Science and God

Janus Marius> But if your God is ”all natural”, that is ”nature” then he/she/it is not needed to explain anything. Nothing in nature seems “guided” by any force other than those scientists describe – unless you move into the subject of free will.

ED is correct. The Bible is full of stories of the Christian/Jewish God interacting with the world (heck, he/it even supposedly made Mary pregnant). Anything that interacts with the Universe is detectable.

However, it is completely possible that a deity of some sort exists supernaturally, that is beyond the means of science to detect it. But if said deity where to physically interact with the world, it would be detectable (We see the astronomer going:”Who moved that star???” 🙂 ) As far as I can see it leaves you with the choices:
1) There is no God
2) God is supernatural and does not interact with the world
3) God is supernatural and ONLY works through conscience

Well, God may very well be supernatural, but we could never determine that IF it was indeed the case. We could only detect God if he were to interact with nature (assuming he does). Now, the problem with that it thus:

- How can you tell what is God and what isn't? It's not like everything he does has a "God stamp" on it.

- How can you separate what is natural from what is God's will, since IF God exists, THEN it stands to reason that he set natural laws into motion. (Or if he didn't, he isn't the absolute player on the field. If God is victim to the natural order and rules of existance, he would not really be God, but just a being of another nature and perhaps some incredible power.)

- Granted, I prefer the scientific and rational approach to any claims on the existance of God, which is why I pass of any religious doctrines as pure myth. An account in an old book that has been retranslated for two millenia does not prove God any more than the guy at the corner store telling me he found Mother Mary in his peanutbutter and jelly. SO my next question is: Since we can't rely on scriptures and doctrines to prove God, how can we apply those traits to a neutral God? The OT God is petty and vengeful, NT God is loving and compassionate. Both of these particular instances support the idea that God is unique, that he is an entity, and that he has emotions and whims. But from where I'm sitting, this is human arrogance; God could exist as an intangible ribbon wrapping through each molecule in the galaxy, moving them in accord with some kind of will that is impossible to discern. Yes, I understand that this is a wild claim and that's why it's not a scientific claim; it's a philosophic suggestion. IF God were in such a form, THEN you could never reach him. He's indistinguishable from nature. You could take it a step further I suppose, and suggest that God is not supernatural, nor is he all-powerful; he simply is what is and makes the center hold.

And I missed this on the first posting: God being a unique human like individual is misleading...

Janus Marius> Exactly.
IF God set the natural laws in motion, he is undetectable as having done so. Again, God is not needed to explain how the natural forces work, so Occam’s Razor dictates we should abandon the “added plurality”.

But if God simply is WHAT is and makes the center hold, there is no need to pray to him/her/it, worship him/her/it etc.

If we’re to believe the Bible however God interacts with our world. So unless someone can explain to me why he suddenly stopped doing that, he continues to do so. Hence a supernatural and scientifically unexplainable effect should be seen.

Originally posted by The Omega
Janus Marius> Exactly.
IF God set the natural laws in motion, he is undetectable as having done so. Again, God is not needed to explain how the natural forces work, so Occam’s Razor dictates we should abandon the “added plurality”.

But if God simply is WHAT is and makes the center hold, there is no need to pray to him/her/it, worship him/her/it etc.

If we’re to believe the Bible however God interacts with our world. So unless someone can explain to me why he suddenly stopped doing that, he continues to do so. Hence a supernatural and scientifically unexplainable effect should be seen.

You have hit on what I believe. God is the universe and more and therefore, we cannot be separated from God and God does not need worship. You don't even have to call God "God". You could call God the natural laws a nature.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
You have hit on what I believe. God is the universe and more and therefore, we cannot be separated from God and God does not need worship. You don't even have to call God "God". You could call God the natural laws a nature.

But then it seems your concept of a deity is not even conscious??
Why then even consider it?

Originally posted by The Omega
But then it seems your concept of a deity is not even conscious??
Why then even consider it?

I don't... As a Buddhist I referee to this as the mystic law. However, the mystic law, by its self, does not lead to happiness. I talk about God on this forum because most people would not understand me. I apologize to people like yourself who can understand.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I don't... As a Buddhist I referee to this as the mystic law. However, the mystic law, by its self, does not lead to happiness. I talk about God on this forum because most people would not understand me. I apologize to people like yourself who can understand.

But as far as I understand Buddhism it’s more a philosophy than it is a real religion?? It’s more asking “What would the Lord Buddha” have done in this situation when you pray/meditate?

Originally posted by The Omega
But as far as I understand Buddhism it’s more a philosophy than it is a real religion?? It’s more asking “What would the Lord Buddha” have done in this situation when you pray/meditate?

Yes, but I am a Nichiren Buddhist. Believe if or not, religion and ritual is important to me in my life. It grounds me and allows to communicate with my inner self. I can give you information of Nichiren Buddhism, if you wish.

I know there are two schools, hinayana(?) and mahayana(?)... And well, should I ever leave my stance as an atheist I'd go Buddhist 🙂

Do you see Buddha as a god?

Originally posted by The Omega
I know there are two schools, hinayana(?) and mahayana(?)... And well, should I ever leave my stance as an atheist I'd go Buddhist 🙂

Do you see Buddha as a god?

No. Buddha was just a man. We all can have what Buddha had, we do not have to wait.

Aren't ya gonna post the chanting spam??? 🙄

I do believe there is an intelligence of some kind working in all things at a creative level that can be accessed.

* there are things even science can't explain... that's why they have "THEORIES"... God is beyond science...

* let's say for example, the Big Bang theory... which tells us that the universe began by an explosion of a certain atom... that of which got many flaws...

* if it's true, where did that certain atom came from? and if everything else came from an explosion, how come everything here on earth seemed to be well-placed and in order?

* i believe there is a Supreme Being that created the universe... He is God Almighty... and He is beyond science... 😉

^ And beyond literature....ie.Bible......... 🙄

Originally posted by peejayd
* there are things even science can't explain... that's why they have "THEORIES"... God is beyond science...

* let's say for example, the Big Bang theory... which tells us that the universe began by an explosion of a certain atom... that of which got many flaws...

* if it's true, where did that certain atom came from? and if everything else came from an explosion, how come everything here on earth seemed to be well-placed and in order?

* i believe there is a Supreme Being that created the universe... He is God Almighty... and He is beyond science... 😉

How do things on Earth seem to be well placed or in order?

* the earth is so well-placed and in order, that it is so impossible to believe that this is a result of an accidental explosion as the Big Bang theory... trees, plants, animals, humans, the atmosphere, etc...

Originally posted by peejayd
* the earth is so well-placed and in order, that it is so impossible to believe that this is a result of an accidental explosion as the Big Bang theory... trees, plants, animals, humans, the atmosphere, etc...

Or maybe we should turn our thinking around. Maybe everything is here because this planet just happens to be in the right place. As large as the universe is, every possibility could be in place many thousands of times each.

Originally posted by peejayd
* there are things even science can't explain... that's why they have "THEORIES"... God is beyond science...

Oh yes... Because bolding "theories" means that scientists are amatuers. And your horribly edited and revised copy of the Bible is somehow better. I guess the scientists were just using flimsy "theories" when they made that computer you're using, huh?

* let's say for example, the Big Bang theory... which tells us that the universe began by an explosion of a certain atom... that of which got many flaws...

I like how religious people and Creationists always cite Big Bang, like it's the centerpiece of all science. Hell, most scientists aren't even keen on the diea- it's simply put forth with the evidence we have at the time being. It's most likely incorrect, but with the present information, it's what science has come up with. Now, everytime I see someone argue "Oh Big Bang has problems", I want them to tell me exactly what those problems are. And try and be as specific as possible, please. No scripture.

* if it's true, where did that certain atom came from? and if everything else came from an explosion, how come everything here on earth seemed to be well-placed and in order?

You obviously don't understand the theory you're questioning. I hope you didn't judge the entire theory based on the entire paragraph they have in your high school science book. That'd be arguing from ignorance.

* i believe there is a Supreme Being that created the universe... He is God Almighty... and He is beyond science... 😉

Good for you. Blind faith is what makes terrorists fly planes into buildings, makes armies embark on crusades, and lead to religious persecution on all sides for the last four thousand years are so.

In the meantime, the rest of us will be moving into the future and exploring the world and discovering things about it instead of clinging to a book and chanting, hoping that we can "will" things the way we want to.

* the earth is so well-placed and in order, that it is so impossible to believe that this is a result of an accidental explosion as the Big Bang theory... trees, plants, animals, humans, the atmosphere, etc...

Again, you don't understand the theory. And even then, no one is claiming Big Bang theory = absolute truth. That's the domain of Christians to make absolute claims like that.

"zomg teh bibul = absolute truth".

Seriously.

Originally posted by Mindship
1. Can Science, theoretically, be used to prove the existence of God?
2. If so, how?
3. If not, why?

The problem with this is how do you define god, there are many views on what is god. My personally belief is that God is the highest level of consciousness

* the earth is so well-placed and in order, that it is so impossible to believe that this is a result of an accidental explosion as the Big Bang theory... trees, plants, animals, humans, the atmosphere, etc...

wow......

you base your argument on one celestial body where chemicals come together to allow life to form and live, and disregard the other hundred or so celestial bodies that we know of and about where it did not?

Here.......9 planets alone in our solar system, not counting the many, many more moons.

Mercury ---- didn't happen
Venus -----didn't happen
Earth ---- happened
Mars ----didn't happen
Jupiter ---- didn't happen
Saturn ----- didn't happen
Uranus ----- didn't happen
Neptune ---- didn't happen
Pluto ---- didn't happen

with just those primary celestial bodies........your hypothesis holds only 11% true..........much smaller if we were to factor in the what, the 137 known moons........ all contain mixtures of gases if in the right combination can allow for life, all have mass...if great enough can retain these gases to form an atmosphere........

so......1 out of 144 celestial bodies in our solar system alone..........that's less than 1%.......yeah, valid argument buddy. I guess if I throw 144 dice, it is devine intervention that causes one of them to land on the number five........not pure chance and probability. And we're only talking about our solar system.......not even getting into the infinite solar sytems throughout the rest of the universe...

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Oh yes... Because bolding "theories" means that scientists are amatuers. And your horribly edited and revised copy of the Bible is somehow better. I guess the scientists were just using flimsy "theories" when they made that computer you're using, huh?

* and because it is edited and revised, you just tend to badmouth it? nice tactic... since you think technology is great, why not use it to find the truth of the "edited and revised"? why not search for the original manuscript... it might gain you self-respect, rather than concurring stupid ideas... 😉

Originally posted by Janus Marius
I like how religious people and Creationists always cite Big Bang, like it's the centerpiece of all science. Hell, most scientists aren't even keen on the diea- it's simply put forth with the evidence we have at the time being. It's most likely incorrect, but with the present information, it's what science has come up with. Now, everytime I see someone argue "Oh Big Bang has problems", I want them to tell me exactly what those problems are. And try and be as specific as possible, please. No scripture.

* because when it comes to the creation, Big Bang is the best theory they can think of... face it, dude... science can't explain it... better yet, what's YOUR theory of the creation? 😕

Originally posted by Janus Marius
You obviously don't understand the theory you're questioning. I hope you didn't judge the entire theory based on the entire paragraph they have in your high school science book. That'd be arguing from ignorance.

* ignorance will be manifested when someone argued and professed it was not the centerpiece of all science... if it's not the centerpiece, why argue? hurts your scientific pride? 😛

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Good for you. Blind faith is what makes terrorists fly planes into buildings, makes armies embark on crusades, and lead to religious persecution on all sides for the last four thousand years are so.

* and never will i do that... that's not faith, that's stupidity... believing in God does not tell you to kill someone or kill yourself... give Bible readers some rationality... you're too one-sided... 😉

Originally posted by Janus Marius
In the meantime, the rest of us will be moving into the future and exploring the world and discovering things about it instead of clinging to a book and chanting, hoping that we can "will" things the way we want to.

* good luck... 😆

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Again, you don't understand the theory. And even then, no one is claiming Big Bang theory = absolute truth. That's the domain of Christians to make absolute claims like that.

"zomg teh bibul = absolute truth".

Seriously.

* and you do? i just said it was a theory... it can never be a fact because you will never be able to explain the creation scientifically... if you can, then prove it... if you step on the Big Bang area, wow nice one! you are NOT in the centerpiece of all science... 😆