Can science prove or disprove the existence of a Spiritual existence? God?

[InformedIgnorance]

Sorry, however while correct to a point you are however leaving out one critical element which would substantially alter the conclusion....

Provided that the 'God' concept that was being discussed was in any way 'supernatural', then it would also be impossible to prove that such a God existed; any such existence claimed as proof for that concept could instead merely indicate that we have a flawed understanding of the natural laws ("Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke) or that our understanding of the situation (where we were attempting to apply that knowledge of the laws of nature) was itself flawed.

A one hundred foot tall Jesus walking down the street making it rain loaves and fishes and curing cancers left and right does not constitute proof of God, even if your deceased great grandparents bust out of the ground and tell you that it is so.

In such a case, the more likely scenario is that you have gone mad. Or, that your perceptions are being tampered with (such as through some advanced virtual sensory information) or that someone with really advanced technology (including the ability to reanimate corpses and cure cancers) has decided to mess with you.

 

[Thief]

Sorry, however while correct to a point you are however leaving out one critical element which would substantially alter the conclusion....

Provided that the 'God' concept that was being discussed was in any way 'supernatural', then it would also be impossible to prove that such a God existed; any such existence claimed as proof for that concept could instead merely indicate that we have a flawed understanding of the natural laws ("Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." Arthur C. Clarke) or that our understanding of the situation (where we were attempting to apply that knowledge of the laws of nature) was itself flawed.

A one hundred foot tall Jesus walking down the street making it rain loaves and fishes and curing cancers left and right does not constitute proof of God, even if your deceased great grandparents bust out of the ground and tell you that it is so.

In such a case, the more likely scenario is that you have gone mad. Or, that your perceptions are being tampered with (such as through some advanced virtual sensory information) or that someone with really advanced technology (including the ability to reanimate corpses and cure cancers) has decided to mess with you.

Now if you're serious...or maybe you're just being sarcastic....either way

You've gone WAY over the line of debate.
You are beyond all hope of conceding an idea....no matter the level of discussion.

Billions of copies of a device to generate unique souls, and you might still insist there is no God.

You last paragraph sums it up.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Billions of copies of a device to generate unique souls, and you might still insist there is no God.

Why would that indicate that there is?

 

[Thief]

Why would that indicate that there is?

Consider the cause and the question 'why?'

Someone had to be First, in thought and feeling.
That Someone would also be alone.

You would have your creation, and though the creation responds to your touch...
it does not really 'respond'.

The ability to set yourself in more than one place might be there...
but that's no more than talking to your own echo.

A blend between spirit and substance is then the way to go.
Man.

Each life is a unique event producing a unique perspective.
(someone to talk to)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Consider the cause and the question 'why?'

Why would that matter? What you consider has no consequences for what is actually true.

Someone had to be First, in thought and feeling.

How do you know?

That Someone would also be alone.

How do you know?

You would have your creation, and though the creation responds to your touch...
it does not really 'respond'.

How do you know?

The ability to set yourself in more than one place might be there...
but that's no more than talking to your own echo.

A blend between spirit and substance is then the way to go.
Man.

How do you know?

Each life is a unique event producing a unique perspective.
(someone to talk to)

Everything you've just said is baseless assumption. You've not demonstrated anything whatsoever.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Now if you're serious...or maybe you're just being sarcastic....either way

You've gone WAY over the line of debate.

Why would I not be being serious? I was simply saying that a visible manifestation that conforms to some individuals' existing preconceptions about the nature and/or identity of god while performing feats that contradict our (limited) understanding of the laws of nature does not count as 'proof' that what is being observed (even IF real which it may well not be) is in fact a supernatural phenomena let alone caused by a /The supernatural 'god'.

Given that the language used in the above sentence is difficult for many to understand, i summed it up with a giant jesus - because most people could understand what that means.

You are beyond all hope of conceding an idea....no matter the level of discussion.

I am more than willing to concede I do not KNOW (hence the term ignorance in my user name). However simply said, I AM also willing to concede the idea that it is possible we CANNOT know the truth; and no one anywhere has been able to prove (which btw is the entire point of this thread) that we can know with absolute certainty whether or not there is a supernatural dimension.

 

[Thief]

Why would I not be being serious? I was simply saying that a visible manifestation that conforms to some individuals' existing preconceptions about the nature and/or identity of god while performing feats that contradict our (limited) understanding of the laws of nature does not count as 'proof' that what is being observed (even IF real which it may well not be) is in fact a supernatural phenomena let alone caused by a /The supernatural 'god'.

Given that the language used in the above sentence is difficult for many to understand, i summed it up with a giant jesus - because most people could understand what that means.

I am more than willing to concede I do not KNOW (hence the term ignorance in my user name). However simply said, I AM also willing to concede the idea that it is possible we CANNOT know the truth; and no one anywhere has been able to prove (which btw is the entire point of this thread) that we can know with absolute certainty whether or not there is a supernatural dimension.

Some forms of truth are not rendered by experiment.
For God there will be no fingerprint, photo, equation, or repeatable experiment.

This is a matter of mind and heart.

And of course there is this extreme abundance of form walking about the earth....learning and becoming unique spirits...each one of us.

A creation is a reflection of it's Creator.
Here we are...learning all we can....and then back to God we go.

 

[Thief]

Why would that matter? What you consider has no consequences for what is actually true.


How do you know?


How do you know?


How do you know?


How do you know?


Everything you've just said is baseless assumption. You've not demonstrated anything whatsoever.

I'm sorry but this type of rebuttal is not worthy a response.

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Some forms of truth are not rendered by experiment.
For God there will be no fingerprint, photo, equation, or repeatable experiment.

Then be aware that such 'proof' as you call it will not suffice for most people - such as people who are not already (because they already believe as you do) inclined to believe you, or those that require... you know objective repeatable evidence that supports the position directly.

This is a matter of mind and heart.

Subjective. Not proof.

I am not saying that this is insufficient for you to believe wholeheartedly that god exists. It is however insufficient to 'prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural existence' (as per the thread). It is also insufficient to sway those people who require objective evidence as to the validity of your position.

And of course there is this extreme abundance of form walking about the earth....learning and becoming unique spirits...each one of us.

A creation is a reflection of it's Creator.

Here we are...learning all we can....and then back to God we go.

I am indeed a reflection of my parents and of my environment, they in turn of theirs, back through the generations.

There is however nothing to prove the existence of a supernatural dimension, let alone a supernatural creator

I'm sorry but this type of rebuttal is not worthy a response.

Actually it is; for the simple reason that you made a significant number of unsubstantiated claims - which they rightly asked, how do you claim to know that those positions were accurate.

 

[Thief]

Then be aware that such 'proof' as you call it will not suffice for most people - such as people who are not already (because they already believe as you do) inclined to believe you, or those that require... you know objective repeatable evidence that supports the position directly.

Subjective. Not proof.

I am not saying that this is insufficient for you to believe wholeheartedly that god exists. It is however insufficient to 'prove or disprove the existence of a supernatural existence' (as per the thread). It is also insufficient to sway those people who require objective evidence as to the validity of your position.


I am indeed a reflection of my parents and of my environment, they in turn of theirs, back through the generations.

There is however nothing to prove the existence of a supernatural dimension, let alone a supernatural creator

Everyone of science wants that repeatable result from a repeatable event.
So...you reject such a thing...because your parents are part of the experiment?

 

[outhouse]

A creation is a reflection of it's Creator.

at this time creation is otlawed in public schools

and found to be mythology with not a ounce of credibility

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Everyone of science wants that repeatable result from a repeatable event.

ABSOLUTELY! If you cannot repeatedly produce the same results (and provide methodology for others to do the same) to show the validity of your observations then it is not reliable at all, it could simply have been an issue with the environment in which the observation was made for example (i.e. not a controlled environment) or even subconscious artifice (unknowingly distorting your own perceptions to fit your preconceptions).

Repeatability is without doubt one of the defining characteristics of any addition to knowledge which conforms to the scientific method, the ability to ensure that an observation made by one person at one time can be made by another person at another time... Without that corner stone of human intellect we would still be practising alchemy rather than chemistry, astrology rather than astronomy etc.

So...you reject such a thing...because your parents are part of the experiment?

Eh? What are you talking about?

My parents are part of which experiment? Who designed the experiment, for what reason, how do we know it is an experiment?

There is nothing to -prove- that a supernatural dimension exists (or does not exist); we can make assumptions about such an existence based on our limited understanding of the natural dimension. However there is never a possibility for proof because in all circumstances there exists the chance our understanding of the situation being observed is incorrect, also our understanding of the natural dimension itself (such as the true laws of nature, rather than merely the laws as we currently perceive them to be) may also be flawed.

 

[Thief]

ABSOLUTELY! If you cannot repeatedly produce the same results (and provide methodology for others to do the same) to show the validity of your observations then it is not reliable at all, it could simply have been an issue with the environment in which the observation was made for example (i.e. not a controlled environment) or even subconscious artifice (unknowingly distorting your own perceptions to fit your preconceptions).

Repeatability is without doubt one of the defining characteristics of any addition to knowledge which conforms to the scientific method, the ability to ensure that an observation made by one person at one time can be made by another person at another time... Without that corner stone of human intellect we would still be practising alchemy rather than chemistry, astrology rather than astronomy etc.

Eh? What are you talking about?

My parents are part of which experiment? Who designed the experiment, for what reason, how do we know it is an experiment?

There is nothing to -prove- that a supernatural dimension exists (or does not exist); we can make assumptions about such an existence based on our limited understanding of the natural dimension. However there is never a possibility for proof because in all circumstances there exists the chance our understanding of the situation being observed is incorrect, also our understanding of the natural dimension itself (such as the true laws of nature, rather than merely the laws as we currently perceive them to be) may also be flawed.

Yeah well...with billions of reoccurring humans on this earth...
each one becoming a unique spirit....
each one having chemistry that will fail...
I think the scheme of things is.... obvious.
(You don't see repeat?)

The results are spiritual.
You don't get to see the results until the experiment (for you) is over.
And the angels have an interest, whatever may stand up from the dust.

You are part of the experiment.

 

[PolyHedral]

Yeah well...with billions of reoccurring humans on this earth...
each one becoming a unique spirit....
each one having chemistry that will fail...
I think the scheme of things is.... obvious.
(You don't see repeat?)

The results are spiritual.
You don't get to see the results until the experiment (for you) is over.
And the angels have an interest, whatever may stand up from the dust.

You are part of the experiment.

So God isn't all-knowing?

 

[InformedIgnorance]

Yeah well...with billions of reoccurring humans on this earth..
each one becoming a unique spirit....
each one having chemistry that will fail...
I think the scheme of things is.... obvious.
(You don't see repeat?)

What do you mean by 'reoccurring' or 'spirit' or 'scheme' and what objective evidence is there to support these assertions?

The results are spiritual.
You don't get to see the results until the experiment (for you) is over.
And the angels have an interest, whatever may stand up from the dust.

You are part of the experiment.

... so how do you know there is an experiment at all if we dont find out until after the experiment is over.

 

[s2a]

at this time creation is otlawed in public schools

and found to be mythology with not a ounce of credibility

Well no, and yes.

In coursework in some school systems, "Comparative Religion" studies are permitted, and quite "legal". As an atheist, I both encourage and endorse such studies, even as they may include the varying multitudes of contrasting "origin" mythologies.

What is disallowed under Constitutional law as established today is state-sponsored teaching of only one particular/singular religious view of cosmological origins... and those views have been court determined to be utterly and completely unscientific in any fashion, measure, implementation, or instruction.

"The "credibility" of creation mythologies is left to be evaluated amongst individual adherents of those myths, and the State is silent and/or otherwise disengaged in any pious determinations of faith-based claims of "truth".

It's not the role of public education to "disavow" any religious interpretations or explanations of cosmological origin stories or myths... only to provide the very best and contemporary conclusions derived of scientific inquiry and experimentations available to this day.

 

[Thief]

So God isn't all-knowing?

Confusing all knowing with all awareness?

Not much point in creating so many copies of a form that learns....when you all ready know the results.

Not considered that God can experience a linear existence if He wants to?

 

[Thief]

What do you mean by 'reoccurring' or 'spirit' or 'scheme' and what objective evidence is there to support these assertions?

... so how do you know there is an experiment at all if we dont find out until after the experiment is over.

No evidence....no photos, no fingerprints, no equations, no lab experiments...

This is of mind and heart.
You just have to think about it.

Please review previous post, again.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Yeah well...with billions of reoccurring humans on this earth...
each one becoming a unique spirit....
each one having chemistry that will fail...
I think the scheme of things is.... obvious.
(You don't see repeat?)

So what? What do you think that indicates and why?

The results are spiritual.

Prove it. If you can't, then stop claiming it.

You don't get to see the results until the experiment (for you) is over.

Prove it. If you can't, stop claiming it.

And the angels have an interest, whatever may stand up from the dust.

You are part of the experiment.

Prove it. If you can't, stop claiming it.

 

[Thief]

So what? What do you think that indicates and why?


Prove it. If you can't, then stop claiming it.


Prove it. If you can't, stop claiming it.


Prove it. If you can't, stop claiming it.

Faith is a matter of mind and heart.
By definition...no proof is required.