Can Science Reveal God?

[mickiel]

Originally Posted by iamthat

The equipment for revealing the Divine is readily available. It is called the human body.
The human body is our laboratory to explore the nature of Consciousness, as
Peace

Interesting take, I can agree with it. Our bodies are an excellent lab to research. My curiosity is more geared towards the machines they might try, I am sure they are already doing it, I just don't know about it.

[mickiel]

Me myself, I think the revelation of God is difficult to the natural eye. The natural man has been somewhat revealing, but yet not enough for me. I still sense there is something more, more than we know, more than even science reveals. I think it is something out there , something very rare and is a great mystery of dynamic power that is stable but still unseen to humanity. Something spiritual.

[mickiel]

Originally Posted by mickiel

So we need to do our best when we write, this opportunity we are given here at Spiritual forum , it is one of the finest websites on the internet, more diverse and tolerant than any website I have been on, and I have been on hundreds.

I wrote this 6 years ago , trying to start a conversation with science so I could understand more.

[mickiel]

[quote=mickiel]

So science has moved away from its original position, which was a search for the divine; now they search for knowledge. But I think their search for knowledge can only lead them back to God.[/QUOTE


This 8 years ago I think still relevant today. It has continuing merit as the thought that things created themselves is being seen as the farce it is , imo.

[mickiel]

Im Sorry science left the church in the great reformation, it lost some great minds.

[quote=mickiel]

Originally Posted by mickiel

So science has moved away from its original position, which was a search for the divine; now they search for knowledge. But I think their search for knowledge can only lead them back to God.[/QUOTE


This 8 years ago I think still relevant today. It has continuing merit as the thought that things created themselves is being seen as the farce it is , imo.

Still within the same area as the original starting point which is God and what God is
Which is the existence of thought (the closest thing to it that words can grasp that is) and the spirit of god "Sophia" which is thought itself
And the son of god the living word of God which is the spoken thought because thought that is spoken is God in the flesh

And wisdom Sophia can't be had if a person can't think because before a person can act on his wisdom he first has to think of it

But the ability to think seems to come and go in humans throughout time it seems that we go from being like animals not thinking to humans thinking to then dumb humans not thinking properly and then the cycle repeats itself and we create all these concepts and religions in the process which only slow us down .

[Altair]

No, I don't think so. First of all one needs to agree on what ''God'' is. Can we find agreement? Don't think so...
Then we'll need a way to scientifically prove this ''God''. Can we do that? Don't think so...

And also.... say ''God'' is immaterial, you'd have to scientifically prove that this exists. Even when you do that, you just have proof of that and not of whatever ''God'' you believe in. Getting scientific proof of souls or afterlife is already daunting enough as it is, let alone whatever it is you mean by this ''God''.

[Aknaton]

I believe that science can reveal God, but it would have to abide by the rules of the ways in which God can be revealed.

[Miss Hepburn]

Originally Posted by Aknaton

...the rules of the ways in which God can be revealed.

Can you tell us what they are? :)

[Aknaton]

Yeah, sure. I remember this research done by a few people, but where does one take these findings? There's a general bias against such kinds of research as from the top (large corporations and funding) because they don't bring about any findings that can generate money, because a great deal of God's activity through man is done for free! Moreover, if a particular researcher would like to push these findings in common scientific circles, this would tarnish their reputation. But this has been proven from my experience through quantitative and qualitative studies.
Taking healing or recovery not connected to medical help for example, In some hospitals where there are unfavourable doctor to patient ratios, doctors and assisting medical personnel have noted unexplainable patient recovery and discharged them in usually less than three days. This research has been and can be done within current scientific frameworks (whomsoever needs the data). Unfortunately, this would be challenging to do, and would need a lot of convincing, because which hospital or hospital staff would want their name to be put in such a report in any case the data needs to be verified and analyses rerun? And then permission to use hospital data for that kind of reason... And then we have the health insurance industry, this and that... That's a lot of problems!!! I'd better just go heal whom God wants me to heal without seeking any attention.
Otherwise, the interior framework for personal and subjective experience would require that a person would be baptized with water, and with the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit will help them from there. But if you ask a spirit-filled believer in God if God exists, the question would not make any sense at all to them.