subject: Lack of proof for God's existence or nonexistence is itself the crux of matter! Part II [print this page] Lack of proof for God's existence or nonexistence is itself the crux of matter! Part II
Lack of proof for God's existence or nonexistence is itself the crux of matter! Part II
God is beyond these. He is not subject to science, for he is the creator of science and knowledge.
But scientists, in order to believe in thing they have to prove it to exist, to be empirically observed. This is why a lot of scientists do not believe in God. Well, for the disappointment of scientists, the biggest question of all is who made the universe, subject to science itself, and who ordains it together. For there should be something brought it into existence and managed it the way it is.
It is too easy to reject this idea and consider the universe as either eternal or self made, or even with the big bang hypothesis, there is no necessity for God, as the stupid blinded and mind crippled Stephen Hawking said.
Proof for or against God's existence, a causal- external-finality, was and still is the subject of human thought, a relentless objective for humans. It is the subject of religious thought. It is the subject of scientific validity.
But, alas, there is no proof, not one single evidence, not one single index.
Aristotle, in his Physics as well as Metaphysics, resorted to movement in the universe to conclude by necessity a God. But movement is but one expression of matter and does not prove the existence of God.
St Paul and St Augustine have tempted their chance to show that the presence of the universe is a proof for God's existence.
Leibniz took his chance and made necessity the empirical link between the universe and God. He even resorted to the Gospel to show God exists.
Kant resorted to moral necessity dictating the need for God. He refuted the ontological argument of Anselm of Canterbury on different levels.
Descartes rebutted major arguments to prove God's existence like perfection, ontological proof, design, presence of man, presence of thought, objective reality.
But, nothing can be considered as valid proof, these are only ideas that can be created by the imagination.
The argument of the presence of the universe being more denotative for God than the absence of the universe does not prove the existence of God.
Nietzsche, Hobbes, Sartre and Russell are the most ardent atheists possible against the idea of God.
They rejected God's existence on many grounds. They dismissed the need for a God.
But, what is interesting, is that these atheists and agnostics looked at the same phenomenon namely the universe, its presence, its structure, humans and life and death, just as those believers among philosophers, and concluded the opposite things. Each group, confronted matter, time, order but made opposite and contradictory conclusions.
It is for this reason it can be argued that the lack of proof for or against God's existence is the reality of the subject, the crux of matter.
