Existence Of God Is Plausible But Is It True?
“you can even test those numbers at home using a ball, an inclined plane, a ruler” As we know, Newton’s law of universal gravity only holds under certain conditions. In Einstein’s theory of general relativity, the gravitational force is just a fictitious force resulting from the curvature of spacetime . One can measure the effects of gravity, but it’s a very shallow understanding of science to say that you can measure it at home using an inclined plane and a ball. There are many things about gravity that we still don’t understand. For example, in spiral galaxies the orbiting of stars around their centers can’t be explained by either Newton’s law of universal gravitation or by Einstein’s general relativity. In order to explain this, scientists come up with yet another unproven idea of dark matter. “I think this analogy is also flawed because in a test the participants know that they are being tested” Knowing that you’re being tested is not a pre-requisite for a test. That said, we do know that we’re being tested , however, to understand this you will have to spend enough time in understanding religion rather than drawing conclusions from the sidelines. The material that I shared with you above should suffice for at least the initial understanding in this regard. “Metaphysical notions cannot be tested in a rigorous manner” I’m not sure what rigorous means in this context. We witness matter turning into human bodies every day , those bodies acquire life, then those living beings acquire consciousness and intellect – is this not rigorous enough to ascertain a Creator? Please don’t bother telling me that there’s a scientific explanation for all of this – science can only show us how this happens, not why . Besides science knows very little about consciousness and intellect. It’s not even the domain of science. Moreover, we know that all humans experience pain and sorrow, regardless of their material resources. Can mathematical models tells us why? Religion does – because humans are sent to this earth for a trial, and pain and sorrow are essential ingredients for this trial. “I have given them as alternatives which do not require a begining and therefore do not require a creator” There are no alternatives which don’t require a Creator. With all due respect, anyone who claims as such is in fact not only ignorant about religion but also about science beyond what’s presented by the likes of Harris and Dawkins. As for mathematical models you mentioned several times, please understand that a consistent mathematical model is no basis for reality. Besides all reality can’t be modeled using mathematics. Without God, there’s also no explanation for mathematics, let alone any laws. I must end this with a note that while I might sound negative about science, that’s certainly not the case. I’m a scientist at heart, however, it’s very immature to put science against religion as most people do. Science and religion both have different domains and until one spends about equal amounts of time and effort in trying to understand each, they can’t adequately argue about either. My personal findings conclude that religion establishes itself on much firmer grounds than science, however, it’s not as evident on the surface.