Simple question?

Quote: FrGamble

It makes sense for scientists not to address these questions because it is a logical and philosophical discussion and one that is settled.

As settled as a tumbleweed blowing for miles across the plains, you mean. You have no proof, no method for obtaining proof, and depend on an unsupported assumption which can't even be tested.

Assumptions can be made at will, but they need to be tested to find out whether they're true or not. If we take the usual example of a basic syllogism:

All men are immortal
Socrates is a man
Therefore Socrates is immortal.

Well and good. But what happens when Socrates drinks hemlock and dies?

Oh, well, maybe he's immortal as in he doesn't tend to die, but can be killed. So we do another test:

All men are immortal
Akhnaton is a man
Therefore Akhnaton is immortal.

Again, well and good. But then Akhnaton dies of old age, and we must conclude the assumption that all men are immortal is wrong.

But if you pick an assumption such as "All men have an invisible, intangible, undetectable, immeasurable particle of love in their hearts," how the hell do you test that?

Quote: Dalex64

You're right! They don't answer WHY because they don't have to! The part that you can't seem to get past is: what if there isn't a WHY, what if it just IS.

The part that you can't seem to get past is: whatever natural explanation of the universe is discovered will always be inadequate unless you grant to strings or branes, etc. the characteristics of God. They have to have the reason for their existence in their very nature, which in my opinion would make them spiritual, and they must be all-powerful.

Quote:

If strings are eternal and have always existed, they are part of the fabric of space, then it also doesn't matter if the universe is cyclical or if it was created from the energy of two 'branes' (which is also not matter or energy and may be eternal) colliding.

They need to be more than eternal. You also need to explain how a material thing has always existed. This seems to be a logical impossibility. Material things do not create themselves.

Quote:

The beauty of these scientific explanations is that they are testable and falsifiable. Much like the search for the higgs-boson, the search for strings and branes is ongoing.

I agree that this does make them beautiful and exciting, but it also shows a weakness. To really discover how the universe and all things began will not be found at the end of a microscope or telescope. This is really a philosophical question in its very nature. For something to be testable and falsifiable it must be observable. To discover what created the universe and all that exists we will need to enter a realm where there is no material observable things, the realm of pure thought and reason. The supernatural and spiritual realm where science dares not tread.

Quote:

Scientists will be able to look at theory after theory until experiments confirm a theory and we have a natural explanation to the cause of our universe. And then they will experiment some more.

Thank God our universe is so ordered and inexhaustible in its mysteries.

Quote:

Attributing the reason for existence to an infinitely powerful infinitely knowledgable and completely impossible being which exists entirely outside of time and space and everything that we understand about the universe is completely non-sensical.

Unfortunately for you it is the only explanation and it is the only one that makes sense.

Quote:

If it is shown that there are multiple universes out there, and the mass and energy in our universe was created in a collision between universes, did god create all of those universes, our universe, all of the stars in our universe, all of the planets around all of those stars, our sun, and the planet earth just for us?. It makes no sense.

That is one interpretation of the motivations for the creation of the universe (or multiverses). It does make sense, but I recognize it might not gel with your vision of the human person being really nothing more than some accidental quirk of impersonal forces.

Quote: rxwine

What I ascertain is god observing a lot of mayhem. Even our best judges would cringe at the idea at knowing the crimes while they are happening, doing nothing, except meting out justice at some point in the future. They would surely want to interfere rather than waiting around just so they can even the score later, like any sane non-homicidal person also would do.

God is constantly interfering and helping. As I mentioned earlier He has given us all a conscience and there are many ways obviously and anonymously that God is acting to help us. Please remember our best judges cannot see the future nor the entire world at a glance.

Quote:

No, what I said is god has ultimate control over the design. And no designer gets to dismiss results when he actually knows the design. If god didn't know the design he wouldn't be responsible if it craps things up. Human parents usually don't have to take responsibility for their kids crimes because birth doesn't require knowing whether the kid they produced is good or faulty, because knowledge of the brain design is limited. God knows the design, that's why he's responsible. No different than any other designer.

Are you saying that if you could tell a parent with a child who misbehaves and commits a crime that you could make it that their child would go away, do you think they would take you up on that sick offer? God loves all His children even the ones who use their God given freedom to do awful things. God knows the design, it is in His own image and likeness, we were created perfect but with the possibility of being disobedient and selfish. This design is so that we can be truly free and so that we can have the possibility of truly loving one another. What is wrong with this design?

Quote: Nareed

At no point in time is the universe without energy. It has always been there. Ergo there is no reason to suppose it needed to be created, or even that it could be.

So your God is energy. An energy that organizes itself somehow to form the various things you mentioned up to our very selves. I look forward to your creation story of how this disorganized energy become so organized.

Quote: Nareed

But if you pick an assumption such as "All men have an invisible, intangible, undetectable, immeasurable particle of love in their hearts," how the hell do you test that?

Certainly not by science.

Quote: FrGamble

So your God is energy.

I don't have a god. You should know this by now.

Quote:

An energy that organizes itself somehow to form the various things you mentioned up to our very selves.

Not "somehow." According to well-defined and largely known laws of nature which operate in ways that are known and invariable.

Quote:

I look forward to your creation story of how this disorganized energy become so organized.

I'd suggest reading Sagan's "Cosmos," but the truth is it's somewhat outdated by now. Still, there's no shortage of literature about cosmology and astrophysics, plus geology, biology and evolution.

Of course, it's scientific theory, not a "creation story." And if you expect to find "God" in it, you're going to be very disappointed. Likewise if you expect to find a "reason" why there is "something."

Quote: FrGamble

The part that you can't seem to get past is: whatever natural explanation of the universe is discovered will always be inadequate unless you grant to strings or branes, etc. the characteristics of God. They have to have the reason for their existence in their very nature, which in my opinion would make them spiritual, and they must be all-powerful.

If you keep looking for "God" and not finding him, what does that tell you?

You're in the position of a man searching in the dark for a black cat that isn't there.

Oh, I know you've probably "found" "God" in some intangible, non-provable, non-testable, non-objective way. You've likely even "felt" this "God." But until you find physical, objective, testable, demonstrable proof, you're in the position of the man in a dark room searching for a black cat that isn't there, and you think the room is also full of people searching for the cat, because what else could everyone else in the world possibly be doing?

FrG's approach to god is, he keeps seeking
cracks in your argument and when he finds
one, he uses a sledge hammer to insert his
god there. Once he's got the unsuspecting
wanker going 'huh?' 'what?', and a little
confused, FrG and his type go in for the kill.

This works really well with young people,
especially if you can insert the social aspect
of going to church into it. His approach is
almost worthless with people who've been
adults for a couple decades and have seen
FrG's 'stumble upon god' act before. "If you
just keep asking questions with an open
mind, you'll eventually 'stumble upon' god
in your search and become a believer."

At some point you realize there is no god
to stumble over, so you stop looking in that
direction. This is happening more and more
around the world, secularism is spreading
like a wildfire. 70% of Norway's people say
they're atheists and Norway polls as one
of the highest countries for happiness and
quality of life. Once you realize there is no
god to stumble over, amazing things can
happen. (that's right, 'amazing')

Quote: Nareed

Not "somehow." According to well-defined and largely known laws of nature which operate in ways that are known and invariable.

Actually don't those know laws of nature tend toward disorder and entropy rather than the other way around.

Quote:

Of course, it's scientific theory, not a "creation story." And if you expect to find "God" in it, you're going to be very disappointed. Likewise if you expect to find a "reason" why there is "something."

You know what would disappoint me more than anything? If some scientific theory did find "God".

Quote: Nareed

If you keep looking for "God" and not finding him, what does that tell you?

You're in the position of a man searching in the dark for a black cat that isn't there.

Nope, I'm in the position of a man in love.