I was browsing Facebook last week and came across this question posed by a high school friend, whom I have not spoken to much over the past almost 7 years, “If there was a scientific study that proved 100% that there wasn’t a god would you still believe? And if so why?” Of course this question piqued my interest. But the more I thought about it, the more I questioned the question. For me, this type of question posits two things: 1) God can be proved or disproved, and 2) I believe because God has been proved real for me. Neither of these things are true, so the question didn’t apply to me.
Even still though, I felt compelled to engage the question on the actual thread provided, especially when the only other reply had been from a woman whose theology was suspect at best. Here is what I wrote (note, the previous post was someone wishing the thread would have more replies):
“I feel that you’re not getting more replies because maybe people are like me and don’t believe in a God that is contained in the realm of science; what I mean is, I don’t believe there ever will be a study that proves the existence of or proves there is no existence. The question does not then apply to me because my faith doesn’t fit the parameters set there within: I don’t fit because the God I believe in cannot inherently be proven or disproven.
For the sake of congeniality, I probably still would because science has reformed itself again and again making corrections to previous things that were 100% true.
But I don’t, nor should anyone, live in a vacuum where such questions are not impeded by the life we live.”
My statement started a little bit of a conversation between my friend and I, and I hope it can breed into more conversations when I’m back in town. Because at the end of the day, just like I don’t want our beliefs to stand in the way of reason, I don’t want our beliefs to stand in the way of having conversations.