My view of Physics and God

[Sweetdeath]

You're such a good dad, Tank.  It makes me wanna have hot cocoa with you, and listen to old stories. XD

We'll if you ever get to the UK and you don't come for a cup of hot cocoa I shall be seriously disappointed. 

Aww ~  !

[Gawen]

After eight pages, we can sum up the Superior's Education quantification of God, of which, physics is a side trip.
By using Maslow as a qualification...well, first...

Maslow was a proponent of Humanistic Psychology. His ideas have fallen out of vogue due to a lack of empirical evidence.

The problem for SupEd is that Judaism and Christianity promotes a Divine command theory of happiness in that happiness comes from following the commands of the divine - with one teeny tiny difference, that being; Christianity says that true happiness only comes in the afterlife.

How SupEd quantifies, qualifies and compartmentalises his belief in his God (let alone the existence of one) and its Divine command theory through Maslow's debunked humanistic theory, with humility as a prerequisite, and subsequent Positive Psychology is beyond me. But I reckon that's delusion for you; people will seek evidence for their gods any way they can.

[DeterminedJuliet]

I wonder if being condescending and arrogant is part of his method for teaching people. If it is, he should probably fix that.

One could only hope not. I can only imagine him spouting this pseudo scientific gobbaldy gook in front of vulnerable kids, the thought frankly fills me with dread.

I do, however, live the same Christ-like character of agape love in the classroom, on the street and even when no one is looking.  My actions and words always match my character.  I do not use any substances, drink alcohol or use foul language.  My moral character is beyond reproach.  If given the choice between me and an Atheist, who would you rather your kids be with on a field trip?  Be honest.

No offense, but based on what I've seen from you here, an atheist. I would prefer my son be exposed to respectful, logical, unbiased people.
And swearing doesn't bother me. I swear all of the time. I realize I can't have my son go to kindergarten saying "fuck" all of the time, but that's just because it'll save us a lot of awkward social situations with the teacher and other parents later. People don't like little kids saying "fuck", so I'll probably try to avoid teaching our little boy to say it.

But my husband is currently doing his ph.d in English and he'll tell you that cursing can be a very effective use of language. When he's a professor of his own class, I'm quite sure he'll swear from time to time. 

[xSilverPhinx]

Whether someone is Christian (or any other theistic denomination) is not a good enough indicator of whether they're moral or not. But based on some of the Christians I know, I want them as far away from my family as possible, and I will go to great lengths to guarantee that. 

[Sweetdeath]

Whether someone is Christian (or any other theistic denomination) is not a good enough indicator of whether they're moral or not. But based on some of the Christians I know, I want them as far away from my family as possible, and I will go to great lengths to guarantee that. 

It truly bothers when a christian walks a moral high ground.   Pffft

[xSilverPhinx]

Whether someone is Christian (or any other theistic denomination) is not a good enough indicator of whether they're moral or not. But based on some of the Christians I know, I want them as far away from my family as possible, and I will go to great lengths to guarantee that.  

It truly bothers when a christian walks a moral high ground.   Pffft

It bothers me too, and I'm not talking about their lack of humility in this. They genuinely believe that they have their version of god on their side, and that can justify practically anything.

I just don't like bleating sheep. I don't respect them much either and don't put much faith in their competence or intelligence.

(not that all religious or those with religious philosophical inclinations are sheep)

[Always Amused]

SuperEd, in my opinion, you have developed a philosophy based on subjective intuitions which you arrived at by combining some things you know about science and some things you believe about religious writings. It seems you believe in it strongly. Good for you. However, I cannot agree with some basic statements you make about your beliefs.

You say in your opening post:

My main goal in life has been an attempt to confirm or refute this belief.

I don't think this is true, nor do I think it is possible. One cannot confirm or refute a subjective belief which is based on intuition. If you really wanted to attempt to confirm or refute this belief, you would do it on the basis of examining the validity of the evidence on which your belief is based. I have seen none of that. 

Not one verifiable piece of evidence has been presented to support your belief. Stating your passion for physics and making occasional reference to the discipline and things said in religious texts does not constitute evidence. Your attempts to tie physics and the universe to your interpretation of Bible passages  contain only pseudo-philosophical, ethereal, feel-good BS.

The study of history seems to point to the universal need for humans to create a narrative to help explain the universe and their relationship to it. It provides us with a sense of perspective and security. You seem to have done that in a way that is very satisfactory to yourself.

However, in a forum such as this, the challenge which you present below is hollow and meaningless. Asserted beliefs which are not presented as based on verifiable evidence cannot be proved or disproved.

... allow me to present a challenge:

I would like to match my understanding of God, the universe and truth against the opposite swing of the pendulum as an exercise in growth.  If you are up for the challenge, here is the request.  Convince me why I am in error as a believer in God.  

Allow me to present a challenge.

I have taken the liberty to put in bold a part of a statement which you made in response to a question:

Read genesis 1:27 and John 1:1.  LOGOS is Word in John 1:1.  I study physics as a passion.  I study the Bible for references to physics.  There are plenty.  When Jesus said that the veil had been torn to the temple enterance of the Holy area, I realized what this was saying.  The veil is the block over our consciousness so we do not see God as fact.  We need to experience Him by faith.  When the Bible speaks of the temple, it references the body and mind of man.

Present to me verifiable proof that the above statement in bold is true. If your proof involves quoting any religious text, please present verifiable proof that the text is absolutely authoritative.

Then, we may have something to discuss.

[Sandra Craft]

SuperEd, in my opinion, you have developed a philosophy based on subjective intuitions which you arrived at by combining some things you know about science and some things you believe about religious writings. It seems you believe in it strongly. Good for you. However, I cannot agree with some basic statements you make about your beliefs.

You say in your opening post:

My main goal in life has been an attempt to confirm or refute this belief.

I don't think this is true, nor do I think it is possible. One cannot confirm or refute a subjective belief which is based on intuition. If you really wanted to attempt to confirm or refute this belief, you would do it on the basis of examining the validity of the evidence on which your belief is based. I have seen none of that. 

Not one verifiable piece of evidence has been presented to support your belief. Stating your passion for physics and making occasional reference to the discipline and things said in religious texts does not constitute evidence. Your attempts to tie physics and the universe to your interpretation of Bible passages  contain only pseudo-philosophical, ethereal, feel-good BS.

The study of history seems to point to the universal need for humans to create a narrative to help explain the universe and their relationship to it. It provides us with a sense of perspective and security. You seem to have done that in a way that is very satisfactory to yourself.

However, in a forum such as this, the challenge which you present below is hollow and meaningless. Asserted beliefs which are not presented as based on verifiable evidence cannot be proved or disproved.

... allow me to present a challenge:

I would like to match my understanding of God, the universe and truth against the opposite swing of the pendulum as an exercise in growth.  If you are up for the challenge, here is the request.  Convince me why I am in error as a believer in God.  

Allow me to present a challenge.

I have taken the liberty to put in bold a part of a statement which you made in response to a question:

Read genesis 1:27 and John 1:1.  LOGOS is Word in John 1:1.  I study physics as a passion.  I study the Bible for references to physics.  There are plenty.  When Jesus said that the veil had been torn to the temple enterance of the Holy area, I realized what this was saying.  The veil is the block over our consciousness so we do not see God as fact.  We need to experience Him by faith.  When the Bible speaks of the temple, it references the body and mind of man.

Present to me verifiable proof that the above statement in bold is true. If your proof involves quoting any religious text, please present verifiable proof that the text is absolutely authoritative.

I agree with Always Amused, and I'd like to offer a 2nd, related challenge.  Since neither god nor biblical claims about god can be proven (which, after all, is what faith is all about), please provide a convincing reason why people should behave "as if" god exists and the bible is his instruction book.

[Tank]

Just a note to say that at this time SuperiorEd is 3 days through his 7 day posting suspension with 4 days to go.

[Gawen]

Just a note to say that at this time SuperiorEd is 3 days through his 7 day posting suspension with 4 days to go.

Well then...he has 4 days to bolster his arguments with really good evidence, doesn't he?

[OldGit]

I'm sure he will.

[Davin]

If given the choice between me and an Atheist, who would you rather your kids be with on a field trip?  Be honest.

Dawkins, Hitchens (sad), Krauss, me... I'd pick thousands of atheists over you.

[xSilverPhinx]

Just a note to say that at this time SuperiorEd is 3 days through his 7 day posting suspension with 4 days to go.

Well then...he has 4 days to bolster his arguments with really good evidence, doesn't he?

I didn't even know that he got a brief ban. ??? Well that's one less mystery of the universe to worry about.

[Tank]

Just a note to say that at this time SuperiorEd is 3 days through his 7 day posting suspension with 4 days to go.

Well then...he has 4 days to bolster his arguments with really good evidence, doesn't he?

I didn't even know that he got a brief ban. ??? Well that's one less mystery of the universe to worry about.

He picked it up for preaching on another thread.

[Sweetdeath]

Yeah, in the Jesus nipple thread. His comments were quite disturbing.   I'm sending him my therapy bills. XP