Is String Theory Supernatural?

GDR flexes both what the bible says and what science says to fit his beliefs.

He believes in a loving god so he dismisses the hard parts of both old and new testaments and focuses on the soft. He interprets each new scientific discovery as revealing how god did it rather than treat what the bible says as literal. This means that every new scientific discovery is an opportunity to wonder at the ways of the Lord.

It's pretty cool, it means than no matter what is discovered it can not contradict his beliefs and moreover, the more incredible the discovery, the more amazing it proves the Lord to be. Science therefore confirms the belief.

In the rational person, beliefs can only be broken if the belief can't flex. Faith's beliefs can't flex so her defense is to irrationally deny the science, GDR's beliefs not only flex, they accommodate science; it's far less damaging and it's pretty much how the Anglican Church and to some extent, the Catholic Church, has been able to survive.

GDR writes: Thus a lot of what is written in the Bible is the interpretation of what men believed about God.

Agreed (Or at least that's also what I've taken him to believe. I'm sure he'll correct us if we're wrong.)

On the other hand, GDR accepts essentially everything the Gospels say that Jesus taught and did as fact. Where other parts of the Bible conflict with that, they must be wrong.

I don't think that can be correct, if only for the fact that there is nothing in the bible written by Jesus - it's ALL third party reporting. GDR accepts or rejects a particular verse based on his very liberal interpretation of those verses. What he calls 'putting them in context.'

This, in my view, is the best possible interpretation if you must believe in the bible at all - in that it means that you don't actually have to be a Christian to be saved, you just have to be a decent chap. But it does put him against almost all of Christian religious dogma through the ages and even today.

GDR writes: Why would this prevent GDR from believing those third party reports are true? For example, I am sure GDR has said in the past the he believes Jesus performed the miracles described in the Gospels.

It's not his beliefs in the events in the NT that are flexible, it's his interpretation of what they mean. The particular interpretation we're discussing elsewhere is his belief that not only Christians can be saved and even atheists can get into heaven.

Perhaps that's my own bias, but it seems to me that any 'liberalness' GDR uses is applied elsewhere in the new Testament.

I suppose we might get hung up on the word 'liberal', Americans often seem to use it like a swear word. I just mean that he has pretty relaxed and compassionate views cf, say Faith's interpretation of the same words.

NoNukes writes: But I don't consider Faith's beliefs to a baseline to measure whether someone's interpretation of the Bible is improper or subjective.

And neither do I.

I don't see how using liberal in such a way isn't a judgement on GDR's beliefs.

It is.

You seem to be pushing against an open door.

GDR writes: They believed essentially in a 3 tier world with us in the middle, heaven up there somewhere and the underworld beneath us.

People place god somewhere out of reach. Then, when we advance enough to go there, they have to change the model.

I suppose it's human to want an explanation but I really don't understand why you can't just call God magical and be done with it.

GDR writes: However, just like any scientist who wants to continue to learn I'm a Christian who wants to continue to learn.

But you're not learning anything about your god, you're simply plonking him somewhere else every time you hear a new scientific idea about our universe.

God is in the clouds until we get to fly above them, now he's in the 12 dimension or hiding behind a brane. It's not science, it's non-science or just nonsense. It's just you - and others - making stuff up to fit your old god into a new world.

It's just sound silly - i'd understand you more if you just had a belief that he's outside knowledge. At least that would have some internal consistency.

GDR writes: I’m not being that specific. I am interested in science for its own sake but also speculate on how it might fit with my theological beliefs.

If you're interested in science, you'll know that science has shown over and over again, that religious beliefs are wrong and that in order to maintain the belief the belief itself has to change from something absolute and inerrant to something plastic and changeable.

Trying to jam a 2000 year old myth into modern physics is just bonkers - it's misappropriation.

Most Chrisians believe that God is everwhere and with them, how do the physics of omnipresence work?

GDR writes: Be very clear that I know that is highly speculative and that I agree that I am looking for ways that the world might work that are compatible with my pre-existing theistic beliefs.

It's very obvious that what you are saying about physics and how it relates to your god is highly speculative - and that's just you saying it; others would be much harsher.

By saying that you're looking for ways to make your religious beliefs compatible with the discoveries of science, you're knowingly applying confirmation bias - which is deeply odd.

For God's sake, either let yourself believe fully in the magic of your religion or be objective and rational about the science. Or do what most believers do and not think about it much.

GDR writes: I have no doubt there is a confirmation bias in my reasoning but that is true of all of us.

Yes, but that's why science is science - it's set up to remove individual subjectivity and bias. As you cherry pick your science and jemmy it into your beliefs, you're actively seeking out bias and grasping it with both hands. You have lost any critical, skeptical capacity you had because of what you believe.

Given sufficient reason to change my mind though, I am prepared to and actually have changed my views.

I don't think it's remotely possible for any discovery in science to change your mind because you've found an effective way of accommodating it into your beliefs. For example, you ignore the fact that there is no evidence at all for prayers being answered or spiritual healing, yet it's a core belief of Christianity that God intervenes in our world.

You can't explain in any way, the concept of God beingin all places simultaneously but accept the belief anyway. No doubt QM will be levered into place in due course.

What scientific - or other - 'reason' would make you change your mind?
(That's a really easy question for an atheist to answer btw).

GDR writes: Absolutely, so in order to come to come to any conclusions we have to consider other avenues of thought such as philosophy or theology.

Aaarrrrgghhhhh!