CatBus said:
chyron8472 said:
yhwx said:
chyron8472 said:
yhwx said:
chyron8472 said:
yhwx said:
chyron8472 said:
yhwx said:
chyron8472 said:
There is testimony we can acquire, but that is not irrefutable nor scientific.
…how do you know that?
Are you asking how do I know there is testimony we can acquire? Or as you asking why it wouldn’t be irrefutable or scientific?
Yes, your second question.
Because that’s not how science works. With testimony, there is credibility in question. How credible is the witness? and so forth. By its nature, testimony is subject to unprovable scrutiny (that is, scientific scruity, not court-of-law scrutiny) and is not irrefutable.
To refute testimony scientifically is to use the wrong test. The correct test would be “beyond a reasonable doubt” as in a court or some such.
How would there be testimony at the dawn of the universe? Nobody was alive back then. I don’t understand your point.
Testimony about it. From the dawn of our universe.
I’m not sure if I quite understand what you’re saying, but testimony can obviously be falsifiable. Let’s say I propose that flowers grow from seeds. You could test this testimony to find out if I’m right or wrong. I think the same could be applied to the dawn of the universe.
That’s what I said. That’s why it’s not irrefutable nor scientific to use testimony as scientific data.
I said we can not scientifically prove the impetus or method of creation of the universe, but though there is testimony we can acquire it is not scientific nor irrefutable.
If I’m following correctly, this is the “God of the gaps” argument.
No, it’s more like… The bigger my understanding of the world/universe gets, the bigger God gets. It’s kind of like the Narnia book series, where Lucy remarks to Aslan that he is bigger than before. He responds by saying that she is getting bigger (or older) and so in response he looks bigger to her each time she meets him.
It’s all about perspective. When I look at nature or science, I don’t fill in the gaps of my understanding with “God did it.” I marvel at God’s creation. It’s kind of like looking at a painting and it making you think of the artist who made it, and what that painting says about them. Learning about the universe, about science and art and nature, helps me learn more about God. About who He is and what he’s truly like.
Additionally, I do have personal experiences on which to draw that undeniably to me prove the existence, presence, and intimacy of God. I have had personal encounters with him and have physically felt his presence. I knew it was Him. I can not explain these experiences to you in an irrefutable way. At the end of the day you would have to judge the testimonies of myself and other people involved. Thus my experiences are not scientifically provable, nor intentionally repeatable (even suggesting trying that sounds horribly arrogant to me).