Science Does Not Disprove God 

"Science is the study of the handiwork of God." - Dr. Stacy Trasancos, scientist and former atheist, now Catholic and still a scientist.

“I believe that the more thoroughly science is studied, the further does it take us from anything comparable to atheism, If you study science deep enough and long enough, it will force you to believe in God.” -Lord William Kelvin.

You are a wonderful GODLY young man. Thank you, thank you. Blessings on you.

I like how you slipped the jab at Sola Scriptura in there without actually naming it xD

I am interested in the university of Steubenville, particularly their theology degree. I want to learn my faith and know why I believe what I believe, especially as someone who is a convert from Protestantism. Can you please pray for me as I discern my college and faith journey. God bless.

Thank you for making such concise videos. I can't find myself sitting through long videos and most of yours are always within 10-15 minutes. I love the way you present your points and arguments. Truly have been binging on your videos (from various topics!). Thank you for doing your work for the church too :)

You inspire me so much, Brian. Thank you for all you do for the Church

Great video. Thank you for putting it back up so quickly.

God bless you, Brian. I enjoy your videos a lot.

As a former adherent to scientism, I’ll make two jabs at current adherents to it: • There are events in the physical universe that [A] point to the existence of God, [B] have been observed, and [C] have been found to defy the laws of the physical universe. Christians refer to those events as miracles. I’ve yet to discover a person who has offered a rational non-God explanation for any miracle. • Cold Case Christianity has a few RU-vid videos that point out the physical universe’s “fine tuning” and how God must be its tuner.

Thanks for the video Brian! Keep up the good work! Please make a video adressing the whole Pachamama problem.

What is the name of the track playing in the background? It's awesome. Btw, you're awesome too, Brian. God bless you for your labour of love.

Fantastic! I was patiently waiting haha

Just a few word to congratulate you for you choice of music.That says a lot about you. God bless you, good man.

Science is just from a Latin word for "the endeavor of gaining knowledge." Not "Confining yourself to the physical." That's an entirely arbitrary confinement to one aspect of knowledge.

Ah your explanation of categorical irrationality brings me so much clarity. The intertwining of science and philosophy is such a rich topic! Thank you for this wonderful presentation, Mr. Holdsworth!

It's awesome you got a promotion from the school, I didn't know such a school existed.

I find your points to be spot on. Bravo, and keep up the good work 👌

Thank you for this video. In support of everything you said: To point 1. Wittgenstein acknowledged that scientific evidence belongs to one language game and religon and mortality belong to another. They can't critique each other. It would be like saying a grandmaster is offside when playing chess. To point 2. Boethius presents this very point in Consolation of Philosophy where he explains that God's intelligence is superior to ours and so we cannot grasp it. To point 3. This is the position of Logical Positivism which claimed that the only statements that are meaningful are tautological or empirical. A. J. Ayer made that claim. Then be acknowledged that the very position failed back in the 60s as the claim is itself not a tautology or empirical! Great video. Keep it up.

Hey Brian Ive been watching your channel for some time and wondering if you have ever considered having a debate with Stephen Woodford (Rationality Rules)?

Loved this!

Science depends on metaphysical presumptions that cannot be scientifically proven, but are knowable to be certain. For example: the principle of sufficient reason (PSR); causality; mind independent truths; that the universe is knowable, and the human mind has sufficient ability to grasp truths about it; and more. In fact, interestingly, even something like inertia is not scientifically provable because we cannot remove gravity from any test we could do. To say that science can prove (or disprove) any of these metaphysical tenets is like saying we could use a tape measure to disprove them, because science is a descriptive tool that describes the features of the material universe, it does not tell us anything about what the material universe is.

What is the song in all your videos?

What is the music you play in the background?

off topic but... anyone know the intro song ??

5:04 Newton's first law implies either rest _or uniform motion_ is the result of non-interference. _Apart from the second part,_ I think the law is fairly well understandable by pre-schoolers. _As for the second part,_ I wonder if you can prove it? To anyone?

The biggest reason for young people not being religious is not because of their exploration of science and religion, hence choosing logic over superstition (in their eyes). It's because young people are not being taught either and as a default our sick culture gives them science.

I got to ask were did you got that helm?

I'm so glad I found you on RU-vid. Your videos make me feel so much more confident in my beliefs ^-^ and I don't feel so weird for wanting to doubt them

Funny that Miracle and Vision started to get sparse and very rare when we started to get photography and other sciences to studies and document them...

Barry Marshall, Australian Nobel Science Winner, is a daily communicant. He believes that science supports the existence of God.

Totally appreciating your work! I think it‘s really important to adress these issues but it‘s sadly done so rarely. It‘s really an irrational claim and it shows that the one who makes it does not understand the philosophy of science. For those who want to look deeper into it, in order to understand how flawed this assumption really is, I‘d recommend some webinars on sapienceinstitute.org . There is one called „Has science disproved God? Deconstructing false assumptions“. I‘d also recommend „Self-evident: Why atheism is unnatural“ for it gives believers in god more confidence when talking to atheists. (You can find them when clicking on webinars and then just go to „watch the webinars we‘ve already delivered“) As Brian mentioned there are good philosophical arguments for god. This website provides webinars explaining some of these arguments. Also one that‘ll come out on August 15th will be about darwinian evolution. Check ‘em out guys it‘s totally free. On youtube I‘d totally recommend Hamza Tzortzis. He is just such a knowledgable person on the field of the philosophy of science and philosophy in general. There is one about so called scientific facts: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-hfI_X-kY06s.html Here‘s the whole lecture „Does science lead to atheism“ : ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kGmxKhu4s8Q.html You could also read his book „The devine reality: God, islam and the mirage of atheism“ On the topic of books „The philosophy of science: A very short introduction“ is highly praised and it‘s not hard to read. For darwinian evolution i‘d recommend the channel Darwinian Delusions ru-vid.com/show-UCRkKHyivwGmz36qGgXnZHjQ He has some great lectures on darwinian evolution I hope you guys will look into it. We as believers in god really need to understand and know these things; especially in our current climate! May god bless you and lead us to the straight path. Amen In love Khadi

Enrolled there now!

A great video full of clarity , spoken with humility and respectful of science and what it can tell us about our universe. All of us have a unique life journey : I started off as an angry teenage athiiest soaking up all that science could teach me_ transitioned to Agnostic in my 30s and now with a head full of grey hair I firmly believe in an Omnipotent God..

*Reddit thread for this video:* www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/dn6qbw/3_reasons_science_doesnt_disprove_god/

Ok, I’m currently a student at FUS. The professors are great and are largely orthodox (probably a few...outliers). However, I would not recommend going if you are invested in Tradition, but do not want to fight for it. The friars on campus do not like the Latin Mass, many will say this openly.

Well said - reason is on our side and yet young people think the modern church tells them to “just believe it” - while there is mystery to faith there is also mystery in science - the church needs to encourage the use of reason - through the natural world “men are without excuse”

It is important to distinguish between evidence and proof; they are not interchangeable terms. Evidence points to the plausibility of something, whereas proof is incontrovertible. Proof corresponds with objective reality. Many things that we are rational to accept, cannot be strictly proven. For example, criminals often aren’t convicted based on rock solid proof - open and shut cases are rare - rather, it is the cumulative evidence that points to their guilt. One cannot prove God’s existence because - as you mentioned - if God exists, He is a disembodied spirit/mind Who transcends our space time universe, and reigns from an immaterial/spiritual realm. With that being established, it would make sense for God to reveal Himself through our conscience (imbuing each human with His moral Law), and through nature. I believe you touched on this, Brian, in your werewolf video, earlier this year. Here are just five arguments for the existence of God to consider (this is by no means a complete list). 1. The Cosmological Argument from Contingency 2. The Kalam Cosmological Argument 3. The Moral Argument Based upon Moral Values and Duties 4. The Teleological Argument from Fine-tuning 5. The Ontological Argument from the Possibility of God’s Existence to His Actuality *The New Atheism and Five Arguments for God:* www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/popular-writings/existence-nature-of-god/the-new-atheism-and-five-arguments-for-god/ The false dichotomy that many non-theists raise between God and science is especially strange considering that the empirical method was fathered by a Christian: Bacon (Kevin, I believe). Additionally, the most pivotal scientific trailblazers were virtually all Christians: Galileo, Newton, Copernicus, Kepler, Darwin, Faraday, Maxwell, Mendel, etc. It was the faith of these men that was the impetus for seeking to discover the mysteries behind God’s design, which was evident to them. Lastly, you are correct re the limitations of the scientific method. Many people assume that said method is our only way of measuring and verifying information, but that is demonstrably false. *What Science Can’t Prove | William Lane Craig:* ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-BQL2YDY_LiM.html&app=desktop

The last one is especially important.

I don't understand the atheistic premise that Science disproves something it cannot detect. The mere fact that Science, in all its complexity, exists means that someone even more complex and calculated had to create it.

Thank you.

Hey Brian, did you see the (more than) 3 reasons why you shouldn't read Harry Potter books?

I love this guy! Thx

Outstanding.

At the end of the day belief is based on faith alone.

separating non-physical from physical doesn't exempt non-physical existence free of logical existence. And, merely saying "it just is" or "always existed" is not enough explanation. BTW can anyone give an example of an evidence based/observable "absolute non-physical" phenomena!?

👍👍👍

There are only two interesting questions: Where are you coming from? And where are you going to? Can you answer these?

you're doing the lords work my brotha

Excellent. Excellent. Excellent.

7:08 As I just mentioned to someone else, that computers don't think and brutes don't speak is scientifically very verifiable. _Both_ point to man being something special which cannot be explained as the sum of component atoms or molecules or even biological structures (mostly identic to those of brutes and largely parallel to parts of computering). This would be part of _"[t]he fourth way is taken from the gradation to be found in things. Among beings there are some more and some less good, true, noble and the like."_ (I Q2 A3 again). It is the one thing C. S. Lewis used in Miracles.

CUTE OVERLOAD ALERT :) @ 4:53... Hehehehehe! Thanks for this wonderfully ASTUTE and PARADOXICAL video, Brian. Well done!... Greetings from the Philippines! God's Blessings and our prayers to you and your loved ones, your parish and community! HOah! Deus Vult! Semper Fi! Vive, Cristo Rey et Spiritus Sanctus! Ave Maria... salve regina... Pax tribi!

Nice sola scriptura jab at the end there

As a “seeking” non-denominational Protestant, I laughed out loud at the subtle dig at Sola Scriptura 😉 Thanks Brian :)

4:22 St. Thomas Aquinas would very much not have agreed that philosophy is logical but not depending on physical evidence!

Science has nothing to say about God, soul, etc. They are two completely separated worlds - fenomena and noumenon.

5:55 You have given a very great point on why God would have chosen to create a Geocentric universe, because it is one in which the physical action is apparently caused, so no angelic intelligence is needed to figure out that God is. *For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and injustice of those men that detain the truth of God in injustice: Because that which is known of God is manifest in them. For God hath manifested it unto them. For the invisible things of him, from the creation of the world, are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made; his eternal power also, and divinity: so that they are inexcusable.* Geocentrism is also a description of the physical world which was understandable already in the time when St Paul wrote above, Romans 1:18-20. Cited from Douay Rheims.

God became flesh in Jesus. How is that not phisical? I would add and other brach next to phylosophy: exegesis. We can study scripture scientifically so deep, that it will show the trueness of God, in Jesus. Thank you Brain! Appreciate your work!

Science does not disprove God, but science does disprove the literal interpretation of the Biblical creation myth. I seriously do not understand why so many Christians are so obsessed with clinging onto their literal interpretation of the Bible, the metaphor works, the wisdom the story teaches is sound, it was never meant to explain the mysteries of creation, but to relay how it was our pride that condemned us to live like animals despite being created in God's image. Now in our pride we like to pretend that we understand creation by simplifying it into a story about six days, and have become blind to the real teaching of the story.

Depends what counts as “science”

❤️❤️❤️

Wow, first colleges email me, now they sneak into my RU-vid videos

Understanding faith in God, even if it is just another's faith, really does take some understanding of philosophy. Something which many atheists and wannabe science gurus dismiss. I find this funny because most biologists, let's say, wouldn't presume they know enough about physics to say which theories are 'better' or are gaining more evidence. Many people get degrees and gain lots of knoweldge in a given field. They realize how much they didn't know and how success depends on constantly learning. And really they will never know everything so they will have to delegate tasks to other people and rely on their knowledge. YET, they dismiss philosophy. They dismiss the knowledge of others because, as you say, they make a categorical error and think that if it isn't scientific or empiracally proven then it isn't knowledge. They take on a philosophical position without knowing and, I don't know if you have seen this but i have, often dismiss the idea that they have any philosophical position. Instead insisting that they take everything as it comes. (another philosophical position. HA!) It's like insisting that because you didn't vote in an election then politics doesn't affect you and you haven't taken a stance. Personally, I came to my faith by trusting in my experiences and I trust in science because for the most part, I trust in people. I believe, as the CCC states, that people are basically good. That there is a truth. So it only makes sense to me that science should present credible observation and generate valid predictions. It is operating in a world that relies on God. This does make it frustrating for me tho when believers want to throw out science because materialists insist it doesn't support or prove God. God is my linchpin and science a way to understand His creation. If you took away either, in my point of view, it would hurt the other. Whatever reason I'd have to doubt the entirety of science could easily be applied to myself and my experiences. My faith would take a hit. Take out my faith in God and suddenly i have little reason to believe anything is good or true. What would even determine what is good and true? Hope that made sense or at least, one of my points did. :P

Aquinas' philosophical case for God seems basically to be "Something can't give something that it doesn't ahve, so what gave us life must also be alive'. But the Church says God created everything, including souls, from NOTHING, and that how he did this is "beyond human understanding". Aquinas case can't seem objective me without an explanation of the exact means of creating life. It'd be a lot simpler to just have someone pray and make fire come down from the sky like Elijah.

Science doesn't have to disprove the existence of God. The responsibility of proof isn't that of science with this question. What science actually does is negate the requirement to believe in God because we have no other answers. Well now for many, many things, but not all, now we do have other answers and therefore the requirement deminishes.

Video starts at 2:41

I was this 🤏 close getting a brain aneurysm watching this video 😄

Why won't God just send down fire form the sky in response to prayer like for Elijah?

If science is about using experimental results and science said God does not exist you'd expect people to list the experiments proving that and how they work. Without that you'd have to conclude that when scientists say there is no God (and some do say that) they are not doing science at that moment. Then scientists speaking outside their own field may be no better informed than anyone else.

So, not understanding something makes it more real?

I haven’t watch the video yet, I’m already assuming it’s going to be great, you have always come out with solid videos. I have one suggestion which is just remove the part of the title that says 3 Reasons!

GOD IS THE GREATEST

"join the Franciscan University" me, who actually wants to become a Franciscan friar: lol sure I will

Thanks for proving that FUS is producing more burger king shift chiefs and head fryolator technicians than any school on earth. I look forward to finding out how scripture tells me to order a combo meal. No doubt from a Thomism expert.

Real science Acknowledges the GOD of the Holy Bible !

Science does not "disprove God" - it isn't capable of that. What it can do is offer alternative explanations which render traditional religious narratives at best questionable.

I think Science proves God's existence even more now than ever

Yeah i think that science cant find or understand many things like God or anything intangible because it doesnt use the right criteria to measure for those things.

Here's the problem: Science is man's understanding of the world around him. It's not co-equal to the Word. It's MAN-made. It's not "truth" That's the Torah (Psalm 119:142). Science is actually just now starting to catch up with the Scriptures.

3:18 Well, there actually are physical traces of God ... day and night, human language to name two of them. Try to explain day and night by Earth turning instead of Geocentrism in which God turns the Universe around Earth (what else could effect that?) and you run into problems for stability of many body problem in Newtonian astrophysics of gravitation - at the very least. And computers, monkeys and birds do not master language.

"It's like saying the color blue doesn't exist." Colors are creations of our minds.

Science does not disprove the existence of gods or a god but it sure as heck does show that the various claims and stories in various religious texts are untrue, if you disagree then please show me a scripture that disproves anything that science has revealed a natural for?

Science has always backed what the Bible has been saying for thousands of years. It has no choice but to back up the Bible because the bible is the Word. Scientist on the other hand are a different story.

Sooooo is god white or black??

Who claims it can? It can falsify the false god of the creationists, but most gods are unfalsifiable.

If God allowed you to study and document data about him, he wouldn't be God, would he?

Will science progress more once it studies non-physical phenomena? God is non-physical and supernatural

"You will discover there are mountains of logical arguments for the existence of god". Too bad they are all logically flawed. lol.

I find it interesting that all the religious people on this thread keep insisting that the physical sciences can prove God... I think your criticism of atheists equally applies to many religious people if not most.

Do you have a breathing problem Brian?? As I hear a sound of your breadth being little concerning when you breathe in. Stay Healthy God Bless you!🙏🏻

Wanting there to be a God small enough to comprehend -- you got me. I realize my "prove it" bias about religion, even as I use and appreciate all manner of things that I don't comprehend (electricity, cars, water systems, et al). Accepting that He Is, and that following his precepts has created the best human networks and systems, even as I can't explain how/why.

You seem like a good,chill bro to hang out with. Smart as well. However all of those points are very easily debated.

There is one thing that joins at the hip human spirituality and science and that is gravity. It is held in common both spiritually and scientifically and challenges us to find a common understanding.

Science and math are good for dialing in lazers. Not validating human existence.

Great video. I read book by Father Michael Heller, he explained that theory theory of evolution does not contradict God's existence. More over the fathers of the church like SaintThomas Aquinas proves that world can be infinite and be God's creation. ( By the way this philosophical theory of infinite world is made by Aristotle). The author of" big bang" theory is Father George Lemaitre. And so on... Thank you for this explanatory

Psalm 14:1 The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.

I'm sorry, but the contents of this video have not been scientifically verified, so...

Before you start tossing terms like "physical" and "material" around, you should define what you mean when using those terms. You might find that you don't use them the same way as they are used in science, especially when you come from a philosophical background. Then you can start explaining why you think the scientific method and belief in your god does not collide.

God creates all life and makes no mistakes whether Muslim, Hindu, Mormon, catholic, gay or straight

"Let the Messiah, the King of Israel, come down now from the cross that we may see and believe."