Evidence for God from Science

Hi guys,

I have a question. Why is it that religious people are so happy to accept whatever it is in which they believe on pure faith [1], whilst at the same time being so ready to deny, and even to demand (more) proof of, scientific facts? [2]

Thanks,
Trucker

[1] I don't think anyone here is foolish enough to try to argue that there is any defensible evidence for a higher being, for Heaven, or for an afterlife.

[2] Even when the evidence and proof already exists; for example, in the cases of evolution and global warming.

Why don't you take a look at the main site? You may find, to your surprise, that there is a great deal of evidence for a creator and it is highly defensible.

You clearly haven't looked over this site at all or read the guidelines if you really believe [1] is true. That's what this site is about! You might find some stuff that will surprise you.

Also, as far as [2] goes, although evolution is brought up quite a bit on this site, you have to take one question at a time. Addressing evolution is different than addressing whether or not God exists. And what exactly does global warming have to do with it? Just going out of your way to demean Christians for what they may or may not believe?

Trucker,

FIrst, welcome!

I would suggest that you read through our Board purposes and Guidelines. While we welcome sincere questions from non-believers, this board is not primarily for those who have decided and who are here simply to argue.

That being said, you may want to familiarize yourself with the main site www.godandscience.org and our views of Biblical creation and the evidence for God. Then narrow down your questions so that we may address them efficiently.

Thanks and welcome again

Trucker wrote:Hi guys,

I have a question. Why is it that religious people are so happy to accept whatever it is in which they believe on pure faith [1], whilst at the same time being so ready to deny, and even to demand (more) proof of, scientific facts? [2]

Thanks,
Trucker

[1] I don't think anyone here is foolish enough to try to argue that there is any defensible evidence for a higher being, for Heaven, or for an afterlife.

[2] Even when the evidence and proof already exists; for example, in the cases of evolution and global warming.

Welcome Trucker

1. You are right, I am not foolish enough to argue with you.
2. I do believe in evolution to a degree. I don't believe I've evolved from and ape. I hate banannas. But, strangly enough, from time to time, I do enjoy swinging from a good tire swing.
3. As far as global warming goes, who knows. Proof is in the eye of the beholder. But, at this point there isn't enough scientific evidence to prove their theory. At least the way I see it.
4. I also believe the earth went thru an ice age or global cooling.

Trucker wrote:Hi guys,

I have a question. Why is it that religious people are so happy to accept whatever it is in which they believe on pure faith [1], whilst at the same time being so ready to deny, and even to demand (more) proof of, scientific facts? [2]

Thanks,
Trucker

What scientific facts are you referring to? Also everyone is religious.. Even you.

Trucker wrote:[1] I don't think anyone here is foolish enough to try to argue that there is any defensible evidence for a higher being, for Heaven, or for an afterlife.

[2] Even when the evidence and proof already exists; for example, in the cases of evolution and global warming.

There is no 100% proof of anything.. Whether you are a creationist or an evolutionist. If you have 100% proof of your claim then please reveal it.

Trucker said:

I have a question. Why is it that religious people are so happy to accept whatever it is in which they believe on pure faith [1], whilst at the same time being so ready to deny, and even to demand (more) proof of, scientific facts? [2]

God said it, I believe it, that settles it!!! Just kidding. Jesus himself said the greatest commandment can be found in Mark 12:29,30. Some people don't take the part about Loving God with our minds literally. 1 Thessalonians 5:21 tells us to test everything. I believe that means "test" the Bible against itself to make sure our interpretations are consistent.

[1] I don't think anyone here is foolish enough to try to argue that there is any defensible evidence for a higher being, for Heaven, or for an afterlife.

My Mom died on the er table, and I bet she would be "foolish" enough to offer up an argument.

[2] Even when the evidence and proof already exists; for example, in the cases of evolution and global warming.

The Earth goes through periods of warming as well as cooling. I think the argument comes from people who claim man is responsible for it. There are different kinds of Evolution. If you can be specific about what kind of evolution to which you are referring, we can go from there.

Trucker wrote: [1] I don't think anyone here is foolish enough to try to argue that there is any defensible evidence for a higher being, for Heaven, or for an afterlife.

What makes you so sure that we don't have proof, and what makes you so confident that we cannot argue with the evidence we have for our faith?

Trucker wrote: [2] Even when the evidence and proof already exists; for example, in the cases of evolution and global warming.

Really? So do you not know of the evidence against them?

Trucker wrote:Hi guys,

I have a question. Why is it that religious people are so happy to accept whatever it is in which they believe on pure faith [1], whilst at the same time being so ready to deny, and even to demand (more) proof of, scientific facts? [2]

Thanks,
Trucker

For your first part, we don't just go on pure faith, we go with the evidence we have( Isaiah 1:18 ). It takes more faith to believe that everything would come from nothing, and that matter would live on its own accord. Atheists believe in spontaneous generation, something a Christian scientist proved to be wrong. For your second point, we don't demand more proof, in fact if you took some time to learn about us you would see that there are some of us who believe in evolution and global warming. Now you really should broaden your horizons because to me it is obvious you do not know Christians very well or you would not have said what you did above. Further more we don't demand more proof, instead we drag the so called "evidence" out into the light and to show the world what it really is. Not only that, we have our own proof (scientific mind you) against evolution.

Further more we don't demand more proof, instead we drag the so called "evidence" out into the light and to show the world what it really is. Not only that, we have our own proof (scientific mind you) against evolution.

there is small proof against some specifics of evolution, but if you really have some proof against evolution, i would be happy to hear about it.
http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/locke.html i read this, but not much new stuff, fossil records dont really matter when proving evolution, that half wing thing was pretty interesting and i need to orientate myself in that issue.
evolution simply means that organisms evolve by natural selection and mutation, large organisms dont ''use'' the mutation, but bacteria does, because of fast reproducing. there are lots of studies where evolution can be seen to happen in a short period of time, in bacteria in years, in bigger organisms in decades.

Realize too that there are a wide number of perspectives here too in terms of the Christian community. Some are Young Earth Creationist, some are old earth creationists and we have here as well some who might even be classified as Theistic Evolutionists.

Being a Christian or a creationist doesn't automatically mean the person is against science, denies science or even that they deny evolution as far as it has been demonstrated scientifically.

I think it is safe to say that most Christians here, if not all, are very concerned that evolution has become more than science. There's an entire philosophy that builds out of it that is often highly humanistic and yes, even atheistic. Where much of the parting paths takes place is in where science ends and philosophy and/or religion begins to be built with implications as to morals, values and the existence of God.

Frankly, while I hope I have a healthy skepticism with regard to science, and in addition to my religious training I am finishing a Master of Science degree in a field of psychology, I don't see the science of evolution as threatening to the existence of God at all. At most it provides insight into how God did some things and doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. I'm not particularly thrilled with the God of the Gaps type arguments that are thrown out from religious persons. I don't think they are necessary and I think they represent sloppy thinking. I'm very willing to examine truth from any realm and to seek to reconcile it with my religious faith when the evidence is strong and even then, I'm willing to re-eaxamine things that I've thought true that evidence brings into question.

Hello all,

First, as a Biology student, I am appalled to see the way Evolution is handled here, so I thought I might as well shatter some myths here:

Myth #1: There is no unison among scientists about Evolution (so why should we bother if creationism is true or false?)

Wrong. There is NO discord whatsoever on if Evolution happened. Evolution DID happen, and it removes the necessity of a God to explain why nature is so.
Let me elaborate. Scientists, all of them, agree that Evolution happened, period. But they are in different views on the fact that exactly how it happened. Some go for 'regular' evolution, which is to say that speciation is a continuing, ongoing process, while some argue that speciation occurred in 'bursts'. Either way, evolution replaces God in the sense that there is no need of a God to explain the natural world. After all, that is how we are all taught; Why is the natural world so-an-so? 'coz God created it that way.

Anyone wants to argue? Please, let us do so and dispel this Myth. Then I will proceed on to Myth #2.

cjdrox wrote:Hello all,

First, as a Biology student, I am appalled to see the way Evolution is handled here, so I thought I might as well shatter some myths here:

Myth #1: There is no unison among scientists about Evolution (so why should we bother if creationism is true or false?)

Wrong. There is NO discord whatsoever on if Evolution happened. Evolution DID happen, and it removes the necessity of a God to explain why nature is so.
Let me elaborate. Scientists, all of them, agree that Evolution happened, period. But they are in different views on the fact that exactly how it happened. Some go for 'regular' evolution, which is to say that speciation is a continuing, ongoing process, while some argue that speciation occurred in 'bursts'. Either way, evolution replaces God in the sense that there is no need of a God to explain the natural world. After all, that is how we are all taught; Why is the natural world so-an-so? 'coz God created it that way.

Anyone wants to argue? Please, let us do so and dispel this Myth. Then I will proceed on to Myth #2.

Um.... this proves nothing at all. So because you say that evolution is true, then it is? How does evolution remove the need for a God? Evolution cannot make life from non life, and is full of holes. But you said yourself that you a biology student, so it would not surprise me in the least bit that you are being indoctrinated and not told the entire story either. I was also told all the common lies in bio in high school, that evolution had to be true, it was a proven "fact" and yet a PHD teacher of mine (in my next year) started to show that this is not so, the year after I was told evolution was a fact, and she began to show that yes, it does have many many problems, and is still only theory. Further more, evolution would not remove the need for a God, becuase God could have used evolution to create. But I am not the science nerd here, I will let Gman and Zoegirl do the talking here.

Please see this: A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM

Scientists who say: “We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

And please don't say these aren't "real" scientists, or that the owner of this site isn't a "real" scientist. It's just that there's more to the scientific community than you seem to be educated about (or care to take seriously). But if you read so much of the site as you claim, none of it will matter to you, so one has to wonder why you're here. Please read the discussion guidelines and the board purpose. Our board isn't here for your pleasure in telling us "uneducated folk" "how it is."

As Gabrielman pointed out, your concept of things is your own, since plenty of people believe evolution to be true but still believe in God. Life had to start somewhere - it didn't just begin spontaneously out of nothing.

cjdrox wrote:Hello all,

First, as a Biology student, I am appalled to see the way Evolution is handled here, so I thought I might as well shatter some myths here:

Myth #1: There is no unison among scientists about Evolution (so why should we bother if creationism is true or false?)

Wrong. There is NO discord whatsoever on if Evolution happened. Evolution DID happen, and it removes the necessity of a God to explain why nature is so.
Let me elaborate. Scientists, all of them, agree that Evolution happened, period. But they are in different views on the fact that exactly how it happened. Some go for 'regular' evolution, which is to say that speciation is a continuing, ongoing process, while some argue that speciation occurred in 'bursts'. Either way, evolution replaces God in the sense that there is no need of a God to explain the natural world. After all, that is how we are all taught; Why is the natural world so-an-so? 'coz God created it that way.

Anyone wants to argue? Please, let us do so and dispel this Myth. Then I will proceed on to Myth #2.

Before I argue anything, please show me where "here" is and where this "Myth" is perpetuated on our main board. I prefer not to address strawman arguments.

I'm so tired of the idea that evolution removes the necessity for God. I'll ask a series of rhetorical questions here, knowing that evolution doesn't answer ANY of these questions.

Tell me, how does evolution prove that no one needed to create the universe? Wait, it DOESN'T address that? Let me guess, we're still waiting but eventually that "gap will be filled" by "science" right?

How does evolution explain the origin of life?

How does evolution explain the historical evidence for God (including fulfilled prophecy)?

How does evolution explain a person's personal experiences with God? Does it explain, objective morality (no, not how morality "evolved", objective morality), free will, or consciousness?

How does evolution explain fine tuning, the fact that there are thousands of extremely unlikely factors that, only by working together, allow for life on Earth to exist?

Finally, how does evolution explain itself or other natural laws? How did the laws of logic come into existence (this is a more complicated argument)?

Even if all of these questions DID have naturalistic answers (they don't), it has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution doesn't solve much of anything in relation to God, and I'm extremely weary of arrogant, condescending scientists and their followers assuming that they've explained everything under the sun when they know they haven't. As far as evolution itself, why not look at the site? You've done pretty poorly at dispelling any myths here, you're going to have to say more than "everyone agrees about evolution and you're wrong!" But I'll let people more qualified than I address that part of your claim. What evolution really does is provide an "excuse" for those who don't want to believe in God.

It's as if people come in here thinking that no Christian has ever been in a biology class before, or that there's no way we could have possibly heard these same stale, tired old arguments, or that nobody believes in God for definite reasons but only because we were indoctrinated or something.

Furthermore, evolution itself does nothing to prove that God is not involved, it does not necessitate a person reject God, nor does it absolve any investigation into the existence of God.

A person will use whatever they want to to reject God and if evolution is that mechanism that still does not implicate evolution as some magic bullet against the existence of God. It will be placed along with all of the other excuses and used to avoid answering the tough questions.

You need to go over the Board purposes and guidelines. If you are simply here, as your OP indicates, to come rampaging in here shaking your fists at all of us stupid Christians, then this Discussion Board is not for you. Perhaps you are used to simply charging in with rhetoric on other sites but it will not do here. Come willing to discuss and discuss reasonably or not at all.