Barriers to Understanding why God cannot be Proven

I would like to open this topic up for discussion, separate from the messiness in the Phat Chance topic. Mainly, I want to ask people why cannot we prove God to be unprovable? Some believers seem to find themselves quite annoyed at the prospects of proving unprovable their God. That shall be issue at the heart of this discussion; I want to try to understand what makes these people upset about the notion of proving that God cannot be proven.First, I would like to point out, that IF it is proven that God cannot be proven, what weight will that have on God's existence? What scares these believersspecifically, the believers which are annoyed by the idea of proving God to be unprovableabout showing them that their God cannot be proven? Do they need proof to believe?So, the three questions:1. Why cannot we prove God to be unprovable?
2. If it is proven that God cannot be proven, what weight will that have on God's existence?
3. Do "these believers" need proof to believe?JonEdited by Jon, : Admin request.Edited by Jon, : Title: Admin request.Edited by Jon, : Removed message to Admins.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.Edited by Jon, : No reason given.

---

"Can we say the chair on the cat, for example? Or the basket in the person? No, we can't..." - Harriet J. Ottenheimer

​

"Dim bulbs save on energy..." - jar

Hi Jon. Your Title appears to be your emphatic opinion that God can't be proven but that doesn't seem to jive with your OP in which the topic appears to be questions which you want the participants to answer. I suggest you compose a title more compatible with the OP with something like, Can God Be Proven. I'm not sure whether there's an open thread to that effect or not. Perhaps another admin will know.Otherwise I'm inclined to promote the topic but will wait to see if another admin has some concern or suggestions.

I already had Jon make a few adjustments via chat. Title does sound like someone has made a discovery, but I think he means it to be hypothetical.

Lets just go with the other Phat Chance topic. You can refine its direction and add to it now....

Either way is ok with me. I'll leave it to you and Adminastasia to decide what to do.

---

For ideological balance on the EvC admin team as a Biblical creationist.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum. Edited by AdminPhat, : added comment Edited by AdminPhat, : away we goEdited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Some believers seem to find themselves quite annoyed at the prospects of proving unprovable their God.

---

Most people do get annoyed when others try to ruin something that makes them happy or is a significant part of their life.

quote:

---

1Why cannot we prove God to be unprovable?

---

There's nothing wrong with trying to prove God to be unprovable, but if you want all believers to be happy; you're probably out of luck.So you prove God to be unprovable from a scientific standpoint today. Religion isn't science.

quote:

---

2If it is proven that God cannot be proven, what weight will that have on God's existence?

---

None. Our lack of knowledge doesn't cause something to cease to exist.

quote:

---

3Do "these believers" need proof to believe?

---

Believers feel they do have proof on a personal level.The conflict, IMO, comes in when someone states that God is unprovable and then expects or demands that those who believe should accept that as fact and adjust accordingly, which seems to mean casting one's beliefs aside.It is probably similar to the annoyance felt by nonbelievers when believers expect or demand that they accept God as they have portrayed him, which usually means one should take up their belief.

---

"Peshat is what I say and derash is what you say." --Nehama Leibowitz

1.Why cannot we prove God to be unprovable?cos we do not know what god is .. all we can list ia a few reported abilities and attridutes .. beyond that we have no idea what we are looking for when we attempt to prove .... we do not even know if we have the correct sort of sensors/detectors ......i might as well ask you to go prove Bob .. giving you only the info that its name is Bob ....2.If it is proven that God cannot be proven, what weight will that have on God's existence?well you could add it to the known attributes of god .. now you know you are looking for something unprovable ....depends on why god cant be proven ... is it a absolute unproveability .. or a lack of a suitable detector or skill ....or is it because god does not wish you to prove god ...3.Do "these believers" need proof to believe? ..they need faith which takes us to a totally different place from proof ....

This is interesting.God made a claim.
As a result of this claim, we have evidence.
Can we not apply the standard scientific method to measure this claim?Some people say, that God and faith have no place in science. - However, I can't help but feel as though we are running excuses by our own limited capacity to treat the information. And that given enough time, we would eventually have the means to run the numbers through(so to speak) and come to a definitive conclusion.

1.Why cannot we prove God to be unprovable?You cannot prove God to be unprovable from a scientific standpoint, because Creation Scientist have proven there is a God and it is hard to prove that God doesn't exist.Naturalist,Humanist, and Evolutionist give people an excuse, to why they don't believe in God. Evolution evidence is NOT scientific evidence, because science must include Faith in God(It is true that Naturalism,Humanism,and Evolution, cannot be considered apart of Science, which Creationism for its faith in God, has always been the only true reason for Science.)2.If it is proven that God cannot be proven, what weight will that have on God's existence?I doubt that would ever happen. You can't prove something to be unproven, because its already been proven!3.Do "these believers" need proof to believe?Science cannot be considered true science without God. You need God in science, Thats the only truth in science. without God, it's not considered a part of Science. For something to be considered apart of science, this would include having Faith in God, which is also called a persons Belief. It's that simple.Edited by ThyShall, : Separating the Questions from the Answers. :/Edited by ThyShall, : I messed up something and corrected it. Edited by ThyShall, : :/

quote:

---

because Creation Scientist have proven there is a God

---

Where and when did they do that?

quote:

---

Evolution evidence is NOT scientific evidence, because science must include Faith in God

---

Why must it? How is scientific inquiry helped by allowing supernatural explanations for natural phenomena?

quote:

---

Science cannot be considered true science without God.

---

Really?If you believe that your God gave you the power to fly, and you jump off a cliff, the Godless science of Physics will, I predict, trump your claim.

Sure, you can win any argument if you just define the words to mean whatever you want them to mean.But you're then you're not saying anything meaningful, so I don't know what benefit you get out of this.

---

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. -- Doug Brown (quoted by Carlin Romano in The Chronicle Review)

Which God?

Because you can't give positive proof of a negative. IOW, you can't prove something doesn't exist if it in fact, does not exist. At the most, you could conclude that there is no good reason to assume otherwise, but it is not possible to prove empirically. None, I would say. If I existed, but you were not aware of my existence, would that really effect me?To the doubtful, though, I would offer this concession: Since there are a plethora of gods out there, and your current professing faith is no faith at all, have you ever asked yourself why it is you care either way?I had to ask this inescapable question eventually because I grapled with it for so long. What inside of me is drawn towards even the interest? Is it God speaking to me in that soft, still voice, beckoning my will towards His? The answer for me was, absolutely. I would say evidence, but not proof. In my estimation, here in this earthly realm, there is no empiricism when it comes to God. I believe that to be for a very specific reason.Anyone that believes in God, just because, will not last long in that faith because it has to be fed. You see a myriad of them in here at EvC. Evidently, they were weak in faith because they sought to satisfy the flesh before they sought to seek after Him.Evidence of His existence, while not concrete proof, is a faith lived in tandem with specific evidences. I say this because you have to have faith to believe in God. You do. You absolutely do. That's all throughout the scriptures.However, there is a difference between blind faith and an informed faith. The scriptures, nature, and the Ruach HaKodesh are all evidences of God revealing Himself. But it still requires faith, undoubtedly. And don't think for a second that life ends as a believer. We are, afterall, called Believers, not Knowers.And this, perhaps, is because knowing God in the same sense that I know whether or not my shoelaces are tied is two totally different things.When I was an Agnostic, I used to say that I needed a primer in order to believe in God. I needed some basis for believing. I needed some kind of a catalyst. After praying earnestly for it, He finally answered me in a profound way. And although those moments are rare, 1: it makes it all the more special when it does happen, and 2: a deadening silence is my surest sign that I have stepped out of His perfect will, and right into His permissive will-- which, really, is just another way of saying, my will.When I re-engage, He re-engages, just as the scriptures declare."Draw near to God, and He will draw near to you."Based on experience, I believe that very much to be true.Hills and valleys, my friend. A relationship with God is going through hills and valleys.

---

"It is better to shun the bait, than struggle in the snare." -Ravi Zacharias

In reverse order: No, for then it is not faith, it is knowledge, and then they are no longer believers. The earth going around the sun is not a matter of belief because it has proven to be so. Rather the last thing they need is proof. None, for god cannot be disproved, as there can always be a god one removed from any argument that is made, down to the barest deist concept of initiating the formation of the universe. Because there is always the possibility that god could reveal itself from behind whatever cloak of anonymity one desires, down to the barest deist concept of initiating the formation of the universe.Enjoy.