A Scientific Test for God's Existence

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, Gray said:

Science doesn't verify that everything exists should be called God. That's a subjective judgement call. But science does verify the existence of things that exist (ie the universe). 

How does science verify that the universe exists?

[Bernard Gui]

14 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

I am just saying that apologists find creative explanations, so the Book of Mormon is not falsifiable. 

but if you really want the Book of Mormon to be falsifiable, you think Ether 15:2 will survive scientific scrutiny? I can point to many other examples. 

Which is of course a topic for another thread. I will start it and you can respond.

[TheSkepticChristian]

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

God could be anything to anybody. The list could be billions long

Exactly, that is why you need to give us a specific definition. 

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

 I am asking about the global concept of a God

The examples I gave you are so different they can't fit in the same category. It is like comparing Computers to Salt, so different. You need to give us a definition. 

4 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Many atheists claim "God" does not exist 

Listen, I am an open minded agnostic. I am not claiming God does not exists, I don't know that. 

So that means the burden of proof falls on you. 

You are the one that needs to demonstrate that.  

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

Exactly, that is why you need to give us a specific definition. 

The examples I gave you are so different they can't fit in the same category. It is like comparing Computers to Salt, so different. You need to give us a definition. 

Listen, I am an open minded agnostic. I am not claiming God does not exists, I don't know that. 

So that means the burden of proof falls on you. 

You are the one that needs to demonstrate that.  

No, that is why a specific definition is meaningless and unworkable. The list could never be exhausted in our lifetime. I can understand agnosticism, but not atheism. 

I don't have to prove anything. I am accepting a claim by atheists that science proves "God," whatever that is, does not exist. I am asking them for proof of that fact.

To make a global declaration that there is no God because science has proved it, as I understand the argument, means that there is no scientific proof for each and every concept of God. I do believe they are directing this at the Judeo/Christian concept of God. It would be too politically incorrect to direct it at, say, Native American or Tuvan concepts of God.

So for the sake of your request, please propose a scientific experiment that would prove or disprove the Judeo/Christian concept of God.

Edited May 20, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Gray]

44 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

How does science verify that the universe exists?

Direct observation using a number of different methods. The evidence that the universe exists seems to be quite solid at this point. Solipsists remain unconvinced of course.  

Edited May 20, 2016 by Gray

[Ahab]

22 minutes ago, Gray said:

Direct observation using a number of different methods. The evidence that the universe exists seems to be quite solid at this point. Solipsists remain unconvinced of course.  

And yet not everyone agrees on what the universe is.

I think that's interesting. 

[Gray]

3 minutes ago, Ahab said:

And yet not everyone agrees on what the universe is.

I think that's interesting. 

Sure, but I think there's a pretty broad consensus that stuff exists outside of each individual mind. 

[Ahab]

13 minutes ago, Gray said:

Sure, but I think there's a pretty broad consensus that stuff exists outside of each individual mind. 

Reminds me of one of the first books I remember reading called "Are you my Mother?"

Some people have some of the strangest ideas.

[jkwilliams]

24 minutes ago, Gray said:

Sure, but I think there's a pretty broad consensus that stuff exists outside of each individual mind. 

Except among solipsists, of course.

[Bernard Gui]

50 minutes ago, Gray said:

Direct observation using a number of different methods. The evidence that the universe exists seems to be quite solid at this point. Solipsists remain unconvinced of course.  

Well, I'm pretty sure I exist, although as one gets older, my mother used to tell me, you become more invisible. This is proving to be true. I am not convinced of your existence, however. Can you propose an experiment that would tell us why the universe came to exist, and if it does, what is the purpose of that existence?

[Bernard Gui]

11 minutes ago, Ahab said:

Reminds me of one of the first books I remember reading called "Are you my Mother?"

Some people have some of the strangest ideas.

One of our favorite family books. In fact, Sister Gui read it to her kindergarten class yesterday, and she says they were mesmerized. Snort.

[Gray]

29 minutes ago, Bernard Gui said:

Well, I'm pretty sure I exist, although as one gets older, my mother used to tell me, you become more invisible. This is proving to be true. I am not convinced of your existence, however. Can you propose an experiment that would tell us why the universe came to exist, and if it does, what is the purpose of that existence?

I can't propose an experiment like that. Did the universe actually come to exist? Time started up along with the big bang, and you need time to exist in order to think of causes and effects and things "coming to exist". Human language stops being able to describe things well if there is no time. 

Purpose is a subjective judgement call. I don't believe in objective purpose. I have my purpose and you have yours. 

Edited May 20, 2016 by Gray

[jkwilliams]

Just now, Gray said:

I can't propose an experiment like that, certainly. Did the universe actually come to exist? Time started up along with the big bang, and you need time to exist in order to think of causes and effects and things "coming to exist". Human language stops being able to describe things well if there is no time. 

Purpose is a subjective judgement call. I don't believe in objective purpose. I have my purpose and you have yours. 

Yep. Purpose is a concern of religion, not science. Maybe Bernard is referring to a religious experiment. 

[TheSkepticChristian]

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

No, that is why a specific definition is meaningless and unworkable. The list could never be exhausted in our lifetime.

I am not asking you for all possible definitions of God, I am asking you for your own definition. 

I have a gut feeling that you don't have a useful definition. 

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I don't have to prove anything. I am accepting a claim by atheists that science proves "God," whatever that is, does not exist. I am asking them for proof of that fact.

Ask them, not me. I am agnostic. 

5 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Our request, please propose a scientific experiment that would prove or disprove the Judeo/Christian concept of God.

That is much better. There is good evidence that the Trinitarian God doesn't exists. 

Math says that God in three persons is not possible. 

However, if you are talking about the alien God (extraterrestrial) of Joseph Smith, I believe in that one, I think his existence is highly probable.  Does he listen to our prayers? I don't know about that. 

Edited May 20, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[mfbukowski]

9 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

How does science verify that the universe exists?

Actually, it doesn't, it just assumes it

[Bernard Gui]

6 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

I am not asking you for all possible definitions of God, I am asking you for your own definition. 

I have a gut feeling that you don't have a useful definition. 

Ask them, not me. I am agnostic. 

That is much better. There is good evidence that the Trinitarian God doesn't exists. 

Math says that God in three persons is not possible. 

However, if you are talking about the alien God (extraterrestrial) of Joseph Smith, I believe in that one, I think his existence is highly probable.  Does he listen to our prayers? I don't know about that. 

I'm not interested in your or my definition or anyone else's as far as this discussion goes. I'm simply asking

for scientific proof that God (whatever that may be) does not exist. If you don't want to pursue that question, it's ok with me.

[Bernard Gui]

8 hours ago, Gray said:

I can't propose an experiment like that. Did the universe actually come to exist? Time started up along with the big bang, and you need time to exist in order to think of causes and effects and things "coming to exist". Human language stops being able to describe things well if there is no time. 

Purpose is a subjective judgement call. I don't believe in objective purpose. I have my purpose and you have yours. 

Don't we all. 

Would you agree that the existence of God is not something that science is capable of proving or disproving? 

[TheSkepticChristian]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

I'm not interested in your or my definition or anyone else's as far as this discussion goes. I'm simply asking

for scientific proof that God (whatever that may be) does not exist. If you don't want to pursue that question, it's ok with me.

wow it is clear you don't read what I say. I said in the previous post 

Quote

that is much better. There is good evidence that the Trinitarian God doesn't exists. Math says that God in three persons is not possible.

and you are not trying to understand anything I am saying.  Do you know what the God of Spinoza is? 

3 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

Actually, it doesn't, it just assumes it

but science makes predictions, what predictions does philosophy make? 

Edited May 21, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[mfbukowski]

15 minutes ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

but science makes predictions, what predictions does philosophy make? 

It predicts you will never be a philosopher 

[Bernard Gui]

8 hours ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

wow it is clear you don't read what I say. I said in the previous post 

and you are not trying to understand anything I am saying.  Do you know what the God of Spinoza is? 

but science makes predictions, what predictions does philosophy make? 

I read what you say, but it is not what I wish to discuss. I have repeatedly asked the discussion to be limited to one narrow question... atheists claim science proves God does not exist, whatever that entity may be. What scientific experiment proves this? If you want to talk about Spinoza's God, Thor, Tane, Coyote, the Mayan corn god, Mars, a matchbook, or the predictions of philosophy, please start another thread. My assumption is that science claims to prove none of those exist. Or if there is some sort of philosophical or scientific God, whatever that may be, that science must be able to prove it exists. If that is  so, what how is it proven scientifically? In my opinion, it is pointless to argue about every specific concept of God. That would be a limitless debate that would have to investigate anything one would wish to propose to be God. Without derailing into Spinoza or Vine DeLoria or the Great SpaghettinMonster. If you think science proves the God of Spinoza exists, briefly describe why. Has science proven the existence of Spinoza's God? If so, by what scientific procedure, method, or experiment? Are you understanding what I am saying?

Edited May 21, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Ahab]

1 hour ago, Bernard Gui said:

...I have repeatedly asked the discussion to be limited to one narrow question... atheists claim science proves God does not exist, whatever that entity may be. What scientific experiment proves this? If you want to talk about Spinoza's God, Thor, Tane, Coyote, the Mayan corn god, Mars, a matchbook, or the predictions of philosophy, please start another thread. My assumption is that science claims to prove none of those exist. Or if there is some sort of philosophical or scientific God, whatever that may be, that science must be able to prove it exists. If that is  so, what how is it proven scientifically?

I think your assumption may not be correct. Rather than thinking scientists are claiming that no God exists it may be that they are simply claiming that they do not see any evidence that what they think of as God exists.   Which is why I suggested that we first define what God really is, or have scientists clarify what they mean for us.  

I don't see any evidence that God exists either, if I define God as some people do.

[TheSkepticChristian]

13 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

whatever that entity may be. 

1. I keep telling you that there is no general concept of God. 

2. I already proved that the Trinitarian God doesn't exists, simple Math shows that. 

13 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Without derailing into Spinoza or Vine DeLoria or the Great SpaghettinMonster. If you think science proves the God of Spinoza exists, briefly describe why. 

LOL please do some research about the God of Spinoza.  You think the God of Spinoza is a person.

 

Edited May 22, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian

[Bernard Gui]

9 hours ago, Ahab said:

I think your assumption may not be correct. Rather than thinking scientists are claiming that no God exists it may be that they are simply claiming that they do not see any evidence that what they think of as God exists.   Which is why I suggested that we first define what God really is, or have scientists clarify what they mean for us.  

I don't see any evidence that God exists either, if I define God as some people do.

Thank you. It's not the scientist that I question, because I don't believe their discipline is adequate to make this declaration. Having grown up in Los Alamos, I know a lot of very good scientists who believe God exists and many who don't. I am asking atheists/non-believers (who put this in their mouths) to propose a scientific way to prove or disprove the existence of God. I cannot think of one, but I readily confess to not being anything more than a violinist who is occasionally  confronted with people who tell me science has proven God does not exist. 

 

Edited May 22, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[Bernard Gui]

1 hour ago, TheSkepticChristian said:

2. I already proved that the Trinitarian God doesn't exists, simple Math shows that. 

LOL please do some research about the God of Spinoza.  You think the God of Spinoza is a being. 

You are wrong. I don't think Spinoza's substantial God is a being. For the purposes of my question, what he or anyone else believes about God's nature is irrelevant, just that they posit a God of whatever sort. It doesn't matter to me. I do not wish you to derail the topic by arguing about Spinoza. Open another thread where you can discuss him if you wish.

 Is there an experiment that can test his or any other notion of God - substance, non-substance, pure thought, corporeal, animate, inanimate, natural, limited, omnipresent, dwelling in the heart, an eternal Creator, a destroyer of worlds, resting on the backs of elephants, puffing from a volcano, caused or uncaused, suffused throughout nature, Mother Nature, in peyote buds, winding up clocks, cooking cosmic pasta, Love, lounging on a high mountain or under the ocean, in the Q continuum, wafting through the ether, hiding in a matchbook, or fill-in-the blank? Can he/she/it be smoked out by science? Please share if you think there is. I sincerely want to know. Be specific with an answer about Spinoza if you wish.

Edited May 22, 2016 by Bernard Gui

[TheSkepticChristian]

2 hours ago, Bernard Gui said:

Can he/she/it be smoked out by science? Please share if you think there is. I sincerely want to know. 

Again, I said that Math proves the Trinitarian God doesn't exists. God in three persons is not possible. 

Simple logic, Math, and Science show that the Trinitarian God can't exists.  

Edited May 22, 2016 by TheSkepticChristian