(May 12, 2017 at 10:08 pm)Face of a model Wrote:(May 12, 2017 at 11:04 am)SteveII Wrote: First, welcome to the forum. I hope you are here to discuss and not lecture or mock.
1. I'm not sure astronomy was ever redefined. Our understanding of the mechanics changed.
2. Why isn't the concept of a Creator founded? Do you know why there is something rather than nothing or how that something came into being?
You are asserting that our universe is a crude one (a subjective/comparative term). Are you aware of others that are less so?
You have done nothing at all to support your redefinition of God because none of your premises are based on anything resembling reasoning and nothing logically follows from a series of unfounded opinion.
3. I was not aware that science can even comment on whether God exists or not. Said another way, science has nothing to do with the question: Does God Exists -- and certainly has nothing to say about what properties or attributes God would have.
(1) Astronomy was redefined/updated/changed. Take your pick of a word that means change.
(2) I did not assert that our universe was crude. I said that there is zero evidence that our universe was created by intelligent being/s (eg. typical theistic Gods), and instead, the only type of universes created are crude universes, such as simulations. (look closely on the work: 'simulations')
So, now you see that the redefinition then follows logically, just like how astronomy was updated, in a similar way, the God concept is able to be redefined using modern evidence/science.
Also, as Harry points out, I did not say that science comments on any existence of any theistic God creator of our universe. In clearer words, I said that after redefining God using science, you don't have to believe in the redefinition, as you don't need to believe in science. [3]
This is because science has a property where it holds true whether or not you believe in it. [4]
2. You didn't answer my question. There are reasons to believe that God did create the universe. Why is there anything rather than nothing? How did a universe (or a multiverse) come into being out of nothing? Why is our universe, against all probability, fine-tuned to support any kind of life? You say there is zero evidence for God, but you are equivocating. What you really mean is that there is no scientific evidence. The problem with this reasoning is that these are not questions that science can answer--these are metaphysical questions.
I have no idea what you are talking about with 'simulations'.
No redefinition needed. You have presented nothing that requires me to rethink the God of Christianity in the slightest.
3. There is no way in the world science can define God. Science literally means study of the natural world and God is clearly a supernatural (not natural) being. The former cannot inform on the latter by definition.
4. No, that is not a property of science. That is simply the definition of 'truth' (which can be a scientific truth, a matter of fact, a metaphysical truth, a moral truth, or a mathematical truth--among others).
