no trouble in belief in God and their scientific work.
If scientists are trying to prove God exists, it is doubtful this will have any success. This is much the same as those who try to prove or disprove miraculous healings. Firstly, there is no promise from God that He is going to make Himself a 'side-show' or be put under the microscope of men to be dissected. If He were to do so He would cease to be God.
If people are trying to either prove or disprove God, it would seem such work is doomed from the outset as it is based on false assumptions.
Eminent Scientists' only concern is with the Natural world. They not concern themselves with the Supernatural.
Answer:
Metaphysics is not the province of science, science deals with the real world . The purpose of science is to break down barriers to knowledge and utilize that knowledge to further mankind's understanding of the Universe.
If science could prove (or disprove) the existence of god(s) the results would be unsatisfactory to all theists concerned. A proof that there was no god(s) would either not be accepted or cause the disappearance of religion. A proof that there was a god(s) would show that the god(s) are subject to the physical rules of the universe and subject to the scientists' tests. In either of these cases the god(s) would not be omnipotent or above everything, which would make them just another real world phenomenon, not supernatural.
People have so many definitions of God so it is hard to prove that God exists. A religious experience may make a believer of you but it may not "prove" God exists as your experience may not convince a non-believer.
Because blind faith is all there is. As soon as people start trying to prove that God exists, they start realising that he does not.
This is the thing, there is no proof of there being a God see? Humans think that you can believe in something without knowing that it exists.
Prove that god exists
yes
William Paley not only believed in God, he thought he could prove that God exists.
I don't think there is. Science can only prove what can be observed.
Theology must rely on philosophy since there is no way to prove a god exists.
That's kind of asking why an egg, exists. The egg doesn't matter the chicken does. Its not why god exists, its why did he create us. We live to learn about him and to fill the Earth will peace full and loving people. That is what My God Jehovah is trying to do.
A:No. A Christian could have what he or she regards as a religious experience and a Hindu could have a very similar religious experience. In both cases, this proves no more than that they are devout followers of their relative faiths. The Christian's experience does not prove that God exists, any more than the Hindu's religious experience proves that Brahma or Vishnu exists.
he was at first trying to convince the world that god didn't exist.then he was convinced that god is real(wich he is) and then he started writing books to try prove that god is real
It is not possible to prove God doesn't exist, just as we can't prove fairies, elves and unicorns don't exist. The inability to prove something doesn't exist does not therefore mean that it does exist. It is not possible to prove that there is no teapot in orbit around Pluto, yet the lack of such a proof doesn't mean that the teapot therefore exists. There have been several attempts to prove that God exists using logic (eg Kalam cosmological argument, Transcendental Argument for God [TAG]), but these are not universally accepted as valid and true - if they were then there'd be no need for any further discussion.