What else is there; oh - so even proving that human ideas of God are derived from all sorts of primitive ideas of the universe, or from psychological needs, or from any number of other erroneous, misguided, ignorant human proclivities, still does not disprove the actual existence of God. In fact, if there is a God, the human mind would of necessity construe any experience of that God in terms of our own primitive ideas of the universe, psychological needs and erroneous, misguided ignorance. This doesn't disprove the existence of God, it just proves what we already know of ourselves.
In actuality, the vast majority of people around the world who believe in God, and actually most of the Christians in America and Europe, have no problem believing in God while also completely accepting the process of evolution, the human sources of scriptures, and the fact that anything and everything we say about God is just our own imagination. They're good with all of it.
So not only can proving all of this not disprove the existence of God, it doesn't even convince most people of anything they don't already know and accept.
On the is-a-God side of the arguments: somehow twisting science to purportedly demonstrate that the universe as we know it could not exist without a Creator God, doesn't really prove the existence of God. It merely demonstrates that the universe is a very complex form of existence and further study is needed to resolve any of the currently contradictory findings. No matter how often or how convincingly alternative scientific findings are brought forward to challenge current scientific thought, it will never prove the necessity of a Divine Conscious Architect. It will always just mean there is more to learn about our universe.
Even contradicting every argument that atheists put forward will never prove the existence of a Divine Supreme Being. Setting out irrefutable arguments, presenting firm evidence, and using impeccable logic to challenge every assertion of atheists regarding the non-existence of God will never actually prove the existence of God. It just proves the intellectual skills of the combatants. Logic is just word games with the most skillful demonstrating only their logical skills, not the truth of their assertions. Ask any lawyer about that.
The real central problem with theists attempting to use logic, to prove that their belief in God is legitimate, is that attempts to fit That Infinite Absolute Reality into the limited boundaries of the human mind just turn God into a figment of our imagination. Anyone who believes in God because they think God can be proved by science seriously misunderstands the nature and being of God.
The only "proofs" of God which actually demonstrate the living Presence of That which transcends all else, will always be completely limited to the personal, individual, and subjective. This isn't a bad thing. These deep subjective truths are something theists can cherish, can treasure. But they are not and never will be weapons of combat. You make love with them, not war.
So much for the logical part of the arguments - what about the scientific arguments? see the next blog
No comments:
Post a Comment