Can science find God

[John John]

2 minutes ago, MigL said:

I'm willing to take bets ...
I say in 10 days your demerit points will have exceeded your post count.

I know I'm doing well, I'm curious to see what the red line is. Anyway, be patient and we will see what happens.

[Phi for All]

23 minutes ago, John John said:

I know I'm doing well, I'm curious to see what the red line is. Anyway, be patient and we will see what happens.

You're doing horribly. You're intellectually dishonest and you have no inclination towards learning anything of substance. You seem entrenched in your confirmation bias, and can't reason your way through the scientific replies you're getting. You somehow think this is a competition rather than an opportunity to educate yourself.

We're used to people coming to a science discussion forum to learn. It's not as common to have people join and then insist that their opinions and wild ass guesswork are equivalent to the knowledge accumulated by scientists over the centuries. You act as though education was a punishment your were able to avoid, rather than a goal you missed. 

I'm sure you're a lovely person IRL, but here you come off as willfully ignorant, which is shameful and wastes everyone's time. People here have studied intensively, and love sharing the knowledge they've gained, so your posts are often insulting in their lack of understanding and civility. 

You're more curious about what our "red line" is than about science, and that means anything you say from here on out will be in bad faith. Let's just part ways now. There are plenty of wild ass guesswork forums out  there for you. This site requires more rigor than you're willing to give, but I guess that's our fault? Goodbye.

[swansont]

2 hours ago, John John said:

You still haven't answered my question as to saying I am biased. Why.

Because you admit your view is only from a Christian perspective, and yet many gods from multiple religions exist. You aren’t considering them.

[TheVat]

18 hours ago, iNow said:

Are you saying there’s a penis in my heart?

Aorta know the answer to this.

1 hour ago, swansont said:

yet many gods from multiple religions exist.

(chuckle)

[harlock]

11 hours ago, John John said:

I believe a true Christian is blessed with insights and knowledge as a gift.

saul(s.paul)? it depends on god purposes. it's destiny also(revelation 12, 5. probably he'll be the son of man..., the cherub...). 

[Night FM]

On 8/22/2024 at 3:31 PM, MigL said:

Most people who 'find' science have no further need to find God.
I suggest you never did 'find' science, because science provides a very clear path for making sense of the world, without invoking mystical beings.

That would be one, arbitrarily defined path based on materialist axioms (which are as old as Epicurus and just as debatable today as they were then). Just as there are many things which are outside them realm of science to "make sense" of, or at best would merely provide a specific materialistic description which is not mutually-exclusive to other potential descriptions. (For example, merely reading a textbook explaining the physical laws by which a car operates wouldn't provide a workable explanation of how to become a race car driver).

I'm also not sure what a "mystical being" even is, if a consistent definition isn't used. That sounds like a term which is easy to abuse and use in inconsistent and meaningless ways, similar to how the term "supernatural" is arbitarily used, despite it being predicated on contemporary understandings of the natural world to begin with. (e.x. If people 1,000 of years ago had encountered a supercomputer, they likely would've chalked it up to "magic" or "sorcery" due to being well-outside of contemporary understandings of the natural world, even if, in theory, it could eventually be explained).

So that, to me, harkens the quote that "any significantly advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic".

On 8/22/2024 at 3:31 PM, MigL said:

Your posts are sufficient proof that you need to do a lot more searching to find science.

That would beg the question why one would need to "find science" at all, as opposed to electing to be willfully ignorant of the world or arbitrarily inventing their own way of making sense of it for them. Even presuming on the basis of common sense alone that "finding science" is better than not would be predicated on axioms which are outside the realm of science itself.

On 8/23/2024 at 9:59 AM, swansont said:

Because you admit your view is only from a Christian perspective, and yet many gods from multiple religions exist. You aren’t considering them.

The idea of there being one Supreme Being goes beyond any specific religion, or any specific religion's conception of that Supreme Being. (As an example from a Christian source, John Calvin acknowledged this to be true across cultures in his Institutes of the Christian Religion). 

I would distinguish this from polytheistic conceptions of "gods", which, to my understanding, weren't viewed as having supreme sovereignty over the entire cosmos or being mutually-exclusive to the existence of other polytheistic deities. 

Edited August 29 by Night FM

[swansont]

9 hours ago, Night FM said:

The idea of there being one Supreme Being goes beyond any specific religion, or any specific religion's conception of that Supreme Being. (As an example from a Christian source, John Calvin acknowledged this to be true across cultures in his Institutes of the Christian Religion). 

True and completely beside the point.

9 hours ago, Night FM said:

That would beg the question why one would need to "find science" at all, as opposed to electing to be willfully ignorant of the world or arbitrarily inventing their own way of making sense of it for them. Even presuming on the basis of common sense alone that "finding science" is better than not would be predicated on axioms which are outside the realm of science itself.

No, it would not beg the question. The premise was already presented with a question about science finding God, so finding science is already a given here. Anyone is free to be willfully ignorant about science, but for them this question would not arise.

[MigL]

11 hours ago, Night FM said:

Just as there are many things which are outside them realm of science to "make sense"

Science does not simply make sense, although there is a need for self-consistency.
Science must be 'verifiable' to the extent that there has to be possible falsification.
( usually in the form of experimental evidence )

Religion, a 'faith', has no such requirement, and could not possibly come close to meeting any such requirement.

Edited August 29 by MigL