Scientific knowledge of god goes a bit like this- God is the central figure associated mainly with Christian mythology. This mythology serves the primary purpose of being a moral compass for the feeble. Effectively, a little contest to see who has the coolest imaginary friend.

Gee, the anti religion bigots have sure extradited their heads from the sand on this one. Just gotta LOVE the PC rhetoric they use.

Peacetoyou, I think the title of your topic doesn't quite nail it. Spirituality, the ecology, philosophy etc have nothing to do with "scientific" knowledge of God. There of course is no "scientific" proof, or even evidence, of God. Belief in God is just that ..... "BELIEF", and "proof" or "science" has no bearing on that belief. Why? Well if it did, there would be ZERO need for faith and belief.

I believe in God. I'm a practicing Catholic. I can't "prove" anything regarding God. Nor can anyone else currently living on this planet.

It's not about proof; it's about faith and belief. Spirituality (both God and ecology based) and philosophy have a lot to offer, but "scientific knowledge about God" is not one of them.

The far right wing Christian fundamentalists in the USA have concocted "Creation Science" as an attempt to con people. Of course Creation Science is about as "scientific" as the tooth fairy, and these frauds are rightly laughed at by those who truly understand science and also by those who truly understand what faith and belief really is.

I take it benq, that like with the gw scam you believe the science is settled on evolution. How little you know about the history of this evolving 'theory'.

Oh dear runner, still ignorant?

Why not trot out another mined quote from a paper you haven't read and understood, just to demonstrate the shallowness of fundy thinking?

To the point,

Yes, let's have scientifically literate theology.

Since evolution happened, and arguably happened entirely in the absence of input from a "god", what does this tell us about any "god" that might *actually* exist? (as opposed to the various works of speculative fiction and infantile wish-making currently enjoying popularity)

It tells us that it is (at best/most) a deity. A remote deity that is *not* taking a personal interest in anybody.

To the extent it *may* be interested, it is probably interested in who gets out of the bottle, rather than the interactions of those inside.

That is, of course, omitting the greatly more likely scenario of nonesuch whatsoever.

So, get on with scrapping "scripture" and get on with really thinking for yourself. If you can't work out how to live forever here and now, "god" won't do it for you anymore than it prevents cavities in your teeth.

Rusty

I think Runner has definitely run up a dry gully here. We know that climate change is highly unlikely to be catastrophic because of the billions of years of earth's history that we can understand via the geological record. Which is the same way that we know that God didn't create the world in 6 days.

ok GY I now think you got it right every idea has a right to be heard ,including this spam add.
Runner and the rest can you open those minds?
Why the childlike leftist tie to those who do not believe?
And why the mud on them for that matter.
You know I once hid from reality in the arms of your brand of God.
Let myself dream I did not need my hands on the wheel of life God had it under control.
Or of a Christian who gave his whole life to his God, got an equal amount to one years salary from me, because he needed it,was family and I could.
He is in church about now preaching, and thanking his God for forcing me to give.
Your God is just one, in fact including the major ones from the east and middle east surely he is not the biggest.
Is it wrong to want better?
To understand we can cast of our inventions, our crutches and become one humanity?
Then mark me down as wrong proudly so.
Some, no small number who claim God loves them are not very nice people.