God can not be disproven by science

[Audie]

Easy. Science is limited to the objective verifiable evidence of the "physical" nature of our universe.


Yes, and science is justifiably neutral to the many conflicting subjective religious perspectives of God.

What "god"?

The one described in the bible doesnt
exist.
Which one cant be disproved?

 

[shunyadragon]

You can make as many assumptions as you like, it won't change anything beyond your own perceptions. But then without a belief in something greater,

Simply justifying belief as 'something greater' is ambiguous. Something bigger may very well be an boundless Quantum Existence. Everyone makes assumptions concerning what the many conflicting versions of what ;something greater could be. Though at least science is consistent as to what could 'something greater.'

our own perceptions are pretty much all we have, are they not?

Yes, but that does not justify 'something greater.'

I believe in God, but fully realize the limits of the fallible human ability to justify a 'Source' some call Gods is beyond our physical existence and subjective perceptions. I reached some very rational conclusions based on our perceptions, and objective observations of the nature and history of human beliefs and science. If there is a God, God is Universal God beyond any of the variable and conflicting ancient religions, scriptures and justified beliefs. It becomes very obvious the ancient 'hands on' miracle working anthropomorphic Gods do not exist. The ancient scriptures are without provenance of authorship, and origins of the text. They cannot be rationalised by the evidence as remotely true. They simply represent an ancient tribal perspective of the Source some call Gods.

Without the rational option of a Universal 'Source; some call Gods. the only option to the beliefs of ancient tribal religions is atheism.

 

[shunyadragon]

What "god"?

The one described in the bible doesn't
exist.

I agree, The question arises: Why are the ancient God silent today? See post #122.

Which one cant be disproved?

Of course none can be disproved. The ancient Gods have been demonstrated not to exist, but of course, not proven one way or the other.

 

[wellwisher]

When you say that God exists outside of time and space: how do you know?

God is often equated with light; Light of the nations. Light travels at the speed of light. If plug the speed of light, into Special Relativity Equations of Einstein, we get a reference where the universe will appeared contained in a point, with time essentially stops. The mass variable of Special Relativity becomes infinite relativistic mass, which does not or can exist within our finite energy space-time universe. We do not have the instruments to meet all the criteria needed to see God, if he was sitting on the speed of light reference.

God would exist where space-time; see above, becomes discontinuous; into separated space and separated time, but without mass; not of any mass based realm.

If God could move in space, apart from time, he would omnipresent, like the tradition; distance potential=1 and time potential=0. The ancient understood separated space and separated time much better than does modern space-time science. This is the future of quantum physics. If you can control time and space apart from each other; via space-time, a new frontier opens up.

If God could also move in time apart from space, would know the past, present and future at any point in space.

If God decided to become omnipresent; distance potential=1 and time potential=0, while also moving in time with distance held constant; time potential=1 and distance potential=0; sequential but a disconnected sign of the cross, this would makes him omnipresent and omniscience. This was ancient math and infinity personified.

I developed a theory called the MDT theory about 20 years ago; mass, distance and time. It came as an inspiration and was solidified as a series of diagrams I created in PhotoShop, that set up framework for an extensive math model possibility of reality in just three variables. These diagrams looked like concentric circles, where you can could adjust the three parameters; M, D, and T like dials, and solve complex connections between space-time and separated space and separated time; macro and quantum worlds meet.

I was not sure back then how to explain this to justify and explain this model, in the Physics Forums I used to write in; answer without a solution. The 6-8 diagrams; dials, in 20/20 hindsight were connected to the effect of separated time and separated space on space-time. The logic of the model led to many new things yet to be discovered such as six possible universe formation scenarios. The MDT theory was named after the scenario that was closest to the modern BB. There are five other ways from separated space and time.

In the MDT scenario, once mass appears in the universe, we finally have a capacitance for space-time, that is sustainable and scalable; from from subparticles to the galaxies. Energy can induce space-time, but it is not moldable like mass and matter, except in black holes. However, the black hole limits the formation of the chemical life we see and need to account for. With the appearance of mass, separated space and separated time interacted, at the quantum level, with the ever changing scalable and sustainable levels of matter in space-time.

I put D before T ; MDT, or distance potential before time potential, after the mass of the primordial atom appears; particle matter. This distance potential is for an almost omnipresent universe; blueprint in space. Then time is added to build from the blue print, in time. The model could dial in the details. The model also paralleled Genesis; brooding over the deep; distance potential and blueprint, and then let there be light; d/t=photons. blueprint divided by time, as steps in time.

 

[shunyadragon]

God is often equated with light; Light of the nations. Light travels at the speed of light. If plug the speed of light, into Special Relativity Equations of Einstein, we get a reference where the universe will appeared contained in a point, with time essentially stops. The mass variable of Special Relativity becomes infinite relativistic mass, which does not or can exist within our finite energy space-time universe. We do not have the instruments to meet all the criteria needed to see God, if he was sitting on the speed of light reference.

God would exist where space-time; see above, becomes discontinuous; into separated space and separated time, but without mass; not of any mass based realm.

If God could move in space, apart from time, he would omnipresent, like the tradition; distance potential=1 and time potential=0. The ancient understood separated space and separated time much better than does modern space-time science. This is the future of quantum physics. If you can control time and space apart from each other; via space-time, a new frontier opens up.

If God could also move in time apart from space, would know the past, present and future at any point in space.

If God decided to become omnipresent; distance potential=1 and time potential=0, while also moving in time with distance held constant; time potential=1 and distance potential=0; sequential but a disconnected sign of the cross, this would makes him omnipresent and omniscience. This was ancient math and infinity personified.

I developed a theory called the MDT theory about 20 years ago; mass, distance and time. It came as an inspiration and was solidified as a series of diagrams I created in PhotoShop, that set up framework for an extensive math model possibility of reality in just three variables. These diagrams looked like concentric circles, where you can could adjust the three parameters; M, D, and T like dials, and solve complex connections between space-time and separated space and separated time; macro and quantum worlds meet.

I was not sure back then how to explain this to justify and explain this model, in the Physics Forums I used to write in; answer without a solution. The 6-8 diagrams; dials, in 20/20 hindsight were connected to the effect of separated time and separated space on space-time. The logic of the model led to many new things yet to be discovered such as six possible universe formation scenarios. The MDT theory was named after the scenario that was closest to the modern BB. There are five other ways from separated space and time.

In the MDT scenario, once mass appears in the universe, we finally have a capacitance for space-time, that is sustainable and scalable; from from subparticles to the galaxies. Energy can induce space-time, but it is not moldable like mass and matter, except in black holes. However, the black hole limits the formation of the chemical life we see and need to account for. With the appearance of mass, separated space and separated time interacted, at the quantum level, with the ever changing scalable and sustainable levels of matter in space-time.

I put D before T ; MDT, or distance potential before time potential, after the mass of the primordial atom appears; particle matter. This distance potential is for an almost omnipresent universe; blueprint in space. Then time is added to build from the blue print, in time. The model could dial in the details. The model also

This line of reasoning is compounded with the circular reasoning 'IF God,' which is a subjective assumption not remotely related to the math and science you describe above, which can be explained by a boundless Quantum existence without God.

paralleled Genesis; brooding over the deep; distance potential and blueprint, and then let there be light; d/t=photons. blueprint divided by time, as steps in time.

Equating this with the ancient mythical belief in Genesis is equally without basis in science and math with the circular assumptions of 'IF God.

Belief in a Universal God must go beyond the many conflicting ancient tribal view of God, and even then justification is limited, but belief would be a more universal basis on the natural attributes of our physical existence reflect the attributes of God.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Sure, they can. As soon as you provide the evidence for it..

Really? So you think mankind is in charge of the weather?
You're joking, of course!

 

[Firenze]

God can not be disproven by science. Why?

Because God exist outside of time and space. God created space and time, but are itself beyond it

Happily, Science wastes no time trying to prove something doesn't exist. Gods, leprechauns, teapots on the other side of the sun, honest politicians - are all things Science does not even consider.

 

[Nakosis]

Really? So you think mankind is in charge of the weather?
You're joking, of course!

What?

Out of that entire post, this is all you got out of it.
And even that was wrong.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Out of that entire post, this is all you got out of it..

I read all of your replies .. I got the gist..

 

[shunyadragon]

Really? So you think mankind is in charge of the weather?
You're joking, of course!

The ability of modern science to provide accurate weather predictions nas absolutely nothing to do with mankind being charge of the weather. This statement you made perpetuates your intentional ignorance of science.

 

[blü 2]

God can not be disproven by science. Why?

Because God exist outside of time and space. God created space and time, but are itself beyond it

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only way God is in fact known to exist is as a concept, notion, thing in imagined in an individual brain, and then very usually in the form to which that individual has been acculturated.

For instance, God never appears, never says, never does. Real entities are, well, real ─ found in reality, the world external to the self, which we know about through our senses.

I'm not even aware of a definition of God that's appropriate to a real being. such that if we found a real suspect we could determine whether it was God or not. Instead, God is routinely defined in terms of imaginary qualities ─ omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent, perfect, infinite, eternal, that kind of unreal thing.

So saying there's no real God is not the same thing as saying there are no real unicorns, because at least if we found a candidate unicorn, we could determine whether it was the real deal or not; whereas God is simply a very flexible idea, various versions of which people have been taught.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Yes, which is why I said primarily through, not exclusively through. The theological justifications for God as articulated by theologians are primarily logical and rational arguments, rather than arguments that hinge on empirical (scientific) observation or experience. I can't say I've made much study of it - not my wheelhouse - but I got enough of a crash course in it during college that I'm aware of this. Plus, it comes up when you study philosophy more generally as the timeless question of "how do we know things" pertains.

Not really. Theological arguments are based on empirical observations of the world around us and its properties. On this base then theology logically concludes there must be some fundamental principle. Then they call it "God" (that's the most problematic part IMO).

So theology asserts we can know the existence of God through reason alone but we can more intimately know him only through his self-revelation. This requires faith.

34 The world, and man, attest that they contain within themselves neither their first principle nor their final end, but rather that they participate in Being itself, which alone is without origin or end. Thus, in different ways, man can come to know that there exists a reality which is the first cause and final end of all things, a reality "that everyone calls God".

35 Man's faculties make him capable of coming to a knowledge of the existence of a personal God. But for man to be able to enter into real intimacy with him, God willed both to reveal himself to man, and to give him the grace of being able to welcome this revelation in faith.(so) the proofs of God's existence, however, can predispose one to faith and help one to see that faith is not opposed to reason. (Catechism of the Catholic Church)

 

[PearlSeeker]

God can not be disproven by science. Why?

Because God exist outside of time and space. God created space and time, but are itself beyond it

Something comes from something. Space-time must be part of God then. So God is the All (inside and outside) - everything is part of God.

 

[Audie]

Something comes from something. Space-time must be part of God then. So God is the All (inside and outside) - everything is part of God.

"Kalam cosmo" only takes 2 words

 

[muhammad_isa]

The ability of modern science to provide accurate weather predictions nas absolutely nothing to do with mankind being charge of the weather. This statement you made perpetuates your intentional ignorance of science.

I said: "One cannot disprove that G-d might be able to change it .. locally AND globally."

He said "Sure, they can.."
so I said "So you think mankind is in charge of the weather?"

What that has to do with my ignorance, I cannot imagine.

 

[shunyadragon]

I said: "One cannot disprove that G-d might be able to change it .. locally AND globally."

He said "Sure, they can.."
so I said "So you think mankind is in charge of the weather?"

What that has to do with my ignorance, I cannot imagine.

The ability of humans able to predict the weather therefore "mankind is in charge of the weather."

 

[shunyadragon]

Something comes from something. Space-time must be part of God then. So God is the All (inside and outside) - everything is part of God.

Gaia conclusion based on faith. Much easier to explain that the natural nature of our existence is based on Natural Laws and processes, which avoids the circular reasoning above to justify 'belief.'

 

[Kfox]

God can not be disproven by science. Why?

Science does not address God. However, depending on how God is described, he can be disproven by logic. If God is described as all wise, but he does foolish things, if God is described as all good, but does bad things, If God is described to be fair, just, or righteous; but does things opposite, logic and reason disproves God as described.

Because God exist outside of time and space. God created space and time, but are itself beyond it

Are you suggesting there are parameters to space and time? If so, where are these parameters? IOW where does space and time begin and end?

 

[shunyadragon]

Are you suggesting there are parameters to space and time? If so, where are these parameters? IOW where does space and time begin and end?

Space time of our universe began with the expansion of the singularity. There is at present no evidence for an end of expansion.

 

[Kfox]

Space time of our universe began with the expansion of the singularity. There is at present no evidence for an end of expansion.

So what was outside of the singularity before it expanded?