Science Makes God Unnecessary

To All Interested Parties, As I've said, I have a life-long appreciatiion of the sciences, and, after considering everything, I still believe that a God exists. How about we consider several possibilities:?

1-The Big Bang really happened, and everything that has happened since that moment has brought us to present time, including our own existence. All that has transpired, including us, in the result of a series of random and meaningless events, a rather remarkable series of "accidents." At the present time, science has no way to prove that this might be true.

2-The Big Bang really happened, and everything that has happened since that moment has brought us to present time, including our own existence. All that has transpired, including us, is the result of some higher power/energy/consciouness or whatever at work. At the present time, science has no way to prove that this might be true.

If I am to believe that #1 might be true, I have to accept that an incredible number of fortuitous events took place, including the relationships between the Earth, Sun and moon that allow for a multitude of lifeforms to exist. It's also very fortunate that other "accidents" took place, including the position of the planet Jupiter, which, according to many scientists, makes life on Earth much more possible.

If I am to believe that either #1 or #2 might be true, I also have to factor in our own existences and the fact that we exist as beings with a consciousness. That consciousness, however it came to be, gives us the ability to take in information, make decisions, formulate conclusions, change directions, look for meaning, stop, start and so on.

When I add it all up, it requires a much greater leap of faith on my part that everything is a result of a remarkable series of random, meaningless events. Based on my own experiences and everything else I can find, it appears that there is a deliberateness and intention at play in all that has happened and will continue to happen in the future. I call that God.

[Chrysaetos]

Originally Posted by CuriousSnowflake

Can science bring us great truths? Yes. Can science bring us meaning? No. Meaning is in the realm of religion and spirituality, not of science.CS

I agree with you there. To add: Meaning is not necessarily spiritual.
And meaning is also what we make of it.

Originally Posted by aKuna

~ this is none of your labels.....Your Loss having closed the door to your mind!

It's often the religious who are close minded and don't like it when spiritual stuff are just natural phenomena. I always try to keep an open mind but that does not mean I simply accept every belief out there as real, or as probable. Having an open mind means critical thinking, not just absorbing everything without questioning.

[Camilla]

One thing that totally irks me about those who choose to disprove the existence of Yahweh is that they think they are the supreme being of the universe and is all knowing. Humans as a species is still evolving; we are but mere ants in comparison to this vast universe. So how in the world do you think science has all the answers? Science= Theories of how Yahweh created us as far as I'm concerned. In the grand scheme of things, even Einstein was an idiot. Spirituality is about setting yourself free from your limiting pretentious right mind and simply letting yourself experience the glory of Yahweh.


If we come from NOTHING, thats exactly what we would be; nothing. No photons existed, no black holes existed, no space existed, not even darkness or air existed. So why do people say we come from nothing? It bothers me.

Originally Posted by CuriousSnowflake

"Theory" is a scientific term. Gravity is a theory, relativity is a theory, atoms are a theory. A great many "facts" in science are just best guesses, best explanations for the way reality behaves. Heck, even F=ma, possibly the second most famous equation in all of physics, has no explanation; we don't know why it takes x amount of energy to accelerate y amount of mass to z speed, we just know that it's true. We don't know why inertia exists. We don't know why gravity exists. We just know that there is a certain degree of predictability in physicality.

In a way, religion really is a theory; an idea that attempts to explain the world. There are certain things about life that science is not equipped to explain: love, beauty, morality, laughter, purpose. Religion is an attempt to place these ideas into a coherent framework, and because these are subjective experiences and not objective phenomena, there's a great deal of personal, individual spin involved. This does not mean that there is no "research and discovery" involved, just that it is research and discovery placed into a subjective framework.


Science cannot reveal the nature of the Divine because the Divine is an experience, a subjective phenomenon. This does not mean that It cannot ever be found, just that we will never be able to point at something and say "this proves God". Proof is objective, not subjective. Can science bring us great truths? Yes. Can science bring us meaning? No. Meaning is in the realm of religion and spirituality, not of science.

CS

I am aware that both science and spirituality are loaded with theories. I was simply pointing out that science uses theories as a starting point. Obviously every theory has not been and will not be proven. But the actual objective of science is to investigate its own theories until identifying what can be proven. There is gravitational theory, but there is the law of gravity. Research has proven certain things about gravity, only that which has not yet been proven remains theoretical. It is a misrepresentation to suggest that science is full of only theories.

I get what you are saying that science can not offer meaning, and that the nature of Divine is a subjective experience that can not be objectively studied. The fact that we each interpret God and/or meaning differently could very well be because it is an individual experience rather than an actual universal truth of some kind. However, the very nature of subjectivity is that we don't have the actual answer. Maybe we all interpret differently because we simply do not yet understand the true nature of things. There's a big difference between "We don't currently know for sure." and "We will never know for sure."

The only objective/open minded point of view, in my opinion, is that anything is possible, including that we might one day discover and understand the true nature of what we call the Divine.

[7luminaries]

The only objective/open minded point of view, in my opinion, is that anything is possible, including that we might one day discover and understand the true nature of what we call the Divine.

__________________

Nicely said...agreed!

[psychoslice]

There is no need to understand the divine because we are the divine, the mind can never understand the subjective, this is what Awakening means, to Awaken to who you truly are are, the Divine.

Originally Posted by psychoslice

There is no need to understand the divine because we are the divine, the mind can never understand the subjective, this is what Awakening means, to Awaken to who you truly are are, the Divine.

The subjective isn't meant for understanding, only application. The purpose of religion is to put the subjective into proper order.

Originally Posted by DulcePoetica

Religion actually is only theory, which is offered as truth without proof - but more dangerous, without even research or discovery.

Actually this is not true. There is over 5,000 years of research notes from every religion on the earth. The Chan and the Sumarians are currently the oldest known societies that wrote their experiences down. All the myths and parables are the experiences of masters who used metaphor and analogy to explain what they experienced. Most myths have a history of expansion and change.

The fact that most people do not understand the value of these stories and what these stories mean does not make them a heap of garbage.

I like both science and religion. There are laws and there is just plain mystery.

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

I agree with you there. To add: Meaning is not necessarily spiritual. And meaning is also what we make of it.

Oh, I agree completely. The purpose of religion and spirituality is to create meaning, but they are not the only way to create it. Meaning is 100% subjective; we create it as we feel we need it. The idea that there is a universal meaning and purpose to life has caused untold suffering in this world. The worst thing one person can do to another is try to shoehorn them into a life-philosophy they do not choose for themselves.

CS

Originally Posted by nventr

All the myths and parables are the experiences of masters who used metaphor and analogy to explain what they experienced.

I appreciate that the experiences are documented, but myths, parables and metaphors are theories dressed up in pretty stories. Yes, they are helpful in that they support and document the experiences, but these stories are meant to substitute actually knowing the true source of an experience.

The source of a "religious experience" could be some kind of god, or it could be a million other things. I'm not personally inclined to accept any explanation without evidence. It doesn't mean a religious experience is not significant, it just that my personal curiosity is to find out the actual physical description of how an event occurs, which religion makes no effort to offer.