Moorad
I many times hear "Prove to me that God exists." to which I respond "Prove to me
that man came from rocks." To which I hear usually "Well, all scientists (read,
all evolutionary biologists by definintion) believe this."
Setting mathematical "proofs" aside, we actually face a delima that nothing is
provable including this statement.
Sorry, when I hear "Prove to me that XXX is true ." I hear a question that is
not provable. Therefore, I refuse to base my belief on God on the
non-provability of really anything.
Thus, we have to agree to the best explanation, the beauty principle, Okums
razor, or whatever and then define what kind of evidence we will accept (a
priori, many will define God out of existence by saying that only the results of
"science" are evidence) and tell those who demand that we prove the existence of
God to prove their own existence.
Bert M.
************
Moorad Alexanian wrote:
> You are asking a question that, perhaps, a mathematician can answer who is
> well-versed on Godel's results and other such things. Of course,
> mathematical proofs do not prove the existence of anything, that is to say,
> do not bring anything into being. Proofs are mathematical games that
> indicate logical consistencies. To prove the existence of God means that you
> are bringing God into bring, which is nonsense. Moorad
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bert Massie <bert@massie-labs.com>
> To: Moorad Alexanian <alexanian@uncwil.edu>
> Cc: hcook@oanet.com <hcook@oanet.com>; asa@calvin.edu <asa@calvin.edu>
> Date: Thursday, October 19, 2000 9:52 AM
> Subject: Re: ID
>
> >Moorad
> >
> >Can you post a list of things that are "PROVEN."
> >
> >Bert M.
> >******************
> >
> >Moorad Alexanian wrote:
> >
> >> No one can prove or disprove the existence of God. I think the
> combination
> >> of being a scientist and a Christian is a powerful one that most people,
> >> especially campus people, would respect. In the past very famous
> scientists
> >> and philosophers would speak of God as being a Mathematician, a
> >> Geometrician, etc. All this points to the particular mode that the
> Designer
> >> used to design the universe. One must be blind not to infer a designer or
> >> intelligence from all the data we collect and all the laws and theories
> we
> >> offer as explanations.
> >>
> >> Moorad
> >>
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Harry Cook <hcook@oanet.com>
> >> To: asa@calvin.edu <asa@calvin.edu>
> >> Date: Wednesday, October 18, 2000 12:25 PM
> >> Subject: ID
> >>
> >> We're back to ID! I have two unrelated questions, at least I thinks
> >> they are unrelated.
> >>
> >> 1. Does anyone know of literature that explores the relationship
> >> between ID and evolutionary psychology (aka [also known as]
> >> sociobiology, behavioural ecology)?
> >>
> >> 2. Is the ID discussion (approach) another reincarnation of the
> >> proof for the existence of God? (No, I'm not being sarcastic)
> >> --------------------
> >> Harry Cook
> >> 15032 84 Ave
> >> Edmonton, AB T5R 3X5
> >>
> >> phone: 780-489-8563
> >> email: hcook@oanet.com
> >
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Oct 19 2000 - 16:02:21 EDT