Will humanity ever prove/disprove God?
Given how much scientific knowledge constantly advances, do you think there will ever be a time when humanity can objectively prove or disprove the existence of God?
Comments609
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
Nope - simple as that.
You can't prove that god does not exist because logically - you can't prove the negative.
And the further science progresses - the divine is pushed further into various gaps and words of metaphor.
Back in the old days, when people spoke about heaven, they quite literally meant the high sky. When we realised what the sky is, it was pushed beyond that, to space. Once we discovered what space is, divine got pushed further and further.
And there is ultimately the old Greek concept of Demiurge - a divine-like entity that sees "outside the box" - the "box" being our reality - an entity that by very definition can't be proven nor observed from the inside of the box. I personally like to call it, the ultimate excuse - it is beyond understanding, so explanation is not only unnecessary but also impossible. This is literally not different to "it's magic, I don't have to explain it" trope - while it is generally seen as poor writing, apparently religions get the pass.
You can't prove that god does not exist because logically - you can't prove the negative.
And the further science progresses - the divine is pushed further into various gaps and words of metaphor.
Back in the old days, when people spoke about heaven, they quite literally meant the high sky. When we realised what the sky is, it was pushed beyond that, to space. Once we discovered what space is, divine got pushed further and further.
And there is ultimately the old Greek concept of Demiurge - a divine-like entity that sees "outside the box" - the "box" being our reality - an entity that by very definition can't be proven nor observed from the inside of the box. I personally like to call it, the ultimate excuse - it is beyond understanding, so explanation is not only unnecessary but also impossible. This is literally not different to "it's magic, I don't have to explain it" trope - while it is generally seen as poor writing, apparently religions get the pass.
Nope. And that's where faith comes in. That doesn't make it okay to accept dogma blindly, but to believe in God means having faith despite a lack of concrete evidence.
Humanity can't prove to me that I exist, therefor, I highly doubt it can prove anything at all regarding god.
Should the Second Coming occur, I'd say that would be pretty solid proof. Otherwise, I have no idea.
No,something that is immaterial as in lack of physical form like vvichfvker said cannot be proven by with physical evidence but logical.by asking something to be proven especially as that something said to create time and space and was outside of those spheres is foolish and ignorant, We can only look at the universe for such answers and draw conclusions that way
If we did that it would go back to the strongest. That or a new-world-order and the anti-Christ would be in charge. So the answer is no.
God is playing a game. That is how harder the game is as we go about time.
God is playing a game. That is how harder the game is as we go about time.
>> do you think there will ever be a time when humanity can objectively prove or disprove the existence of God? <<
First everyone involved in the discussion has to agree on the nature of God. (Good luck with that)
Einstein's definition of God was the universe and all it's natural laws. I don't know of any possible evidence that could prove the universe does not exist, so Einstein's God is not subject to scientific inquiry.
First everyone involved in the discussion has to agree on the nature of God. (Good luck with that)
Einstein's definition of God was the universe and all it's natural laws. I don't know of any possible evidence that could prove the universe does not exist, so Einstein's God is not subject to scientific inquiry.
Russell's Teapot. But it's likely that god doesn't exist. We're arrogant as fuck t-to assume that if a god did exist it'd care about humanity or consider us special, let alone be a source of morality beneficial to humans.
Russell's Teapot says the burden of proof is on those who make the claim. The hubris is the claim that anyone can speak for God.
The Occam's Razor itself ignores the Occam's Razor out of convenience.
That's NOT logical.
And "we are too small for God to care about us, so let's reject Him" - is the textbook case of SELFISH ARROGANCE.
Not that you'd CARE.
That's NOT logical.
And "we are too small for God to care about us, so let's reject Him" - is the textbook case of SELFISH ARROGANCE.
Not that you'd CARE.
It is not logically possible to ensure the non-existence of something.
One cannot prove that something does not exist. What is not existent does not produce proof of its non-existence.
One can assure that, in a limited and determined scope, something does not exist. But that cannot be applied in the universe.
Now, proving that if it exists will depend on you interpreting that it is God and what are the proofs of its existence that you consider valid.
Regards
One cannot prove that something does not exist. What is not existent does not produce proof of its non-existence.
One can assure that, in a limited and determined scope, something does not exist. But that cannot be applied in the universe.
Now, proving that if it exists will depend on you interpreting that it is God and what are the proofs of its existence that you consider valid.
Regards
Science does not have to disprove god or any other postulated existence, those claiming they exist must prove their claim, until they do, they can be ignored.
God is a mutable, intangible, constantly in flux, evolving concept, and all religions based on static objective perceptions of god are illusions primarily designed for control
Truth evolves and changes and becomes a different shape every time you encounter an aspect of god or contemplate a god, it changes the definition of what a god is by contemplating the existence of a god, you change the definition of all gods that have ever existed-- that's literally it.... anything else is, has been, and will only ever be subjective conjecture that arrives from the deception of Ego/personal agenda
Trying to prove/disprove god by bringing it into the physicality of science is a paradox.... it's like trying to grab a shadow in your hand. Once you believe you've finally caught the true answer, you can only ever end up exactly in the same place you started from....
Those who truly "believe" they've found proof of god end up completely fucking batshit lunatic mental patients for a reason-- the purest forms of enlightenment are held deep, deep, deep within the most inescapable spirals of madness
Truth evolves and changes and becomes a different shape every time you encounter an aspect of god or contemplate a god, it changes the definition of what a god is by contemplating the existence of a god, you change the definition of all gods that have ever existed-- that's literally it.... anything else is, has been, and will only ever be subjective conjecture that arrives from the deception of Ego/personal agenda
Trying to prove/disprove god by bringing it into the physicality of science is a paradox.... it's like trying to grab a shadow in your hand. Once you believe you've finally caught the true answer, you can only ever end up exactly in the same place you started from....
Those who truly "believe" they've found proof of god end up completely fucking batshit lunatic mental patients for a reason-- the purest forms of enlightenment are held deep, deep, deep within the most inescapable spirals of madness
This ^
I just don't know. Personally, I'm an agnostic atheist who acknowledges that we are living in the secular age and have killed God - but I still know that a few people, in fact, many worldwide, still have religious faith. I think that no matter how far into science we get, there'll still always be a few creeds out there.
Interesting that you credit secularism with killing God. I have often stated the the reason blasphemy is so offensive is because a god that exists only as words can be destroyed using only words.
Well scientist have disproven the existence of gods or god multiple times. I think the question you should be asking is anyone going to listen to science. And the answer is for a long time no. (Sadly).
Maybe
ive taken every science class possible, I am well educated in chemistry, microbiology, anatomy and physiology, and I can tell you while learning all of these sciences, my faith in God became even stronger, because I could see the details of his creation. Id like to think im self aware enough to know that all of creation would not be this perfect without a perfect creator.
This time last year, I felt the same: the more I studied science, the more religious I felt, as I felt inclined to believe in intelligent design. However, things had gradually changed when I learnt about Darwinism and how natural selection works. The human body, for example. It may seem complex, but it is complex because it has evolved and adapted to be that way over many, many years. I'm not trying to change your opinions, but just expressing what I believe.
Maybe there is a creator and they don't care .
Absolutely not.
For the living, God's existence is a matter of belief. You either believe or you don't.
To the truly faithful science can only demonstrate how God worked creation. To the non-believer science reveals how it all happened.
There are two questions, one asked of the other, that make my point.
Who or what created God?
What banged, why did it bang? (If that is answered, which it may already have, then the question is what created the membrane, where did it come from?)
No one will actually "know" until they die. If there is no God, then no one will ever know.
For the living, God's existence is a matter of belief. You either believe or you don't.
To the truly faithful science can only demonstrate how God worked creation. To the non-believer science reveals how it all happened.
There are two questions, one asked of the other, that make my point.
Who or what created God?
What banged, why did it bang? (If that is answered, which it may already have, then the question is what created the membrane, where did it come from?)
No one will actually "know" until they die. If there is no God, then no one will ever know.
A complex world may require a complex designer - the designer would have to be omnipotent and all that as believed to be by monotheists. But a complex designer is that complex he/she/they/it would need a designer just as complex.