Science itself proves the existence of God?

Yes, any logically thinking person can use science to prove the existence of God. We know black holes exists and yet no one has ever seen one. I would love to see science and religion more fused together instead of polar opposites.

"That means science is the biggest proponent of God, since science cannot explain how out of nothing a big bang occurred of nothing and created something."

No, no, no. Saying "I don't know how it started" is NOT the same thing as saying "God did it".

here's a scientist who skates right up to the edge of saying there is a god/conscious universe [well, meta-universe, actually] or whatever you want to call it:

Circular logic.. If god made it from nothing,, then nature could have made it from nothing... If everything needed a creator, who or what created the creator that created the creator to create something.....

but this is the point. Since science can't rationalize the law that something came out of nothing, maybe the only answer is something bigger than science: i.e. a god.

No one in science says something came from nothing.. Even in the Bible it says there was something for this god to work with.. Nature had access to the same thing...The Christians are the ones that put the spin of "Something from Nothing" because if there was nothing then what did this God of theirs have to work with "Nothing" twisted Logic,,,at its best...

actually, classic, it is possible for something to come from nothing. virtual particles are known to exist and they pop in and out of existence from...well, nothing.

I know that.. I was quoting what the bible thumpers say..

existances colliding

I think things will look different to either side. You can prove anything with science if you are an atheist who believes strongly in the values of science. That being said, you can prove anything with God if you are religious, and believe in the miracles of a holy spirit. So who's to say?

Actually there is no proving anything about This GOD... Science is based on evidence and Facts.. Theory is theory untill proven, then it becomes fact, There are no Facts to support a God/Gods

people seem to think that something coming from nothing is a truism. well, actually, it is possible using Heisenberg uncertainty principle that something can come from nothing. i am not saying that the universe did come from what people consider to be nothing, i am pointing out that there is a chance that it may be the case.

Science can't prove the existence or non-existence. Let's just say, science is useless when it comes to this subject. I mean, I say...no, god doesn't exist, therefore science can't prove what doesn't exist. If something doesn't exist then it doesn't exist.

Science does prove that there is LACK of evidence . One cannot prove a negative,,, the one claiming the positive is the one responsible for providing facts to support their claim....

Exactly.

Science does not go to the supernatural as the default explanation for the riddles it has yet to solve. Science is okay with unanswered questions. In fact, unanswered questions are the reason why science is necessary.

So you theory is, because science can't explain how the big bang occurred, it proves God must exist?

Honestly I don't like the theory for two reasons

1) It assumes the big bang happened. The big bang is just a theory (some even says a ridiculous theory), which might not of ever happened. So your theory is based off another theory which could be totally wrong.

2) If science can't explain something, it only means three things... 1) Science can't explain it .... 2) Any thing that does explain it is just a theory (until proven)....3) There might be a false assumption some where.

(Note to readers: When I say science, I mean facts as in proven.... things like say, the world was flat, was thought and taught as science and fact... when really it wasn't... so false theories thought to be science (fact) would fall into that 3rd one)

=============================...

Also you said, "Science does not go with a concept of "it has always existed""

I'm confused by that... because science does say "matter cannot be created or destroyed" ... which basically means it does go with a concept of "it has always existed" if by "it" you mean matter.

=============================...

Science does not prove nor disprove any gods or goddess.

They could all be watching over us :)

http://www.factmonster.com/ip...

Science and religion actually go great together, people just refuse to realize it...

You have the right to your belief. I disagree though.

You misunderestimate me. I don't have a belief. I'm a searcher. I'm interested in what everyone thinks. That's why I posted the question. Not everyone is your enemy.

"What caused the God, then?" is exactly where this logic fails, obviously. You cannot use the law, then immediately break it. Even worse, it would still be utterly assuming an answer. A "God of the gaps", in other words.

We can ask questions we currently do not have answers to all, day, long, but none of them evidence of a magic man in the sky. It is only evidence of our ability to ask questions.

Correct answer is "we don't know" how our particular Universe began. We have some fairly good attempts floating around, but not much more, and I defy anyone to suggest otherwise.

you're right. what caused God. That's the ultimate question. Since science is based upon cause and effect we come up against the ultimate question: what caused God. Which means science can't explain under the terms cause and effect, which means that there does exist "non cause and effect" which science can't deal with. Thank you. You've pointed out that science can't explain God and nobody can explain science.

Science does not need to explain "God". God was invented by humans as a way of attempting to explain that which cannot be explained.

Jim, I know you're uber-smart, but get outside the box dude. We're not talking about God per se. we're taliing about the unknown constant. Science cannot explain "god" and "god" cannot explain science. Doesn't this lead you to realize that neither has the true explanation? And doesn't this lead you to another dimentsion?

I am not in a box and I do not know what a "dude" is. Your question very specifically refers to God and that is how I addressed it. If you are reduced to name-calling then I am no longer a part of this.

are you getting tetchy? A dude is something we say in the US. I'm sorry there's no direct translation into English. What can you do. But chill, dude (get the meaning of dude here) You could use the word "bro". This is a serious discourse on God vs Science. Don't ruin it by shilly-shallying. "get my drift"?
Nobody here is seeking to down anyone or call anyone out. Believe it or not, sometimes (rare I admit) Sodahead does actually have some fundamentally serious conversations. We none of us know the answer. And we aren't judging. Join in, say your bit and quit being defensive. (We none of us know the answer...............get it?)

what caused God.
You are still completely and utterly assuming a God exists.

we come up against the ultimate question: what caused God.
If this "God" is defined only to be "the unknown thing that started time for our Universe", then there would be no need to give "it" a name.

which means that there does exist "non cause and effect"
If you say so, and it still could be ANYthing... If time had a beginning, does the term "before" even have meaning? Etc, etc...

You've pointed out that science can't explain God
We can't even evidence a God, let alone "explain" this "God".

and nobody can explain science.
Dismissing the pinnacle of current, practical knowledge over a regress paradox is silly, flaca. ;-)

I think that you're stretching logic to the nth degree with that one. There was a big bang therefore there must be a God? And that God waited 4.6 billion years for the earth to cool and then sent his son to be amongst us and instruct us not to sin? Hmmmm......

no I'm saying that if the big bang spread stardust everywhere, where did the stardust originate from?

I do not think that anyone will ever be able to answer that with any degree of certainty. I think we can only ever speculate / theorise.

look above at what sokokid says. it encapsulates the dichotomy.

Religions don't care if God actually exists or not, they just want to corner the market in describing God's attributes (as if they knew or cared) and why you should follow their lead.

Not saying anything about God existing or not but, religion has always been a big game, and it is man made.

Science can't prove everything. Sometimes you just have to believe in the things you can't see.

you "have to"?

Really?

Note the presence of the question mark. That generally means that I am asking you.

No, I perfectly understood it. I just think it's a silly question. It's not like I'm forcing something on you.

You're right. "really?" is a silly question. Folks need to grok this question or bypass it. Jim bypassed it.