Has science found God?

[1213]

As Bible suggests, this world is like a computer simulation. And now some have found evidence this could be true, world may be like a computer simulation. What say you, have science found God, the programmer of the universe?

"Simulation theory is a theoretical hypothesis that says what people perceive as reality is actually an advanced, hyper-realistic computer simulation, possibly overseen by a higher being".
https://builtin.com/hardware/simulation-theory

"Do you ever experience something and think to yourself, “This can’t be real.” To some people who have bought into the notion that our reality is currently being simulated, there are examples all around us, that demonstrate glitches in the Matrix. Deja Vu? Ghosts? The Mandela Effect? These could all be direct examples of flaws in the simulation."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

"MIT Theoretical physicist James Gates has made a discovery that allegedly caused Neil deGrasse Tyson to sit down in shock. Now for the uninitiated, superstring theory is a concept that could unify all aspects of physics if proven right. While working on his superstring theory, he made an odd discovery. Gates claims to have identified what appears to be actual computer code embedded in the equations of string theory that describe the fundamental particles of our universe. In short, he found “error-correcting codes,” the same error-correcting codes that you might find on the web browser you are using right now."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

[The Barbarian]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

Of course it hasn't. It can't.

Why not?

Science, by its very methodology, is limited to the physical universe. It's unable to confirm or deny the supernatural. The "invisible things, clearly seen" in Romans 1:20 are those aspects of the physical universe that are understood by believers to show God's power and wisdom.

[The Barbarian]

When an answer is unknown, like how did the universe or life on earth begin, it would be foolish to reject possible explanations. "The gods are human inventions, but I'm open to being wrong about one of them or one yet to be proposed." I would imagine that you would get a reply something like that from Dawkins, because there is no justified reason to reject the possibility of there being gods out there. Dawkins would understand this.

If someone was to ask me where God fit into my work in science, I would have to say as Laplace supposedly said:
"I have no need for that hypothesis."

It doesn't mean I don't believe. It means that one can describe the way our physical universe works without once bringing God into it. At least so far. Apparently, it gets kinda hard if you go deep enough into matter and energy, but that's not my area of expertise.

[William]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

Of course it hasn't. It can't.

Why not?

Science, by its very methodology, is limited to the physical universe. It's unable to confirm or deny the supernatural. The "invisible things, clearly seen" in Romans 1:20 are those aspects of the physical universe that are understood by believers to show God's power and wisdom.

So science is not able to confirm the beliefs of those who understand God as being "Supernatural".

Please list those things that allow one to understand that invisible things are clearly seen.

[The Barbarian]

[Replying to 1213 in post #1]

The answer to the question "Has science found God?" appears to be "no".

Of course it hasn't. It can't.

Why not?

Science, by its very methodology, is limited to the physical universe. It's unable to confirm or deny the supernatural. The "invisible things, clearly seen" in Romans 1:20 are those aspects of the physical universe that are understood by believers to show God's power and wisdom.

So science is not able to confirm the beliefs of those who understand God as being "Supernatural".

Correct.

Please list those things that allow one to understand that invisible things are clearly seen.

St. Thomas Aquinas asserts logic can do this:

1. Nothing is the efficient cause of itself.
2. If A is the efficient cause of B, then if A is absent, so is B.
3. Efficient causes are ordered from first cause, through intermediate cause(s), to ultimate effect.
4. By (2) and (3), if there is no first cause, there cannot be any ultimate effect.
5. But there are effects.
6. Therefore there must be a first cause for all of them: God.


Which seems to me an explanation for why there is something instead of nothing. For me, it's experiential. One doesn't go through a long dark night of the soul, without being changed. At 21, I went through that. Lost my ambitions, what little faith I had, my friends, the love of my life, and saw nothing worth being for. And then, slowly found my way back, after deciding that whatever truth was there, I'd accept and embrace it.

She came back to me then, BTW, for which I am absolutely grateful.

And so here I am. Ich kann nicht anders.

[William]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #74]


Thank you for your thoughtful response. I find your points, particularly those rooted in St. Thomas Aquinas’ logic and your personal experiences, both intriguing and profound. However, in revisiting my original question—about listing things that allow one to understand that "invisible things are clearly seen" (Romans 1:20)—I think there's an opportunity to further explore this idea.

Your perspective, coupled with the Subjective GOD Model (SGM), suggests a framework where understanding the "invisible things" of Romans 1:20 might not rely on supernaturalism but rather on uncovering what is currently unseen yet observable within the natural order. Let me explain.
________________________________________

1. Unseen Things That Science Unveils
Many "invisible things" referenced in scripture can be seen as aspects of the natural world that were once undiscovered but have since been revealed:
• The genetic code (DNA), demonstrating the intricacy of life.
• The cosmic order, including galaxies and the laws of physics.
• Forces like gravity and electromagnetism, which are invisible yet govern reality.
• Quantum phenomena, where particles behave in ways that challenge intuition but reflect profound underlying order.

These are examples of things once unseen but now revealed, showing how the natural world carries layers of depth that science helps uncover. For believers, these discoveries can be seen as reflecting divined wisdom and power.
________________________________________

2. Consciousness: A Natural Mystery
Consciousness, while not directly observable, is another profound example. It does not need to be supernaturalized but can be understood as a natural phenomenon arising from:
• Neural networks and brain activity.
• Biochemical processes that create self-awareness and perception.
In the SGM, consciousness is viewed as a subjective space where co-creation with GOD occurs. This perspective bridges the gap between science and spirituality, allowing consciousness to be both natural and spiritual, without resorting to supernaturalism.
________________________________________

3. Romans 1:20 and Evolving Revelation
The verse could be interpreted as advocating for the exploration of the natural world as a means of understanding divined truths. The "invisible things, clearly seen" might refer to:
• Phenomena that exist within creation but require discovery (e.g., the complexities of ecosystems or the universe’s fine-tuning).
• Spiritual truths discerned through subjective experiences like synchronicities or insights during meditation.

Rather than emphasizing the supernatural, this reading suggests a universe full of potential revelation, inviting humans to engage in ongoing discovery and co-creation with GOD.
________________________________________

4. Co-Creation and Evolving Moral Truths
The SGM emphasizes that morality is not fixed but evolves as individuals engage deeply with divined values. This aligns with the idea that discovery and revelation are not limited to the physical universe but also extend to moral and spiritual growth. For instance:

• Scientific progress can inform our understanding of ethical responsibility (e.g., environmental stewardship).
• Spiritual practices deepen our alignment with divined will, refining our subjective moral frameworks.
This dynamic, co-creative process resonates with the invitation in Romans 1:20 to see the divined through both the visible and the revealed.
________________________________________

5. Integration of Science and Spirituality
The SGM encourages an integrative approach, where:
• Science uncovers the structure and mechanics of the universe, highlighting its beauty and intricacy.
• Spirituality provides a framework for understanding meaning, purpose, and moral alignment.
This dual approach aligns with the idea of seeing "invisible things" through the lens of both objective discovery and subjective experience.
________________________________________

6. Free Will and Responsibility
The SGM adds depth to this discussion by recognizing the role of free will in shaping both individual and collective realities:
• Historical atrocities are seen as outcomes of free will exercised independently of GOD.
• Co-creation requires conscious alignment with divined values, emphasizing personal and societal accountability.
This reinforces the idea that "invisible things" are not unseeable but may require deeper introspection and intentional alignment to fully grasp.
________________________________________

In this light, Romans 1:20 could be viewed not as advocating for supernaturalism but as an invitation to discover the profound realities—both physical and spiritual—that are embedded within creation. Science helps us uncover the unseen complexities of the universe, while spiritual practices deepen our understanding of subjective, internal truths. Together, these paths allow us to participate in the co-creative process, aligning with divined wisdom and moral growth.

What do you think of this perspective? Could it enrich both relationship with GOD re the exploration of the natural world?

[The Barbarian]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #74]
What do you think of this perspective? Could it enrich both relationship with GOD re the exploration of the natural world?

This sounds a great deal like the thoughts of Michael Denton expressed in the forward to Nature's Destiny. The idea of a universe "front loaded", as some IDers say, to produce all the things we see, based on some teleology that set the rules to work toward a desired end, is reasonable, given the evidence you've cited. It all seems just too neatly set up to have been a matter of chance. I'm not an IDer, but Denton seems pretty close to the mark on this one.

Paul depends on faith and experience for his gospel, but you may be onto something about those invisible things. Notice that he indicates that the majesty of God is obvious from the things that have been created. Further, he asserts elsewhere that there is natural law that all humans know from existence itself:

Romans 2:14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Haldane supposedly replied, when asked what his studies in science informed him of God, replied "An inordinate fondness for beetles." But personally, my impression of creation is of a mind inclined to elegance. So much superficial complexity, arising from very simple rules; I think it was to build a universe knowable and dependable for rational beings living in it.

There are other opinions, of course...



I need to think a bit before giving you a better answer.


"

[William]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #76]

Thank you for your thoughtful reflections and for drawing in the perspective of Michael Denton.

I agree that the natural world reveals an elegance that aligns with Paul’s assertion in Romans 1:20. The apparent “front-loading” of creation with intricate laws and order invites exploration and underscores a universe designed to be knowable.

Your mention of Romans 2:14 adds a compelling layer, suggesting that moral truths, like natural laws, are accessible to all through existence itself. This aligns with the view that discovery—whether scientific or spiritual—is an act of aligning with divined wisdom. It seems that creation, in its beauty and complexity, is not only a reflection of a Creator’s majesty but an invitation to co-create and uncover deeper truths.

I look forward to hearing more as you continue to ponder this!

[marke]

As Bible suggests, this world is like a computer simulation. And now some have found evidence this could be true, world may be like a computer simulation. What say you, have science found God, the programmer of the universe?

"Simulation theory is a theoretical hypothesis that says what people perceive as reality is actually an advanced, hyper-realistic computer simulation, possibly overseen by a higher being".
https://builtin.com/hardware/simulation-theory

"Do you ever experience something and think to yourself, “This can’t be real.” To some people who have bought into the notion that our reality is currently being simulated, there are examples all around us, that demonstrate glitches in the Matrix. Deja Vu? Ghosts? The Mandela Effect? These could all be direct examples of flaws in the simulation."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

"MIT Theoretical physicist James Gates has made a discovery that allegedly caused Neil deGrasse Tyson to sit down in shock. Now for the uninitiated, superstring theory is a concept that could unify all aspects of physics if proven right. While working on his superstring theory, he made an odd discovery. Gates claims to have identified what appears to be actual computer code embedded in the equations of string theory that describe the fundamental particles of our universe. In short, he found “error-correcting codes,” the same error-correcting codes that you might find on the web browser you are using right now."
https://interestingengineering.com/scie ... ion-theory

Science cannot possibly 'find God' because God is invisible and beyond science's ability to observe or measure.

[benchwarmer]

Science cannot possibly 'find God' because God is invisible and beyond science's ability to observe or measure.

Yet it's odd that some humans claim to have 'found God' when this God is invisible, not observable, and nothing measured can be shown to have anything to do with it.

It's almost like it doesn't exist, or at the very least, acts no different than not existing.

[marke]

Science cannot possibly 'find God' because God is invisible and beyond science's ability to observe or measure.

Yet it's odd that some humans claim to have 'found God' when this God is invisible, not observable, and nothing measured can be shown to have anything to do with it.

It's almost like it doesn't exist, or at the very least, acts no different than not existing.

Science cannot opine about God and humans can only find God by faith, not by sight.