• Categories

  • Most Popular Questions

  • Recently Viewed Questions

  • Recent Answers

    How To Make a Digita… on What does a frequency of 100 H…
    Daigrepont on Can an earthquake cause air tu…
    Benedict on How did God come into exi…
    joshua on How does the human body g…
    Ian on How did God come into exi…
  • Recent Questions

  • Blog Stats

    • 2,227,292 hits
  • Visitors since 11-3-08

    counter create hit
  • Terms and Conditions

  • Warning

    We are doing maintenance on this site, so some posts may disappear for a short time. Sorry. Normal service will soon be resumed...
  • Pages

  • February 2008
    M T W T F S S
        Mar »
  • Archives

  • Meta

  • Advertisements

Is science willing to except the view that there is a God?

Is science willing to except the view that there is a creative force in the Universe? In other words is science for or against the concept of God?
Matthew Trainer from Glasgow (age 55+)


8 Responses

  1. Could you possibly clarify this question? Are you asking ‘Is science willing to except the view that there is a God?’ in terms of excepting it from their scientific enquiry and not investigating the possible existence of God or reasons for belief OR are you asking ‘Is science willing to accept the view that their is a God’, as in is religious belief compatible with a scientific viewpoint? I presume the later as it is more frequently asked, but the former is also an interesting question to ask in terms of the potential scope of scientific enquiry. Thanks.

  2. Scientists have very different opinions on this!

    Some feel that the universe can be explained without the need for a God to create it.

    Others look at the same things and clearly see the creator God behind it all.

    I don’t think it’s possible to generalise on what “Science” thinks on this subject.

  3. Reply to Lorna Stevenson
    Yes, it is the view as in – is religious belief compatible with a scientific viewpoint? I would think that a scientist could not accept Genesis literary but only as a metaphor for a process that was not clearly understood by ancient philosophers at the time. After all it was not until 1859 that Charles Darwin published his ‘On the Origin of Species’, which is relatively recent in the order of history. At the time this caused considerable creationist- evolutionist controversy involving very prominent scientists of the time.

  4. Religion is faith with the absence of evidence. Science requires evidence through enquiry and experimentation. Science is against the concept of God and the miracles contained in scripture because science requires evidence. As science continues to answer and address the most complex and interesting problems around us, I believe religion becomes even more archaic and apocryphal. I think the idea of a divine creator is too complex to explain the complexities of the world around us.

  5. I see a vague reference to Occans razor in KL’s reply. Which is the simpler answer, God did it or, it all evolved from 9, or possibly 11 dimensional curtains occuring outside time but still they managed to move in such a way that a four dimensional universe came out of their collision. However, I do not see either idea as being satisfactory. God requires belief one way or another, but you may be comforted by the cosmological argument. What is the likelihood that God created the universe. Turn that around, what is the likelihood that he didn’t.

  6. To answer David Whight’s first question – the notion of multiple dimensions is MUCH less complex – and far more satisfactory – than the traditional Christian notion of God.

    To answer his second question – it’s extremely unlikely that the traditional Christian God created the universe because it’s extremely unlikely that such an entity (i.e. the TCG) exists.

    (God is such a flexible concept that one has to define it more exactly to enable sensible discussion.)

  7. Lorna, since primitive humans communalised and first herded animals and grew meagre crops from seeds, they needed something to blame and praise when times were bad and good. Similarly, in the face of natural disasters that they couldn’t explain and didn’t understand the idea of there being a higher authority in control that could be influenced by worship, offerings and persuasion must have been natural – especially sitting outside at night looking out to the stars.

    We can forgive them for their ignorance. But we now know more than our superstitious ancestors.

    Science requires proof, based on evidence. Sadly, there is no proof of the existence of any God. What there is in abundance, is belief, and quotations from scriptures, the origin of which is itself in doubt, but that’s not the same as proof.

    Although there are some individual scientists that accept the view in your question, the mayority would not. The reason why some do may be answered below.

    When you drill deeper into what makes belief, then you uncover a very dark and sinister issue. People don’t often come by their belief as consenting adults using the intellect and objective knowledge that they’ve gained as adults.

    Belief is almost always indoctrinated into very young children by parents or by others in positions of high esteem, or responsibility. They are frightened into conforming to the religious code by stories of eternal suffering if the fail or deviate from belief.

  8. I think Al Cowell is absolutely right. We are how we were raised and we trusted our parents to be truthful. I think the concept of a god in the religous sense as an all knowing entity that controls our lives is as plausible as the concept of Father Christmas. Now how many scientists believe in him, except at Christmas time when they might get a new computer on the tree. In my opinion, the idea of a god just stifles scientific progress.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: