Bob Grant wrote:
After 12+ years of religious instruction, I have never heard on any such experiments, and can't think of any. Could you share a few examples?
These examples are simply off the top of my head, but I think they will be sufficient to illustrate the point. The easiest example I can think of is prayer. Asking God about something and getting an answer is evidence for God. Other examples come from the scriptures, such as John 7:17, where the Lord says, "If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." He is saying the best way to see if what He taught was really from God was to try living the precepts and see if the promised blessings are granted. For the LDS or non-denominational in the group, Alma chapter 32 of the Book of Mormon contains a sermon preached by the prophet Alma along the same lines where he explains to some people how they can determine if there is a God. He explains in more detail what is required to set up the experiment so that it is successful: you must have a real desire to know the truth. If you follow God's teachings with faith, believing that you will receive the promised blessings, then when you see them you will know that your faith has been verified. I know faith experiments are not the same as scientific experiments and that is not what I am trying to claim. I am simply stating that there is a type of experiment that can be done that can develop faith. As faith grows, the evidences also grow. One of the main differences is that the data is personal and is generally difficult to translate well into words. There is the old cliche about how explaining religious experiences is like trying to explain the taste of salt. To someone who has tasted salt, they instantly understand one another. Someone who has not tasted salt cannot relate or understand what is being described without experiencing it for themselves. Scientists tend to focus on all the evidence from experiments that support their theories, and this is as it should be. I think everyone should consider the experimental data in an open-minded manner. Sometimes there are things that cannot be reconciled between the interpretation of scientific data and a person's personal religious views. That is OK. Time will sort all those things out one way or the other, or possibly in some new way that neither side has yet considered. On the other hand there are also millions of people who have conducted faith experiments and have interpreted the data to mean that there is some kind of superior being. That does not mean that everyone needs to interpret the data the same way (just as not all scientific data is interpreted the same). But I think it is unwise to just discard the experiences of all these people out-of-hand as "unimportant" or "ignorant". Just as the scientific community is asking the religious community to be open-minded about the scientific data, I think the scientific community could stand to express the same open-mindedness towards the views and "data" of the religious community. I hope this is helpful in explaining my views. Aaron