Well, first you’d need to establish a theory on what God is to test with science, a theory based on observation. Since no one can give me any quantitative observational data on God, I’m forced to conclude that his existence is, to put it mildly, a very low status probability.
But we’ve already covered how we don’t even know, truly and fundamentally, what Matter is (at least not at its most basic and fundamental ingredients), at least not in the way that you are seeking a definition of God.
This is going to be simple - but YOU are quantitative proof for God’s existence.
We do have a pretty good idea what matter is. I’d rather discuss that after the CERN and Fermilab experiments are concluded and the Higgs Boson’s existence confirmed or falsified.
if energy and matter cannot have existed forever, why is God exempt?
Please, enlighten me, with the proof you hold, that makes god’s existence a low status probablity?
Surely you can spare a hypothesis of what Matter is, though, even if you’re still not sure? After all, the very insistence that we must know what something is in order for it to make any sense believing in it would require you to have, already, a solid hypothesis that answers that question. And if we’re to believe that you have such a theory/idea, by your own “prove it” standard you wouldn’t mind proving it by telling us.
Take your pick, any piece of energy or matter will do, from now, into the future or energy / matter from the past.
CERN will not create anything from “nothingness” because they are smashing particles together.
“God is ALL every good thing perfected”
The fact that something cannot be observed is a big problem for those trying to ratify it’s existence. Even a philosopher must appreciate that.
God is the cause of the big band? Perhaps Glen Miller can shed some light on where he is, if he ever reappears.
Yes. The fact that no one can provide it has told me all I need to know. Anything else said in this thread is purely academic…
I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt here and assume that English is not your first language.
If you want to talk in depth about CERN, start another thread. I’d assumed you would know the significance of the Higgs BOSON.
All that proves is that it didn’t appear out of nowhere. Any other conclusions drawn are pure conjecture.
If a clock cannot have sprung forth by its own evolution and must instead have been made by intelligent design, why is the Clock Maker exempt?
I’ve already stated a hundred ****ing times on this forum that I make no pretence at knowing how the Universe and what it contains got here… I simply reject all the claims so far from those who pretend they do know.
The fact that science can not answer why is a very big problem as well. Even if the why is as simple as “just living,” science is no where near explaining why.
Emergence.If a clock cannot have sprung forth by its own evolution and must instead have been made by intelligent design, why is the Clock Maker exempt?
Why is the Clock Maker exempt from doing the same exact mechanical thing all day long, namely telling the time, with not even the appearance of variation, when the clock is governed by that mechanical and monotonous “law”?
If you can answer that (and I predict that you can) then you already have the answer to your own questions quoted above.
Blessings in Christ,
KindredSoul
What I will do is not respond to any more stupid rubbish that has nothing to do with the question of what, in terms of quantitative observation, God is.
That’s irrelevant to your implication about God though…shouldn’t the Clock Maker be governed by the exact same laws and behavior that he specifically, with his human will and intention, designed the Clock to obey? I mean, after all, if we expect that God should have to obey the same laws that He designed the Universeve to obey, it’s only rational to believe the former.
I am very aware of CERN and Higgs, which I am hoping they do create something. In a sense, it will only be “synthetic matter” if you understand what I am by that.