Fundamental idea on proving God's existence with science?

Question

I think that proving God's existence or any deity from any culture with the rigors of science is fundamentally absurd. The popular arguments usually involve space-time and the big bang theory. (I have a layperson's understanding of those ideas). Suppose that some scientific theory has indeed proven that there exist a creator of the universe, then it still remains to be shown that "the creator of the universe" does in fact have all the attributes of the deity of that culture. Furthermore, if our greatest thinkers succeed in showing that "the creator" does have personal attributes, then what if those attributes contradict the characteristics of the believed deity? Should the new found "creator of the universe" be considered God? Hence, my main reason that it is absurd to try prove God's existence with science is that God is **not well-defined** even in non-scientific language and that proving it in scientific terms is comical. Does this argument make any sense to you? To prove God does one have to show that a certain physical particles exist? An equation? A fruit? A dog? A mathematical proof? What exactly needs to be shown is unclear to me. So what I want to know is what people trying to prove God, wants to show.

Answer 1

Whether or not anyone could actually prove the existence of God (or Gods) through science - and I'm as puzzled about how that could be done as you are - it's clear that there is good reason why anyone would want to determine if God (or Gods) existed through science.

The old saying "Nature abhors a vacuum" is just as true of human beings. Human beings demand answers, so much so that we will go to the extent of making things up to satisfy our need for knowing. Uncertainly - a state of not knowing - is frightening because it's potentially dangerous. The human ego is determined, at all costs, to ensure its continuing existence - self preservation. Merely the potential for danger is an unacceptable circumstance for the human ego. The problem is that, even the average comfortable Middle Class lifestyle of the early-21st century includes the potential for danger. Indeed, simply existing comes with the potential for danger. How much more potential for danger was there 1,000 years ago or 10,000 years ago.

The fact that being certain about one's circumstances doesn't remove the reality of the potential for danger (or, indeed, the presence of actual danger) is irrevelant. As long as the ego feels safe, then the ego is relieved of the burden of worrying about potential dangers. Essentially, it's an act of self delusion, but one that human beings are willing to indulge in, consciously or otherwise, so as to be relieved of unbearable anxiety.

Thus the insistence on wanting to know, without question, whether or not God (or Gods) exist. Those who have convinced themselves - known as 'belief' - that God (or Gods) exists quite naturally would soothe any doubts they may have by establishing some form of proof. The same applies for those who have convinced themselves that God (or Gods) can't possible exist.

Answer 2

Whether or not anyone could actually prove the existence of God (or Gods) through science - and I'm as puzzled about how that could be done as you are - it's clear that there is good reason why anyone would want to determine if God (or Gods) existed through science.

The old saying "Nature abhors a vacuum" is just as true of human beings. Human beings demand answers, so much so that we will go to the extent of making things up to satisfy our need for knowing. Uncertainly - a state of not knowing - is frightening because it's potentially dangerous. The human ego is determined, at all costs, to ensure its continuing existence - self preservation. Merely the potential for danger is an unacceptable circumstance for the human ego. The problem is that, even the average comfortable Middle Class lifestyle of the early-21st century includes the potential for danger. Indeed, simply existing comes with the potential for danger. How much more potential for danger was there 1,000 years ago or 10,000 years ago.

The fact that being certain about one's circumstances doesn't remove the reality of the potential for danger (or, indeed, the presence of actual danger) is irrevelant. As long as the ego feels safe, then the ego is relieved of the burden of worrying about potential dangers. Essentially, it's an act of self delusion, but one that human beings are willing to indulge in, consciously or otherwise, so as to be relieved of unbearable anxiety.

Thus the insistence on wanting to know, without question, whether or not God (or Gods) exist. Those who have convinced themselves - known as 'belief' - that God (or Gods) exists quite naturally would soothe any doubts they may have by establishing some form of proof. The same applies for those who have convinced themselves that God (or Gods) can't possible exist.