What God is...

The Bible made me an atheist.

Science made me a believer.

The more I learn in math, physics and science in general the more I believe that God exists.
The laws of nature, physics and evolution are, to me, the laws of God.
The symphony of all these laws in the universe and all around us are MIRACULOUS & MAGICAL - like the ubiquitous fibonacci sequence, the development and birth of a child...
It is only natural for us to believe that there is a God - all these omnipotent laws course through us from molecule to DNA, to electrical impulse, to quantum particles in perfect symphony.

The perfect symphony of all the laws in the universe IS God.

-----------

What is God to you?

Did bobyyy bruised your ego BL?

sorry KCO, don't need that kind of gratuitous antagonism here.

I'm trying to get a CIVIL discussion going here.

    INFINITE LOVE

I agree with you Joseph-S.

If we look outside of the world we humans created...life on this planet is balanced...there is love in that equilibrium in nature

If only human society could decide to respect that balance and equilibrium...

I'm, at this present moment, reading the articles on your link Spike...will take a minute...

Well we've got three people who agree with each other on one important thing - you, me and Joseph...that's a MIRACLE on chess. com LOL

I've read the main page of the link and began reading the next article on Jesus Christ.

To be bluntly honest, there are parts that fit into what I myself "feel" to be God, but I am unable to integrate the writings of the Bible as a whole into it. I have tried on many occasions to read the Bible when I was younger, if only to understand Christianity. I do believe in the spirit of Jesus Christ.

That being said, I suspect that we all feel that same faith -  God exists.

And I'm alright with all the ways that people believe in God.

One thing I know for sure God's laws are the laws found in nature, physics and only science will get us closer to understanding God.

And this point of contention - the theory of evolution - were I a biologist, anthropologist, naturalist - I would probably find things that I disagree with...but on the whole - it makes sense to me, in the same way, a mechanic might say that those are the wrong nuts and bolts in the car, but he'll still see that its a car....

Hope I'm making sense.

I taught reading at the 6,7 and 8th grade levels for almost 10 years. I retired to go back to school for physical therapy. I now work for a rural hospital "teaching" patients how to walk again. During my education, my faith too was bolstered by science. :)

yay...another soul on the same path...

It only make sense,  clms_chess

I think Einstein believed in God...

I think too many scientists today are too gung-ho about objectivism

الله‎

Einstein was a deist.

I did not know that Eistein was a deist.

"Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world in any way, allowing it to run according to the laws of nature." (Wikipedia)

Then I too am a deist - that was always my position.

Which counters the article written about God on the link that Spikewill provided:

"God's power over the physical creation is absolute, such that He can manipulate matter, energy, space, and time at will"

God does not interfere with - the perfect symphony of the laws of nature.

The molestation, perversion of the laws of nature by humans - the shepherd of life on Earth --- we reap what we sow.

No need for intervention, i.e. "punishment".

1. How can scientific laws be omnipotent? Laws aren't physical entities that can possess omnipotence. Scientific laws are descriptions of phenomena.

You're projecting human characteristics to non-physical, abstract, ideas (laws).

EDIT: Omnipotence isn't a human characteristic. I should have said "divine notion" or something like that.

2. a. You suggest that the perfect symphony between scientific laws is God. But now you're simply useing the word God to define how everything works. You can just as easily say "The perfect symphony of all the laws in the universe IS unicorn." Obviously, this doesn't mean unicorns (the horned horses) exists. It just means that I'm referring to the symphony of laws as "unicorn". You're doing the same thing with the word "God". You're using the word "God" to define the symphony of all the laws, but this doesn't prove God exists in the way we generally refer to something or someone as being a god. 

For example, someone can argue, "God doesn't exist". I can then respond, "Yes he does. See this rock? This rock is God." Obviously, the person claiming God doesn't exist has a different idea of what God means than I do (in this example).

TL;DR: If you're going to call the workings of the universe "God", then you need to understand that you're not proving God, as we traditionally think of gods, to exist. It makes me question why you would use the word "God" when it can so easily be confused with what we generally refer to as a god.

b. How could we know if this universe was perfect or not without a frame of reference? If scientific laws crashed, like coding on a computer, how would you know?

3. I explained that your use of the word god doesn't refer to the standard use in which most people use the word god or the name God.  You said you were an atheist, but became a believer. But if you suggest God refers to how everything in the universe works in perfect harmony, then you're not magically a theist.

Atheism and theism refers to god as a higher entity possessing knowledge, either a physical or spititual being.  The workings of the universe isn't even a physical thing, it's a description, one that does not and can not possess knowledge (because it's an abstract  idea, a description, not an actual object).

It's like saying, "I'm not an atheist, this rock is god." Unless I believe the rock to be a higher entity posessing knowledge, I would still be an atheist (unless we change the definition of atheist).

Aren't semantics fun! The reason semantics must be discussed is because it's the only way to verify if the claims being made are true, or even possible!

 But here's where things get really screwy...

"That being said, I suspect that we all feel that same faith -  God exists.

And I'm alright with all the ways that people believe in God.

One thing I know for sure God's laws are the laws found in nature, physics and only science will get us closer to understanding God."
-BlackLeopard

4.You are now treating God as more than just an abstract idea or a description. You're treating God as a physical entity that actually exists in one form or another. This contradicts your previous claim. At first, you said God is the symphony of all scientific laws. Now, you're claiming God is a separate entity as "the symphony of all scientific laws".

Keep in mind, God can't be an abstract description without changing the definition of what a god is. And if we change the defition of what god is, then there's  no reason to treat god as desctiption A, then treat god as a separate idea from description A. If this doesn't make much sense, allow me to clarify:

"God does not interfere with - the perfect symphony of the laws of nature."
-BlackLeapard-1

At first you said God WAS the perfect symphony of the laws of nature. Now, you're saying God doesn't interfere with the perfect symphony of the laws of nature. Which is it?

Essentially you're dividing the word "God" to refer to two entirely different things, then treating them as one object.  Before we can define whether or not God is real, we must define what god is. If God refers to the rock in my front yard, then it exists. If God refers to a higher entity capable of thought, then that remains to be proven or discussed. If God refers to how everything in the universe works together, then you're merely using the word to express a description.

Also, you might find this video informative: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMAypyKqVKE&list=PL3IOkNR8_9gpQa5teO1xQANB-3MiY17uk&index=9 

Thanks for your response, Nemo.

These discussions take on a life of its own...often turning into a tornado of whirling arguments with everybody getting lost in it - no longer seeing the forest for the trees.

So, never mind the *yeah but you said this and you said that*  hitherto - I will try to clarify:

I believe in God....just like the 90% plus of humanity....but while they are heading in other directions - Islam, Christianity, Judaism, etc., I say that it is in science where you will understand God  - laws of the universe...

No but wait, I still can't work something out in my feeling/thinking about that. Are the laws of the universe God or is it something created by God? God IS or God the creator?--- Perhaps this is the point of illogic that you pinpointed in the presentation of my belief.  Naturally, because I haven't answered that question myself yet.

And I reiterate - God does not interfere.

Also, I believe in malevolent and benevolent energies -- and that these energies are "conscious".

It sounds like you understood what I was saying. I'm glad I don't have to clarify anything. : )

I have to ask though... what if there is no consciousness beyond that of living entities with a brain? What if everything that happens, does so naturally like how a ball rolls down a hill without beind told to do so? Would life be any less precious? 

I did understand you Nemo. You pinpointed a glitch in my presentation - good call...

To answer your last question - life to me are all things that seek to sustain itself in a state of existense - that in itself is a form of consciousness...even plants appear to "consciously" seek to endure and prosper...the vines in my front yard find their ways to that part of the yard with the most sunlight...the plants and flowers bend, slant and open toward sunlight...

Earth is not a lifeless planet like venus, mercury or the other planets...it is a REAL GIFT - life. To be here, alive, conscious - I marvel at it all...how could I not believe in God? Life is precious - separate from inanimate objects such as a ball rolling down the hill - it's God's gift....by the way, when I say God - I don't mean it in the religious sense.

Where is Zod these days?!

When he comes around perhaps he could grant us wishes.

I've always wanted a Star Trek Enterprise spaceship...I'd like to travel around at warp speed