Evidence that God is real

[BlueSky]

It is not so much a matter of truth as it is of "understanding how things work", so that we can use those natural principles for our own purposes.

I think this is a very important and an intended purpose for humans - to examine His creation and to see how things work.

God has no problem with this in my opinion ( based on scripture )

Question is, do we given him credit or deny his existiance and look for alternative ( non-correct ) reasons?

Getting to the truth of creation and how they work is a natural inclination of man. Have at it! I do it to.

 

[BlueSky]

It is not so much a matter of truth as it is of "understanding how things work", so that we can use those natural principles for our own purposes.

I completely agree.

But isn’t finding out how things work, part of the truth of the matter ? God has no issue with us seeking these things based on scripture. I feel he wants us to do this. He baked it into the cake.

Yes, examine His creation, figure out how it works, and use it to our purposes, no problems there.

Do we give him credit tho? Or invent erroneous paradigms to try and explain things removing him from the equation?

 

[BlueSky]

Double post there sorry. But the two work.

 

[Write4U]

There s another possible way to view this dame data. God built us with an innate drive to find and know him. A way to appreaciate “spiritual things”. This evidence actually proves that he is there.

One might make a case that God did it, but you'll never understand how he did it.

OTOH, science does allow us to examine things from many perspectives, which does lead to understanding and ability for practical applications. Only a magician would be able to duplicate Gods miracles, no?

Weird eh how the same evidence can been seen different ways. Which is truth ? Idk, but have a sense in one direction.

Evidence can be seen from different perspectives, each perspective being valid but from that perspective only.
IMO, it's the fundamental principle of General Relativity.[/QUOTE]

 

[Write4U]

Do we give him credit tho? Or invent erroneous paradigms to try and explain things removing him from the equation?

To my knowledge, not a single scientific equation cites a God as a required ingredient in natural law.

The problem is that God cannot be assigned a value of any kind, other than as a subjective emotional experience.

God = error, and cannot be used in an equation. There is no Intelligent Design, there is a mathematical self-ordering imperative, which is self-evident by all the emergent recurring natural patterns observed from all perspectives throughout the universe.

 

[BlueSky]

To my knowledge, not a single scientific equation cites a God as a required ingredient in natural law.

Yes, it could seem to be this. But is it the truth? We are talking about something that is so far back in time, that no one can pin the tale on that donkey. How do you prove the supernatural? It’s outside of our control and view, this is baked into to the cake. Question is, is he actually there? If so, he is a actual ingredient that is required; He created natural law.

The problem is that God cannot be assigned a value of any kind, other than as a subjective emotional experience.

Agree. Scripture would agree with you as well. We cannot pin him down or “find him” from our perspective ( like we could find a missing person ). Regulating this purely to the subjective, is myopic. There is an emotional aspect, but it’s not the whole story.

God = error, and cannot be used in an equation. There is no Intelligent Design, there is a mathematical self-ordering imperative, which is self-evident by all the emergent recurring natural patterns observed from all perspectives throughout the universe.

This is an assumption. A self ordering system without any intelligent input is again myopic and defies everything we know of the world today. Could a 747 self replicate ? The natural patterns are God ordained and self running since Creation ( from the theists perspective) . At the very least it’s a possibility. What does the other evidence show?

 

[Write4U]

This is an assumption. A self ordering system without any intelligent input is again myopic. The natural patterns are god ordained and self running since Creation. At the very least it’s a possibility. What does the other evidence show?

God is not a necessary ingredient in the physical sciences. A motivated creative intelligence is not a requirement for the universe to exist as it does.

An important consideration is that an equation is a two way self-referential mathematical function. It requires no other dynamic imperative.

The closest a physicist/philosopher has come to a God is Bohm who referred to the ultimate fundamental causality as "insight intelligence", a fancy term for self-referential mathematical functions, quantum superpositions.

But a divine motive has never been established. "God loves you", just doesn't quite make the grade.
If there is a creator God, it has no emotional stake in human affairs.
OTOH, humans do have an emotional stake in the creation of a "loving" God in human affairs.....

 

[BlueSky]

One might make a case that God did it, but you'll never understand how he did it.

Agree. This is aspec unknowable from this side of reality. My kids when they were young, had no idea of how the world works, no clue, zip, zilch. But it’s here. I don’t care about the how, per say, some do, ( scientists ) but it’s unfathomable how something can create something from nothing. I still can’t understand how they can make a bomb from rock.

OTOH, science does allow us to examine things from many perspectives, which does lead to understanding and ability for practical applications.

Agree.

Only a magician would be able to duplicate Gods miracles, no?

Even a magician cannot bring life from non-life.

Evidence can be seen from different perspectives, each perspective being valid but from that perspective only.
IMO, it's the fundamental principle of General Relativity.

Totally agree. Each persons view is unique and varied. Thing is, is their perspective true truth? Does it align with the way things actually are or how they actually happened ? There is an actual, absolute truth to everything, beyond our perspective. The truth does not care what we believe or our perspetive. It’s just sitting there waiting to be discovered.

Perspectives are a dime a dozen, but what is the truth?

 

[Write4U]

Even a magician cannot bring life from non-life.

Depends on your definition of life, no?

I really recommend watching Robert Hazen's lecture at Carnegie Institute for Science. He explains the relative ease of creating bio-chemicals and the processes that can lead to self-organization of living systems.
A Slime Mold is a very successful living single-celled hive organism, with incredible mathematical abilities.
Start lecture at 25:10 to avoid lengthy introduction.

and a new one by Nita Sahai PhD. I haven't seen it yet but looks pretty transparent.

 

[BlueSky]

I watched most of this. Very cool. See post #1415 for my view.

But where did everything come from in the first place?

“Get your own dirt”

 

[Write4U]

Get your own dirt”

BB--> inflation--> plasma--> elements--> bio-chemicals--> bio-molecules--> polymers--> single cells--> mytosis--> compound cells--> mobile cells--> hunter cells--> natural selection--> evolution--> Time.

If God exists that's how he got his dirt. Exactly the same as the natural processes that created dirt from evolution of chemical elements. God is not a required value or function in the process. It's purely probabilistic.

Mathematical values and functions are expressed as physical or mathematical patterns. But mathematical value and functions are not capable of emotion, they are the inherent potential values which form the probabilistic Implicate.

Implicate; an object's emergent inherent potential, the abstract mathematical image of "that which may become reality".

 

[billvon]

Agree. This is aspec unknowable from this side of reality. My kids when they were young, had no idea of how the world works, no clue, zip, zilch.

Right. They probably thought it was magic. Milk just appears in grocery stores. Electricity just comes out of the wall. When they got older, they realized the actual science behind those things.

I don’t care about the how, per say, some do, ( scientists ) but it’s unfathomable how something can create something from nothing.

?? It happens all the time in science. Crystals appear from disordered solutions. Particle-antiparticle pairs appear spontaneously in space, from nothing.

Even a magician cannot bring life from non-life.

Scientists have created protolife (self replicating molecules) from nonlife.

 

[sideshowbob]

Which point is that ? ( we’ve said allot in this so far ) I am convinced currently based upon what I have seen. Surely this acceptable?

The point is that you stopped looking when you got the answer you wanted. That is certainly NOT acceptable.

 

[Michael 345]

unfathomable how something can create something from nothing.

But religion is happy to state as fact god has always existed, hence has no requirement to have been created from anything

Since ONLY god has always been in existence (and nothing else) how was god able to unfathomably create something from nothing?

 

[Capracus]

Since ONLY god has always been in existence (and nothing else) how was god able to unfathomably create something from nothing?

If God is everything, then creation by such a god amounts to self reorganization, which is what we see everywhere we look.

 

[Michael 345]

If God is everything, then creation by such a god amounts to self reorganization, which is what we see everywhere we look.

Sooooo he didn't exactly CREATE the Universe from nothing, he used bits of his body(?) and kept part to continue to be god?

Extract

http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/ab...what-is-the-mass-of-the-universe-intermediate

According to these studies, the density of matter in the universe is about 3 x 10-30g/cm3, which means that it is 300 billion billion billion times less dense than water. Note that this includes the contribution of dark matter and so the density of luminous matter (that we see as stars and galaxies) is only about one-tenth of the figure given above.

That's a hell of a weight loss, Jenny Craig would be proud

 

[Capracus]

Sooooo he didn't exactly CREATE the Universe from nothing, he used bits of his body(?) and kept part to continue to be god?

Since woman is made in God's image, she too can create wondrous things from herself.

 

[BlueSky]

The point is that you stopped looking when you got the answer you wanted. That is certainly NOT acceptable.

No, that’s not accurate. I have stopped looking because I believe I have found the truth. It was not the answer I wanted, it was the answer I found based on all data. Big difference. I had no idea I was going find what I did. It blew me away. It was a slam-dunk.

 

[BlueSky]

unfathomable how something can create something from nothing.

But religion is happy to state as fact god has always existed, hence has no requirement to have been created from anything

Since ONLY god has always been in existence (and nothing else) how was god able to unfathomably create something from nothing?

Yes it’s all a very big mystery on many levels. I have no problem with that. I don’t need every little answer answered to settle on a possible truth. God has always existed, yes, ....Dr. William Craig wrote a good book on this complicated issue, I could not even sum it up if I had to, it’s beyond my ability to even grasp what he was saying.

Just because we don’t fully understand something does not negate its potential/actual truth.

How can God create from nothing? I have no clue and probably never will here or in the next life and I am fine with that.

 

[BlueSky]

If God is everything, then creation by such a god amounts to self reorganization, which is what we see everywhere we look.

Not sure where you get this from, God is not the creation. He created the creation by unknown processes. Where the material came from is also unknown. He maintains the creation also by unknown means.