Evidence for God from Science

We also must take into account that we dont know much about the nature of time as an entity. The same can be said about our universe. Just because we do not understand how 'something' comes into 'existence' does not mean that there is a scientific answer. Here the point is "how everything came...

I also don't think I am closing myself to potential truths, for the simple reason that "truths" in the subjective areas are not comparable (therefore not the same) to "truths" in the objective areas. That is fine except that religion is not subjective. The God of the Bible eithe...

Without God an athiest must believe one of two things, either matter always existed and was always just there, or somehow matter came into existance from nothing. Both of these require a great leap of 'faith'. What happens after matter 'existed' can always be interpreted in many different, both ath...

I'd disagree, and believe such things point to God. The inflationary theory for example points to God seeing as it says all space and time had a beginning. It sounds as though the person is just beginning to expand his knowledge on such issues since the inflationary big bang theory does indeed pred...

Statements that are outside the scope of science cannot be, by definition, analysed by science, and therefore you should only use faith and beliefs. I also agree with this statement, provided that you allow for the scope of science to expand. The mechanics of flight might once have been thought to ...

But back to theories, this debate amongst the religious and non-religious is absurd, a conclusion will never be met, it has been going on since the ancient times. Honestly, I don't think it's absurd. As a minimum, it helps me in training my mind. And, discussions are an essential part of interactio...

I'm not trying to learn about 'the theory of creation'... I accept that as an axiom. What we are learning about is the how the product of that creation works. The product of God's creation is our natural world, and that's what science can teach us about. I like this statement. I can now find some c...

Jerickson314, I think we are a little bit diverging both each other and from the topic of the thread. I am also exaggerating by entering into some details that are not really relevant. I don't completely disagree with you in some of what you said, but I think we have to better distinguish here becau...

You are confusing "truth" with "knowledge". Where, in my example about crows? The statement "all crows are black" might be "true", ie a truth. But, still, we can only increase our knowledge in two ways: 1. increase our confidence level about this truth 2. hop...

Christian says: Due to the vast string of consecutive events from the formation of the universe down to the origins of life on Earth, each having an extremely low probability of occuring and being dependant on the previous event, this must hint at an intelligent creator. Atheist says: I can refute ...

I understand what you are saying. I have all along; I'm not sure that YOU understand what you are saying. You are betting that science has the potential to explain everything. You are taking a position of faith that everything is natural, and as a consequence there IS nothing supernatural. I don't ...

I choose #1 not just because of what the Bible Says but of the Proof it contains! None of the three options fit except for #1 especially with the recent Archaeological Proof we now have! Please note that I have said "at least three theories" for this explanation. There might be many other...

Alien, since you seem to know so darn much about, well, everything that you could consider yourself as God, tell me then, how did the universe form from nothing into something? How does the stuff I buy come about? Pop out of thin air? Heck no! That is fairy tale, much like your argument that intell...

no intelligent design is not science. Perfectly agreed. I would slightly expand it by saying that intelligent design is not a scientific theory. And, in addition, if we just consider the statement itself, does it imply there is unintelligent (or stupid) design? At which point does a design cease to...

What about things that will be explained in the future? Do they change from non-natural to natural? No. Of course not, they change from unexplained to explained. It's a very simple position. And there were many examples in the past of unexplained that became explained (motion of planets, origin of ...