Hi everybody.
Science is not such a strict thing as people here think. Time after time I've heard that, because it refuses to consider the supernatural, opinions are automatically dashed before they are considered. However, I don't think this is a correct stance. Sure, science only works with the natural world, but that's because it's all that we objectively know. By "objective," I mean that all people, regardless of religion or culture, can come to that same conclusion- or at least similar ones- by observing the facts.
What I am asking is this: If God(s) revealed him/themselves to us today, then wouldn't scientists everywhere work to understand how he does what he does? Even if he had absolute power over the universe, there would have to be a way that he did it (maybe quantum...
). In other words, in my opinion, whether or not the cause (God) is supernatural or not, the effect must be natural and thus is capable of being tested.
Please note that I would not like this to degenerate into an "is religion factual" argument.
Edited by Teapots&unicorns, : No reason given.
I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts
I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes
"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams