Intelligent Design, the best explanation of Origins

This is my personal virtual library, where i collect information, which leads in my view to Intelligent Design as the best explanation of the origin of the physical Universe, life, and biodiversity


You are not connected. Please login or register

Intelligent Design, the best explanation of Origins » Does God exist ? origin of God - metaphysical reality » There are no empirical proofs of Gods existence

There are no empirical proofs of Gods existence

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Admin


Admin
There are no empirical proofs of Gods existence

Demand: No one has ever produced any verifiable evidence for any god. All the religions make that claim for their specific god. Well, I want some proof, hard verifiable proof.
Answer: This is one of the most common demands of Atheists and mentioned as reason for unbelief until the burden of proof is met. All which such demand demonstrates is the lack of epistemological sophistication of the unbeliever. Usually, this challenge goes hand in hand with the claim that " There is no evidence of God's existence ". What they want to say however is, that there is no empirical proof.

This is a silly epistemological approach and demonstrates the lack of understanding on the unbeliever's side how to get sound conclusions on origins. There is no empirical proof of Gods existence. But there is neither, that the known universe, the natural physical material world is all there is.  To prove, God does not exist, we would need to be all-knowing. We are not. The burden of proof cannot be met on both sides.  Consequently, the right question to come to the most accurate, case-correct, evidence-based inference and conclusion does not need, require or demand an empirical demonstration of Gods existence but we can elaborate philosophical inferences to either affirm or deny the existence of a creator based on circumstantial evidence, logic, and reason.

The probability of God is not to be dismissed. Nobody can prove with reason anything except potentialities, probabilities and possibilities. Reason is not the science of reality when it ventures beyond the scope of physical. It can only imply.

The seeker must also be willing to permit the evidence to lead wherever it is. He needs to be willing to put all his prejudices and bias aside as much as possible, and permit an entirely and exclusively rational approach, based on scientific reasoning and logic, that is, doing the observation, elaborating a hypothesis, testing when possible, and getting well-based and rationally justifiable conclusions. When dealing with the observation of the natural world, the question is, what mechanism explains best the origin of X. That is not the same as to ask, how something works, which is what empirical science deals with. That helps and advances the question of how something came to be when its mechanistic ( physicochemical ) working is known, and what contributes to that. Back in Darwins time, 150 years ago, there was no knowledge about the complexity of the biochemical reality, intracellular action and molecular world. Today, we have advanced understanding on that, and every day that passes, that knowledge adds up.  

The first question to answer is not which God, but what cause and mechanism best explains our existence. There are basically just two options. Either a creative conscious intelligent supernatural powerful creative agency above the natural world acted and was involved, or not. That's it. All answers can be divided in this two basic options and categories. While the atheist affirms, no God was required, the theist claims, God is necessary. Some atheists have argued that the can be many explanations, we just do not know them yet. I disagree. What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

The next step a seeker needs to elucidate is: What signs point to design, rather than non-design? What can be clearly attributed to the action of a conscious intelligent agency? ( or agencies - plural ? ) Then he has to move forward to actually understand how our natural world works. The better understanding and education, the better. Unfortunately, this is a huge hurdle, and many are too lazy to spend time to actually understand the natural world and prefer to see what fits best what they want, and then search for who provides the answers they want to be true ( bias is a big factor contributing to self-delusion ). That is a common approach by atheists. They prefer to rely on the claims of the four horsemen of atheism, Dawkins, Dennet, Shermer and Harris, and the pope of all, Darwin, rather than spending time and looking into the evidence by themselves. All they do, behaving in that manner, is disrespecting themselves, putting their souls at risk to be deluded by their own wishes and faulty approach, and if they are wrong, losing their eternity with God.

A smart epistemological approach about origins of our existence goes as this:

1. Asking: what is ? what exists? Answer: X
2. Asking: what are the possible mechanisms to explain the origin of X? Answer: Y and Z ( and eventually, other causes )
3. Is X better explained by Y or Z?
4. Concluding Y or Z, depending on where the evidence leads to.
5. Moving forward, and trying to identify as accurately as possible the precise identity of the cause, if it is an intelligent agent.

6. Number 1 and 2 is a continuing exercise of science, philosophy, and theology. Upon the advance of understanding, the conclusion is eventually re-evaluated, and changed, if sufficient reasons exist.  

Upon my understanding, intelligent design/creationism tops naturalism - materialism as best case-adequate answer in regards to origins:

125 reasons to believe in God
http://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1276-125-reasons-to-believe-in-god

A cumulative case for the God of the bible
http://reasonandscience.catsboard.com/t1753-a-cumulative-case-for-the-god-of-the-bible

" There is no evidence for God " Really ??!!
http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1440-there-is-no-evidence-for-god



Last edited by Admin on Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:33 am; edited 3 times in total

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
There are no empirical proofs of Gods existence

Demand: All the religions make that claim for their specific god. Well, I want some proof, hard verifiable proof. 
Answer: This is one of the most common demands of Atheists and mentioned as reason for unbelief until the burden of proof is met. All which such demand demonstrates is the lack of epistemological sophistication of the skeptic. Usually, this challenge goes hand in hand with the claim that " There is no evidence of God's existence ". What they want to say however is, that there is no empirical proof. 

This is a silly epistemological approach and demonstrates the lack of understanding on the unbeliever's side how to get sound conclusions on origins. There is no empirical proof of Gods existence. But there is neither, that the known universe, the natural physical material world is all there is. To prove, God does not exist, we would need to be all-knowing. We are not. The burden of proof cannot be met on both sides. Consequently, the right question to come to the most accurate, case-correct, evidence-based inference and conclusion does not need, require or demand an empirical demonstration of Gods existence but we can elaborate philosophical inferences to either affirm or deny the existence of a creator based on circumstantial evidence, logic, and reason.

The seeker must also be willing to permit the evidence to lead wherever it is. He needs to be willing to put all his prejudices and bias aside as much as possible, and permit an entirely and exclusively rational approach, based on scientific reasoning and logic, that is, doing the observation, elaborating a hypothesis, testing when possible, and getting well-based and rationally justifiable conclusions. When dealing with the observation of the natural world, the question is, what mechanism explains best the origin of X. That is not the same as to ask, how something works, which is what empirical science deals with. That helps and advances the question of how something came to be when its mechanistic ( physicochemical ) working is known, and what contributes to that. Back in Darwins time, 150 years ago, there was no knowledge about the complexity of the biochemical reality, intracellular action and molecular world. Today, we have advanced understanding on that, and every day that passes, that knowledge adds up. 

The first question to answer is not which God, but what cause and mechanism best explains our existence. There are basically just two options. Either a creative conscious intelligent supernatural powerful creative agency above the natural world acted and was involved, or not. That's it. All answers can be divided in this two basic options and categories. While the atheist affirms, no God was required, the theist claims, God is necessary. Some atheists have argued that the can be many explanations, we just do not know them yet. I disagree. What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence. 

The next step a seeker needs to elucidate is: What signs point to design, rather than non-design? What can be clearly attributed to the action of a conscious intelligent agency? ( or agencies - plural ? ) Then he has to move forward to actually understand how our natural world works. The better understanding and education, the better. Unfortunately, this is a huge hurdle, and many are too lazy to spend time to actually understand the natural world and prefer to see what fits best what they want, and then search for who provides the answers they want to be true ( bias is a big factor contributing to self-delusion ). That is a common approach by atheists. They prefer to rely on the claims of the four horsemen of atheism, Dawkins, Dennet, Shermer and Harris, and the pope of all, Darwin, rather than spending time and looking into the evidence by themselves. All they do, behaving in that manner, is disrespecting themselves, putting their souls at risk to be deluded by their own wishes and faulty approach, and if they are wrong, losing their eternity with God.

A smart epistemological approach about origins of our existence goes as this:

1. Asking: what is ? what exists? Answer: X
2. Asking: what are the possible mechanisms to explain the origin of X? Answer: Y and Z ( and eventually, other causes )
3. Is X better explained by Y or Z?
4. Concluding Y or Z, depending on where the evidence leads to.
5. Moving forward, and trying to identify as accurately as possible the precise identity of the cause, if it is an intelligent agent.

6. Number 1 and 2 is a continuing exercise of science, philosophy, and theology. Upon the advance of understanding, the conclusion is eventually re-evaluated, and changed, if sufficient reasons exist. 

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Admin


Admin
Atheists constantly ask for empirical proofs of Gods existence. They say: No one has ever produced any verifiable evidence for any god. All the religions make that claim for their specific god. Well, I want some proof, hard verifiable proof.

Have you already heard that demand? I hear it constantly. Then you begin with Jesus, with the fulfilled prophecies, with design in nature, with the Kalaam, fine-tuning of the universe, the complexity of living beings, the origin of life and so on.....

When you already did spend a deal of time, and no progress was made, you ask: What evidence are you looking for? usually, the atheist has no answer, because he never thought about that question. He does not know how to recognize Gods signature in nature. But that also demonstrates that he had never a real intention to find God. Usually, most atheists we encounter, just want to confirm what they already believe, and are not open or interested to encounter Jesus.

They see no benefit in their lives to believe in God, want to keep living autonomously from him and diminish the fear that HE eventually does exist and might punish and condemn them for their sins. So they are grateful when they find a not so well instructed theist, where they can bash his faith in old debunked fairy tale books written by sheepherders, and so on. When they find a theist which refutes their lame excuses with qualification, they get angry, and name-calling begins.

But when they demand verifiable evidence, they mean that they want a theophany, where God does magic in front of them, or an appearance on the Sky, where he hand-waves: Hi friend, I am heeere !!

An atheist in most cases has no idea how Gods existence would be proven. Another escape is: " God knows what it takes to convince me of his existence".

But usually, what is meant, even if not expressed is: They want some sensory input, they want to sense God.

Socrates said: Say, that I may see you!

Spoken words say who you are. Jesus said:

For by your words you will be acquitted, and by your words, you will be condemned.”

Words say who you are.

Words say who God is. Information is the key. A meme which is quite insulting says: " I need people to prove God to me because I cannot think for myself."

Well, the truth is, God speaks to us through his word, because that is the right and best method of revelation. Spoken words, Information. Of course, if an atheist rejects Gods revelation through his spoken word outhand and a priori, then the problem is not the lack of Gods revelation. But his incredulity and misotheism.

Gods message was revealed to humankind through history that he made with Israel in the Old Testament, during an increasing taking off the veil, a gradual revelation of his nature through HIS interaction with Israel, which had its epitome when God made his appearance in Christ, and the curtain of the holy of the holy of the second temple was torn in two from top to bottom. That meant, men now had direct spiritual access to the throne of God through the holy spirit and prayer - no priest intermediate required.

The age of grace makes it possible to man through the holy spirit to come into the close presence of God, into the intimate union and spiritual interaction. God has made it possible. Now it depends on us, to develop this relationship. Gods word exhorts us to exert our faith, and the more we do, the more we will experience God in our lives.

As the Bible says: There is no justification for unbelief. God could have remained hidden and not revealed his identity - but he did. He has revealed his power in his creation, so: no excuse. The claim that there is no evidence of HIM is lame, inexcusable, willfully ignorant, and unless the unbeliever repents, Gods response will be just and in time.

View user profile http://elshamah.heavenforum.com

Sponsored content


Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum