Not necessarily. I think in his train of thought, God created the natural world, science is confined to the natural world, therefor you can't use science to truly refute the existence of God.
Along the same line, since God created the natural world, you can use the natural world to prove his existence.
25 comments
So you can use the natural world to prove god exists, but not to prove he doesn't exist.
What if you try and fail to prove god exists? Does that failure prove god doesn't exist?
Actually, it seems like TheJehosephat was playing devil's advocate regarding the story they were responding to (note the phrase "in his train of thought").
Anyway, I don't think this is really all that fundie.
HE COULD GO ALL THE WAAAA-
fail.
You almost used a valid argument for theism [Simulationism, even], but then you kinda tripped it up.
Sorry, no points.
Science is concerned only with the natural world. It is indifferent to the existence or non-existence of God. If it can't be tested emirically it ain't science's bag.
... you can use the natural world to prove his existence.
You can continue the attempt. Hasn't worked yet.
You can't prove that God doesn't exist. True.
You can, however, prove that the Christian God does not exist by simply demonstrating the contradictory nature of the Bible.
The search for the Grand Unified Theory is the search for the definition of the hypothetical Deity, who/which is obviously far superior to the god of the bible.
You have to admit, there's a certain elegance found in the ways matter and energy interact.
Right on the first part, presupposing the existence and nature of God on the second part.
So close to logical, but yet so far...
"since God created the natural world, you can use the natural world to prove his existence."
Fundie Circular Logic. Can't you guys come up with something original?
Of course science cannot be used to prove any negative.
However, the onus is on proving the positive.
So instead one must PROVE there is a God.
The natural World doe snot prove there is a God until it is proven that there is a God in the first place and that said God created it.
So close, yet so far. In principle, it's the agnostic position but, hey, don't use the "beauty of creation" argument then.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
