Science Makes God Unnecessary

[Gem]

Originally Posted by Morpheus

People may hold a subjective and particular perception and perspective on the subject, which will fail under scrutiny.

But clearly, any Creation indicates of itself, a Creator of it.

One might assume, and believe that assumption, but that doesn't indicate clarity.

St. Paul, while in Greece, spoke to them of their perception of the "Unknown God", from their own poets...

stating... "In Whom we live, and move, and have our being."

Aren't we living and moving within our own being? (or is there something else?)

biblehub.com/acts/17-28.htm

"...for “'In him we live and move and have our being'; as even some of your own poets have said, “'For we are indeed his offspring.'

[Morpheus]

Aren't we living and moving within our own being? (or is there something else?)

With respect to the superficial material, and organic world? In contrast to what is presently and normally invisible to us?

Yes, there is something else.

[metal68]

Originally Posted by Sammy

Doesnt the moon go around Earth with some unseen force?

I always think about the moon, how amazing that we just have the one and its so perfectly placed. Anything else would be chaos for life on earth.

Not sure that it implies anything but its a real wonder!

[r6r6]

There are primarily 4 phenomena that remain illusive to our observational abilities, and some may have more indirect evidence of their existenec thant others;

1} gravity aka mass-attraction is phenomena we have known to at least since Newton,

2} virtual particles, we believe existence because of the effect we see on observed particles,

3} dark matter came onto the scene back in late 80's early 90's,

4} and the most recent is the repulsive anti-gravity-like phenomena some cal dark energy aka cosmological constant that is responsible of Universe seeming to expand if not specifically responsible for the seemingly acceleration of expansion.

Gravity I cover in my recent cosmic nutshell thread

My recent explorations have led me to see two kinds of gravity and each being associated with its own specific geometric shapes.

r6

I have seen this form of statement in various different forms. As far as I can see it always falls flat on its face!

Other scientists would obviously argue against what I say but:

The end product of science is technology - NOT an understanding of existence!

Just observing observable phenomena, experimenting with it and cataloguing it does not lead to an understanding of existence. All that is being done within science is using scientific enquiry with a view to either furthering a field of study or, ultimately, harnessing nature to produce some form of technology.

There is a word for the point of view that suggests that science can be used to understand reality - it is "scientism". It is in the dictionary. It has more than one definition but it tends to be used to refer to the over reliance on science (that rhymes so wonderfully!).

You can observe observable phenomena until you are blue in the face! You are never going to understand anything of any spiritual value through this process unless you are referring to meditation techniques (which is obviously far more simple in nature to scientific enquiry).

It makes me cringe when I hear people like Dawkins suggesting that we will eventually understand all of reality by using science... it is philosophically and logically void to think that you can.

No offence was intended in any of my rant (I am also perfectly aware that plenty of people will disagree). Different people - different perspectives...

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by Chrysaetos

''God'' is often used as a pointer for any spiritual belief..
I don't see how any ''eastern polytheism'' or mysticism would do any better, as they can't provide any evidence either.
What is the ''divine''? Spiritual people can't agree and have battled over this for years, centuries, millennia..

Chyrsaetos is so correct with many of their assessments.

Di is greek for two{ 2 }

Vine is woody plant that travels on laterally/horizontally on surface, or just under surface of soil, and will climb vertically if given the opportunity.

I see divine as some set cosmic twoness. Ex the most complex entity of Universe, that we know to exist, is the human female/woman{ Xx } i.e. wom{b}an.

In conjunction with human female is male/man{ Xy }.

This is most complex set ergo divine, that we know to exist, barring ideas of two or more such sets as part of complex Earthian planet with many complex and less complex biologicals, in conjunction with solar system, and galaxy etc...i.e. yes Universe is more complex the local limited set of female/woman and male/man.

There exists no orginal consciousness, and no original sources etc type concepts. Within concept of eternally existent Universe, where physical/energy cannot be created nor destroyed, there can only exist initiation circumstances, are related to all other circumstances.

1} Metaphysical-1 = spirit-1 as mind/intellect ergo abstracts concepts ex concepts of space.
..spirit-of-intention...
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

2) non-occupied space--macro-infinite

3) gravity buffer-zone---occupied space
...spirit-3....

4) physical/energy---occupied space as fermions, bosons or any combination thereof
...spirit-2....
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Biological = soul ergo soul/biological or biological/soul
..synergy at its best as complex biologicals/souls...

Aggregate of spirit-2 may synergistically evolve as biological/soul, or biological/soul has existed eternally in Universe.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"U"niverse > Universe > universe{s} -> I-verse <- you-verse < we-verse < them-verse
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

God{ ess }/Universe/Cosmos/Great Spirit/Great Mama...etc.....

r6

[ajay00]

As per Jesus ,God is love.


Has science evolved to the point where it can say that love is unnecessary for a human being !

[VinceField]

Originally Posted by ajay00

As per Jesus ,God is love.


Has science evolved to the point where it can say that love is unnecessary for a human being !

Arguments bases on unproven assumptions and hearsay serve little purpose.

[ajay00]

Originally Posted by VinceField

Arguments bases on unproven assumptions and hearsay serve little purpose.

God and love are matters of experiential understanding, and not intellectual understanding.

If one is stuck in the intellect, one misses both.

[r6r6]

Originally Posted by ajay00

God and love are matters of experiential understanding, and not intellectual understanding.
If one is stuck in the intellect, one misses both.

All is both experiential and intellectual/mind understanding and comprehension.

To exclude either--- as your comments do --- is evidence of being stuck in one or the other. imho

We could even argue, that, your use of the word "understanding" is evidence of accessing metaphhsical-1 mind/intellect--- to whatever degree ---yet you appear to exclude significance the signiricance oyour comments as stated, and the significance having access to more complex degrees of metaphyiscal-1, mind/intellect that lead to words like God{ ess }.

All = "U"niverse--includes metaphyiscal-1 concepts of infinite

Whole = Universe ex God{ ess }

Finite set = universe{s}

Finite concept = I-verse--- understanding

Plural concept = you-verse---otherness ergo duality inherently includes I-verse

Complex concept = we-verse

Comprehension = them-verse---concepts of list above

...( (( (**) )) )....

Blue = positive gravity ergo spirit-3

red = time{?}

Blood red = negative gravity/reality

..... = macro-infinite non-occupied space

r6