Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Can science say anything about a Creator God?
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 470 of 506 (697303)
04-23-2013 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 463 by Straggler
04-22-2013 3:17 PM


Re: ScienceFictionology
Straggler writes:
In this thread you have cited (your interpretation of) concepts in modern theoretical physics as compatible of your view that an eternal intelligent being resides in some alternative universe. Things like universes that lack a T=0 and the laws of physics being non-directional in time.
But unless the intelligent being you are proposing is constrained by the physical laws that are present in the alternate universe in which it resides why would such a universe need to allow for eternal existence anyway?
Is the eternal intelligent being you are proposing constrained by the physical laws of the universe in which it resides? Or not?
If my speculation is anywhere near correct then that question is meaningless. All we know is that our universes has a set of laws which keeps things going. If at the instigation of this intelligence we are split off from the greater reality then presumably what we know of laws in a reality with multiple time dimensions is beyond our understanding.
Straggler writes:
If it is constrained - I wouldn't call that a god. I'd call it an alien from another universe obeying a different set of physical laws.
Frankly I don’t have a problem with having a God as we know Him that has constraints. I know people like to throw around the term omnipotent however if God is constrained by the laws of this hypothetical universe but is responsible for the existence of this universe and the life on it, that frankly is good enough for me. You can call him an alien if you like but that wouldn’t change anything.
Straggler writes:
If it isn't constrained - Why bring up universes whose physical laws allow eternal existence as at all relevant to anything?
All of this goes beyond anything that we currently understand, and quite likely ever will be able to understand while living in this universe. I’m only saying that the Christian understanding of things is largely congruent with current scientific thinking.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 463 by Straggler, posted 04-22-2013 3:17 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 471 by Straggler, posted 04-23-2013 12:55 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 472 of 506 (697318)
04-23-2013 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 471 by Straggler
04-23-2013 12:55 PM


Re: ScienceFictionology
Straggler writes:
The distinction I am making is between a being that is bound by the natural laws of the physical universe in which it exists and a being that is unbounded by any such natural laws.
A being that is bound by the natural laws of the universe in which it resides is no more supernatural or godly than you or I. It might be more technologically advanced. But it isn't 'supernatural' and it isn't 'god' if it is constrained by natural laws is it?
I fundamentally disagree. If an intelligence is capable of bringing into existence our universe with the laws that apply to it, then frankly I don’t care if this intelligence is constrained by the laws of that universe or not. From our reference point as it is outside the laws of our universe it is supernatural. Also, if this intelligence is responsible for this universe and we live because of him/her/it then that is god-like enough for me, which as far as I’m concerned answers your question which was Why is it meaningless?.
Straggler writes:
Maybe in the dim and distant future traversing between universes in a multiverse will be commonplace. Similarly creating 'baby universes' may be a possibility. Maybe even creating life.....
Interesting link. I’m probably going to regret this but I’ll branch off into another speculation of mine as it deals with this and it is consistent with the question in the OP.
When I look at the history of God and man that we see in the Bible and even in secular accounts such as Robert Wright’s book it seems to me that in nearly every case God has chosen to intervene in this world through the hearts, minds, and actions of humans. (This is all on the assumption that God does exist.) In the Bible we see God working through Moses, Abraham, the prophets and ultimately He embodies the man Jesus. In Wright’s book we can see how God has gradually worked through humans through our socialization which is essentially humans influencing other humans. When the ancient Jews envisioned God returning as King they didn’t have any idea at all that He would do it the way He did, and there wasn’t any real expectation that the messiah would be anything more than a human figure who would live and die in the same manner as anyone else.
Biblically, at the end of time God will renew the Earth by having all things in heaven in on earth come together. What on earth will that look like? I don’t have the foggiest. Just as the ancient Jews had some set ideas about what Yahweh’s return would look like, (and they were wrong), we have people today that have set beliefs as well. I’m suggesting that what we should expect will be the unexpected.
I believe that reason is a gift of God. On the technological side science is the pinnacle of human reasoning IMHO. It seems to me likely that God will continue to interact with this world primarily through humans, and so I think that it is quite conceivable that ultimately humans will play a role to play in the renewal of the Earth. This of course is totally separate from the role which we have always had and failed so miserably at, which is to reflect God’s love, mercy, forgiveness, justice and peace into the world as we know it today.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 471 by Straggler, posted 04-23-2013 12:55 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 480 by Straggler, posted 04-24-2013 3:46 AM GDR has replied
 Message 481 by Straggler, posted 04-24-2013 4:56 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 482 of 506 (697361)
04-24-2013 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 480 by Straggler
04-24-2013 3:46 AM


Re: Am I a god? Technology Dependent Theological Relatavism
Straggler writes:
You, and the intelligence in question, would however be left wondering why the natural laws in that original universe are as they are. Your 'god' would himself be left wondering why there is something rather than nothing. Left wondering "Why am I here..."
I’m not trying to pretend that this is anything but highly speculative but it seems conceivable to me that an existence with higher dimensions might comprehend things much differently than we do. If one of the characteristics of such an existence did have 3 time dimensions, meaning that movement in time would be infinite as is our movement around in our 3 spatial dimensions is infinite then that question might be moot.
If I’m right I’ll let you know when we get there. Maybe we’ll be able to get together for coffee last week.
Straggler writes:
The link I provided previoussy outlines how humans could theoretically harness the natural laws of our universe to create new universes, design life and suchlike.
If you (or I) were in possession of such technol ogies and able to use them would we qualify as supernatural gods?
Personally I know that no matter what gizmos I am armed with, and no matter how godly I may seem to anyone/anything else, I will never actually be a god.
If we could actually do that, I suppose that from the perspective of the life in the new universes we would. It’s all relative. However, would it really matter to this new life whether you considered yourself a god or not. It’s a bit like our relationship with our pets.
Straggler writes:
If godliness is just a matter of reference point then you or I armed with a Tazer, a packet or Oreos and a mobile phone could qualify as gods to a primitive tribe that had never had any contact with the modern world.
But - Again - I am no god and no amount of gizmology will ever change that.
I think your "reference point" dependent notion of godliness is pretty meaningless. What does or does not qualify as a god at any given time requires a sort of technology dependent theological relativism.
Maybe to that primitive tribe we would be worshipped as gods because we have all this technology but that is different than worshipping a god because that god is responsible for you having life and that you adhere to a moral code.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 480 by Straggler, posted 04-24-2013 3:46 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 489 by Straggler, posted 04-25-2013 7:47 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 484 of 506 (697371)
04-24-2013 1:47 PM
Reply to: Message 483 by Taq
04-24-2013 1:03 PM


Re: Predictions
We've been over all of that.
Taq writes:
What makes it more plausible?
Message 410
Taq writes:
What realm does this intelligence reside in? How did that realm come about?
You'll have to read through a lengthy discussion primarily with Straggler.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 483 by Taq, posted 04-24-2013 1:03 PM Taq has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 485 by PaulK, posted 04-24-2013 1:52 PM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 486 of 506 (697373)
04-24-2013 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 485 by PaulK
04-24-2013 1:52 PM


Re: Predictions
PaulK writes:
In other words you hold that "blind chance" is much more likely to arrange the basic particles into a highly ordered intelligence capable of shaping our universe than it is to produce something as relatively simple as a hydrogen atom.
I don't really think that many people would share this view.
Nor would I. I'm only suggesting that a first cause is not required in a universe that has no beginning or end. Our minds are restricted by time. Everything happens in sequence. If our minds weren't restricted by our single time dimension I suggest that we might be asking totally different questions.
I don't pretend to have all the answers any more than anyone else and probably a lot less than most here. However, as I said to Straggler I have taken the current scientific thinking, (at least as far as I can understand it), and also looked at what a believe on the theological side and speculated as to how the two might fit together.
As far as the basic question is concerned, ( Can science say anything about a Creator God?), my answer would be yes.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 485 by PaulK, posted 04-24-2013 1:52 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 487 by PaulK, posted 04-24-2013 4:04 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 488 by Taq, posted 04-24-2013 5:22 PM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 490 of 506 (697439)
04-25-2013 10:54 AM
Reply to: Message 489 by Straggler
04-25-2013 7:47 AM


Re: Am I a god? Technology Dependent Theological Relatavism
Straggler writes:
How could a higher number of physical dimensions conceivably assist with questions of purpose?
If you look back at the question you asked you can see that my response wasn't referring to a question of purpose. The question was about a first cause.
Straggler writes:
Then you and I have a very different notion of what we mean by 'god'. I didn't think we were talking about theological relatavism based on technological ability.
I was simply pointing out that from the perspective of a created being with intelligence it would be reasonable to assume that this being would consider their creator a god.
It is another step to say that the creator had a larger purpose for the created beings that involved morality.
Straggler writes:
I would consider it a matter of honesty. If the intelligent beings in the universe I had created with my 'design a universe zPod app' came to me and asked if I was a god worthy of worship etc. I would be compelled to inform them that all I did was follow the 'design-a-universe' wizard and then press the big red 'create now' button.
I would tell them I am not a god and that they shouldn't waste their time worshiping me.
It seems to me that there is an underlying understanding in your point that assumes that worship is about the ego of the creator. My understanding of worship is all about the heart of the created being.
Look at my signature. What God wants of us is that we humbly love kindness and justice. From the Christian perspective worship is about our own humility and has nothing to do with satisfying the ego of God.
If you were to create beings in another universe you might very well adopt the attitude that it was an interesting project and just look in once in a while to see how they're doing but not have further involvement. However on the other hand you might have a purpose and a specific desire for what you created so you remain involved. God is a word that we have come up with. Maybe in the world you create they would worship you as Straggler, and have great debates about your nature.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 489 by Straggler, posted 04-25-2013 7:47 AM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 491 by Taq, posted 04-25-2013 11:00 AM GDR has replied
 Message 500 by Straggler, posted 04-26-2013 8:47 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 492 of 506 (697449)
04-25-2013 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 491 by Taq
04-25-2013 11:00 AM


Re: Am I a god? Technology Dependent Theological Relatavism
Taq writes:
Right, and you are saying that it is more probable that we started with an intelligence that came from . . . nowhere I guess . . . than to produce an intelligence from processes that we can observe all around us.
The question is about the process itself. The question is how and why the process existed in the first place.
Taq writes:
I don't consider my parents to be gods even though they created me.
Once again that is just part of the process. What a brilliantly designed process.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 491 by Taq, posted 04-25-2013 11:00 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 493 by Taq, posted 04-25-2013 5:52 PM GDR has not replied
 Message 497 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2013 1:23 AM GDR has replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 498 of 506 (697482)
04-26-2013 2:22 AM
Reply to: Message 497 by PaulK
04-26-2013 1:23 AM


Re: Am I a god? Technology Dependent Theological Relatavism
PaulK writes:
Ah, the usual gambit of pushing the question back until we run out of answers so you can wheel out the conclusion you want to reach.
That's not rational thought, that's just the rationalisation of dodgy apologetics. Because if we found any answer other than God you'd just ask why THAT exists. Your arguing strategy is designed to end up with that one answer - and then arbitrarily stop. It's really quite transparent.
That's nonsense. We can observe and study the processes that enable our universe to exist and how our lives came to be.
Let's look at evolution. Evolution has provided considerable evidence to suggest that all life evolved from single celled creatures that somehow formed from the raw materials on the planet.
We can look at all of that and draw our own conclusions. There isn't only one answer. One answer is that we just happened to be fortunate enough to live in the universe in the multi-verse where there was a chance combination of atoms that formed the first cell and that everything evolved from that, without an intelligent first cause. I'm not saying it is impossible to reach that conclusion. I have simply chosen a different answer than what you have.
Here is the question I asked.
GDR writes:
The question is about the process itself. The question is how and why the process existed in the first place.
Why is there only one answer to that question. It seems that you and I have come up with two very different answers.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

This message is a reply to:
 Message 497 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2013 1:23 AM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 499 by PaulK, posted 04-26-2013 2:32 AM GDR has not replied

  
GDR
Member
Posts: 6202
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 1.9


Message 506 of 506 (697680)
04-28-2013 10:55 PM


I'd suggest science can tell us things about a creator God. People used to assume that God created two humans, (Adam and Eve), to get things rolling.
Other than for a small group who believe in a Bible as a book dictated by God we now know that God created through an evolutionary process.
Science has told us that there was a T=0 and that has certain theological implications.
I contend that science when it talks about other universes and dimensions it gives us insights into the possibilities of how God might co-exist with us and live eternally. (Yes, I agree that it is, at least at this point highly speculative.) Maybe as science develops further we will gain a far better understanding of that.
I strongly believe that we are teleological beings. I think that the fact that we have intelligence and are able to reason is a strong indication of that. If that is correct then obviously we are intended to use that reason. One of the things that Christ did was to heal people. Science has been responsible for a great deal of healing as a result of human intelligence and reason.
As a Christian I believe that the study of the creative world is a natural theology and that it has a great deal to tell us, and has yet to tell us about a creator god.

He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God.
Micah 6:8

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024