Can science refute the "god hypothesis" beyond all reasonable doubt?

Hi Bluejay, I am sorry to hear that is the kind of God you have been serving.You like Pasqual have assumed that a belief in God is sufficient to receive rewards from God.To set the record straight you can believe in God, feed the poor, heal the sick, house the homeless, go to church 7 days a week, study, and pray constantly and still not receive any reward from God.Jesus told the Pharisees, a very religious group of people: The devils believe and tremble. They will spend eternity separated from God.There will be many when they stand in judgment who will say, "Lord Lord did not we do many wonderful works in thy name", Jesus will say, "depart from me, ye that work iniquity". Matthew 7:22, 23.Jesus told Nicodemus that to see the kingdom of God, "you must be born again". He explains in John 3:1-18.So accepting that there is a God or gods is only the beginning.Why do you feel like you are under pressure?Jay I met Jesus 1 month before my 10th birthday. I have never been afraid of anything, sickness, death, proverty, etc., and I have never wanted for anything. Why should I be afraid of what God might see? He has given me eternal life, I will never perish. But God does not watch me. He does not have too. He stood at the beginning and viewed the end, so He knew everything before He created mankind. He counted the cost and was willing to pay the price for my disobedience.It makes no difference what decision you make He already knows what you are going to do. He left it up to you to make your own choice. You see science as illuminating everything. I see science as illuminating many things that God has told me in His Word. I see science as making great strides that benefit mankind. In technology, and medicine espically.But it does not answer the most important questions that I have.Why am I here?
What is the origin of the universe?
What is the origin of life?Because science can't answer those questions my faith is even made stronger.I am convinced God exists because science requires one. The accepted theory requires a beginning. I am told that beginning was a hot little thing that contained everything there ever was, is or ever will be. Nothing exists outside of this little thing that has expanded into what we see today, and the things we do not see.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

There are so many atheistically-induced misconceptions on EvC.
If you mean nothing physical or 3D exists outside the universe, i agree. But we can't possibly know if existence outside of the universe requires time, it can be timeless or eternal. "Existence" can have very different meaning to something that's not a subject to spacetime limitations. There is no proof that there is nothing out there in the uncreated. We may not notice it or understand its existence but there is NO proof there is nothing outside the universe(it's an atheistic myth twisted and served as objective evidence). For sure there is nothing physical or nothing similar to our existence out there in the uncreated but whoever lead you to believe there is evidence that there could be absolutely nothing out there, has just brain-washed you in a pseudo-scientific way. Maybe there really is nothing out there but we have no proof and no way to know.
Too bad Jesus hasn't told you that when you met him, as you claim.Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

---

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind""I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion"-Albert Einstein

Hi Agobot, I am far from brain washed. I said I had been told not that I believe it.But since science will not admit that there is the possibility of something being out there it can not refute the "God hypothesis", because it does not exist.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

It's funny how such a young species feels that in it's meer 200,000 years of existance it deserves the answers to these questions, without having the knowledge to figure it out yet.It's no wonder we developed faith as a trait if those are the type of questions we demand answers for. Why can't we just take pride in being the only species to even come remotely close to figuring out some aspects of reality, even if we don't fully comprehend it? Why do we make stuff up just to satisfy a stubborn curiousity?We are truly self-centered.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi Oni, The OP actually says Message 1 sentence 1. That is the reason I asked, How can science that starts with a god refute my God hypothesis?The only thing I put forth concerning my God was that He was everything that had ever been, is, or ever will be. (That does not leave anything out.) I gave no details of how He accomplished anything.I then put forth the hot little thing at T=10^-43 which is said to be everything that ever was, is, or ever will be. There is nothing outside of it. (That does not leave anything out.)I have not discussed where this hot little thing came from only that it existed at T=10^-43 .So I ask the question again. How can science that starts out with a god refute my God?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

It starts with a mystery, an unknown, you can even call it god as long as it's not the god of the bible and the biblical 6-day creation. Now if you believe, have faith and pray to the unknown in churches, things will gradually start to not make sense for us.

---

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind""I am a deeply religious nonbeliever - This is a somewhat new kind of religion"-Albert Einstein

You needed to read one more line further.Straggler writes,

quote:

---

Has science in fact already achieved this?

---

Then he specifies,

quote:

---

What exactly is the "god hypothesis"? What must such a hypothesis entail if it is to be able to be subjected to scientific enquiry (which after all is the very meaning of the term hypothesis)?
Is it even possible to apply the term "hypothesis" to such a concept as God/gods/deities/supernatural creators? Or are such concepts inherently beyond the restricted nature of scientific investigation?

---

So again, how do we know the God hypothesis is even valid? Because the OP does NOT say "how can we disprove ICANT'S God hypothesis", it say the God hypothesis. This will require people of faith to let go of that self-centered attitude that there is only one God hypothesis, theirs. There are many, lots of which precede your God hypothesis.Then he specifically says,

quote:

---

What I am really interested in is - To what extent do atheists, deists and the most rational of theists require science to be necessary to their world view.

---

So to what extent do YOU, within YOUR God hypothesis, require science? None, some, alot...However, it does say rational theist. Yes but the details is what we want. Can science refute the details? Lets use your God hypothesis as an example but it could be applied to any God hypothesis. Can science provide enough empirical evidence against certain claims in the Bible? Just because you take it on faith doesn't mean we have to. Science does not start off with a God. Unless you have YOUR OWN type of science now too???

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi Oni, But Straggler said he did not want to discuss origins here. Everything that ever was, is, or ever will be was present at T=10^-43. That fits my definition of a god.
I have heard it called existence, pure energy and eternal existence.So what would you call it?You can have the last word as I will not address this again in this thread.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

I don't want to put words into Stragglers mouth so I will let him address this further since it is his thread, agreed? If that is your sole definition then I have no issue with it.However, IMO once you give human emotions to that energy, or say that it had a hand in the creation of things (i.e. matter, planets, organisms etc, etc...), then we can debate the facts and include science.

---

"All great truths begin as blasphemies""I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth."--Bill Hicks"I never knew there was another option other than to question everything"--Noam Chomsky

Hi, Onifre (sweet name, by the way), I’ve never heard it said so well before.I believe that you’re right. I have spent a lot of time thinking critically, and am trying my best to challenge my own beliefs about God. I have rejected a lot of them, and only tentatively hold on to those beliefs that science can’t completely refute. Essentially, I’m down to a belief that there is something that we would call “God” and that there will be something we would call an “afterlife.” After all, at this stage, it’s really only a yes or no question.But, beyond that, there are too many alternatives, none of which can be examined empirically, and I don’t believe in the power or authority of ancient wisdom any more than I believe in my grandmother’s “wisdom” about the world.By the same token, there are too many “god” possibilities that science currently permits for me to say, categorically, that science is a good reason for me to drop my religion. Granted, it is a great reason for me to drop much of the mystical ideas of my traditional religion, but the refutation of a number of hypotheses is not reason to reject the basic concept.For that reason, I argue that several god hypotheses have been essentially falsified (e.g. God created us 6000 years ago out of the dust), but that the concept of god has not been. Therefore, if I choose to stop believing in God, it won’t be because science has disproven Him, but because I no longer feel that I need Him. So, how much material do you get from EvC?

---

-BluejayDarwin loves you.

Double PostEdited by Bluejay, : No reason given.

---

-BluejayDarwin loves you.

Hi Oni, Neither My God or the hot little thing could have human emotions they are not human. Since they both are all those things and there are very few facts what would we debate? We would also have to do it in another thread.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi, ICANT.Thanks for your comments. Maybe you'd like to spend some time reading about Mormon beliefs before you say absurd and ignorant things like this.And, by the way, it's spelled "Pascal": where did you get that stupid and utterly incorrect spelling? This is a very good example of why I am having a very hard time keeping my belief in God. It sounds to me like you are claiming that I can do everything God asked me to do, and he'll still withhold the reward. I humbly submit that such a God does not deserve my worship, even if He does exist and can give me what He claims. Thanks for caring.I feel like I am under pressure because I really have no way of knowing if what I am doing is a sin or not, because everybody I talk to seems to have a different opinion as to what is sinful and what is required of me in order to achieve salvation. In the end, I am told that I must make my own decision through careful thought and prayer. But, being of a sound, objective mind, I am naturally allergic to making decisions without supporting evidence, so I naturally (and stupidly) asked for lots of people’s input. Now, thanks to you, I have one more interpretation of scripture that, naturally, contradicts pretty much every other interpretation of scripture that I have ever heard.All I have to go on is the little blurbs the scriptures have, along with the infinite commentary from a lot of people, and the only tool I’ve been given to make this decision is my own personal feelings. And, by the way, my recent past includes two years on Zoloft for the failure of those very feelings on which I am supposed to be relying. It’s hereditary. Well, that’s my story. Your story is probably that it’s a punishment for my lack of faith.And, here’s the clincher: if I make the wrong choice, I’ll probably spend eternity in Hell.To sum up: if the screwed-up emotional centers of my brain can’t decide between the myriad different perspectives on the Bible and come up with real truth in the absence of any sort of reliable, physical evidence, I’m going to spend a literal eternity in burning torment beyond my mortal comprehension.Does anybody see any reason for me to feel like I am under pressure?

---

-BluejayDarwin loves you.

Hi Jay, My fingers aren't seeing too well tonight. Yes and I am sorry.If you will e-mail me I will see if I can help. Percy will fry both of us if we try here.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Hi, ICANT. That was a joke: you obviously got your erroneous spelling of "Pascal" from my erroneous spelling in the post you replied to.

---

-BluejayDarwin loves you.