Evidence for God from Science

Remember back when, oh 1000 years ago when people believed the world was flat, a solid dome, no little microscopic creatures, no large universe, ect. Well, why didn’t god actually make the world that way, its much more simple. We would argue back with something like, "well those things cant agree with science and laws of the ", but god made the laws of the universe, so then why didn’t he make them all simple. Imagine if we did live in a world where the earth was a solid dome, we had no genetics, the earth was flat, would it not be a lot easier to believe in god that way?

the standard of proof for people who don't believe might just be out of reach no matter what the circumstances. How do you know people wouldn't still say God is nonsense even in those situations? I'm sure people even in Jesus' time denied him while witnessing the miracles he (may have) performed.

I think that the more complex the design, the more it points to a designer.

emember back when, oh 1000 years ago when people believed the world was flat, a solid dome, no little microscopic creatures, no large universe, ect. Well, why didn’t god actually make the world that way, its much more simple. We would argue back with something like, "well those things cant agree with science and laws of the ", but god made the laws of the universe, so then why didn’t he make them all simple. Imagine if we did live in a world where the earth was a solid dome, we had no genetics, the earth was flat, would it not be a lot easier to believe in god that way?

You're kidding right? If the earth had been flat, there would be no poles, no circulation of water as we know, no polar coordinates, earth's magnetic fields would be weird. If the earth rotated and revolved, you would be literally up side down, as the center of gravity would not shift on a plane like it does on a sphere. Water would really spill along the boundary because the spherical earth doesn't have a boundary. A plane earth would have.

No offense, I only hope this was your wild imagination at work, nothing more.

neo-x wrote:

emember back when, oh 1000 years ago when people believed the world was flat, a solid dome, no little microscopic creatures, no large universe, ect. Well, why didn’t god actually make the world that way, its much more simple. We would argue back with something like, "well those things cant agree with science and laws of the ", but god made the laws of the universe, so then why didn’t he make them all simple. Imagine if we did live in a world where the earth was a solid dome, we had no genetics, the earth was flat, would it not be a lot easier to believe in god that way?

You're kidding right? If the earth had been flat, there would be no poles, no circulation of water as we know, no polar coordinates, earth's magnetic fields would be weird. If the earth rotated and revolved, you would be literally up side down, as the center of gravity would not shift on a plane like it does on a sphere. Water would really spill along the boundary because the spherical earth doesn't have a boundary. A plane earth would have.

No offense, I only hope this was your wild imagination at work, nothing more.

Well if god wanted the earth to be flat im sure he would stop the water from spilling off or something

He did, the earth has no boundary so the water doesn't spill.

You are missing the point. The laws of physics are defined by God for a reason. The reason is unknown but since there is similarity in the entire known cosmos, it is logical to comprehend that it is God's logic. All most all planets have a spherical profile.

neo-x wrote:He did, the earth has no boundary so the water doesn't spill.

You are missing the point. The laws of physics are defined by God for a reason. The reason is unknown but since there is similarity in the entire known cosmos, it is logical to comprehend that it is God's logic. All most all planets have a spherical profile.

It's as if it all converges onto two primary things, sentient beings with free will.

Again I refer the honourable gentleman to a quote I made earlier from C.S. A problem of pain.

“We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will by his creatures at every moment: so that a wooden beam became soft as grass when it was used as a weapon, and the air refused to obey me if I attempted to set up in it the sound waves that carry lies or insults. But such a world would be one in which wrong actions were impossible, and in which therefore, freedom of the will would be void; nay if the principal were carried out to its logical conclusion , evil thoughts would be impossible, for the cerebral matter which we use would refuse its task when we attempted to frame them. All matter in the neighbourhood of a wicked man would be liable to undergo unpredictable alterations. That God can and does, on occasions, modify the behaviour of matter and produce what we call miracles, is part of the Christian faith; but the very concept of a common and therefore stable world demands that these occasions should be extremely rare.”

A stable world that allows us freewill require a number of set physical laws. This is the world God wanted.

The world, the Universe, is the way it is because it can't be any other way.

Silvertusk wrote:Again I refer the honourable gentleman to a quote I made earlier from C.S. A problem of pain.

“We can, perhaps, conceive of a world in which God corrected the results of this abuse of free will by his creatures at every moment: so that a wooden beam became soft as grass when it was used as a weapon, and the air refused to obey me if I attempted to set up in it the sound waves that carry lies or insults. But such a world would be one in which wrong actions were impossible, and in which therefore, freedom of the will would be void; nay if the principal were carried out to its logical conclusion , evil thoughts would be impossible, for the cerebral matter which we use would refuse its task when we attempted to frame them. All matter in the neighbourhood of a wicked man would be liable to undergo unpredictable alterations. That God can and does, on occasions, modify the behaviour of matter and produce what we call miracles, is part of the Christian faith; but the very concept of a common and therefore stable world demands that these occasions should be extremely rare.”

A stable world that allows us freewill require a number of set physical laws. This is the world God wanted.

Thanks for re-posting Silver, I had missed it. Yeah, that's it, beautifully said.

PaulSacramento wrote:The world, the Universe, is the way it is because it can't be any other way.

I agree with this one, my logic goes like this:
Man was made in Gods' image.
Therefore, God can do anything man can, only a lot better.
Man can make fiction, even science firction, dreaming up universes different than this one, where things come out differently than here.
If man can, so can God, God dreams up an infinity of possible universes, and chooses to create the one that works best, that accomplishes his perposes, this one.
If that takes a very large, very complext universe, well, who are we to argue?

Also, the "anthropic principle" says that for a universe to support life, it must be exactly like this one, otherwise, it won't support life. It also says that for such a universe to be like this by random chance is essentially impossible, it must be planned. Therefore, the entire universe says that there must be a God. The entire universe, just how much evidence do you want? Make a simpler universe, you will just have less evidence, how would that convince people? Look what the bible says about that Rom 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness,
Rom 1:19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
Rom 1:20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
Rom 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Rom 1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools
Rom 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.

In other words, God gave an entire universe full of evidence, so much that we are 'without excuse", yet people still made and worshipped idols. If the universe where much simpler, people would just do the same, maybe different idols, but idols just the same.And people in Jesus time saw his miracles and did not believe, and he even said Luke 16:31 "He said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be convinced even if someone rises from the dead.'"

In short, the universe is already a miracle that points to God, and many still will not believe, how would making it a different kind of miracle be any different?

And if God wants everyone to believe, well, there are even easier ways, he could just force the belief into their minds, why doesn't he? Perhaps he wants to give them a choice, rather than force the issue onto them. Perhaps he wants to make a universe where the evidence is "plain" and "clearly seen" yet people can CHOOSE to ignore it anyway IF THEY REALLY WANT TO.

Legatus wrote:Also, the "anthropic principle" says that for a universe to support life, it must be exactly like this one, otherwise, it won't support life.

I agree with everything you've said Legatus except the above. The anthropic principle does not make any pronouncement as to what type of life or type of universe it must be. A universe is said to be anthropic for ANY type of life, ANY type of physics, chemistry and biology laws, not necessarily like our own. The probability of even such a broad type of universe is still infinity to 1.

Byblos wrote:

Legatus wrote:Also, the "anthropic principle" says that for a universe to support life, it must be exactly like this one, otherwise, it won't support life.

I agree with everything you've said Legatus except the above. The anthropic principle does not make any pronouncement as to what type of life or type of universe it must be. A universe is said to be anthropic for ANY type of life, ANY type of physics, chemistry and biology laws, not necessarily like our own. The probability of even such a broad type of universe is still infinity to 1.

Basically, all I was saying here is that even tiny changes to natural laws of this universe would result in life being impossible in it.

There are purely theoritical types of universes with other purely theoretical types of life, however, we only really KNOW one type of life that actually works, especially works to support sentient life. I expect that God dreamed up an infinity of universe that could support some kind of life, and chose the one that supports the kind of life God wished to create, our kind (people). I suspect that of all the types of life that could exist with other natural laws, this type of life, carbon based with these laws, is the one that makes the most appropriet sentient beaings (the most sentient, or something).

Of course, not being God, I cannot dream up an infinity of alternative universes to see what life would be like in other ones. I can only go with the evidence of the universe I know.

Note that this universe is scheduled for remodling, rather drastically at that, there is no telling what the next set of natural laws will be, or even if God will keep them the same from then on, or change them over time. Could get interesting.