You need to define what you mean by "god" first. Which god? What are its qualities? What are its falsification criteria?
You can't just say, "What does science have to say," because it's not a singular question about a singular being.
Community Rules
Rule 1: Be respectful and inclusive.
Treat others with respect, and maintain a positive atmosphere.
Rule 2: No harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or trolling.
Avoid any form of harassment, hate speech, bigotry, or offensive behavior.
Rule 3: Engage in constructive discussions.
Contribute to meaningful and constructive discussions that enhance scientific understanding.
Rule 4: No AI-generated answers.
Strictly prohibit the use of AI-generated answers. Providing answers generated by AI systems is not allowed and may result in a ban.
Rule 5: Follow guidelines and moderators' instructions.
Adhere to community guidelines and comply with instructions given by moderators.
Rule 6: Use appropriate language and tone.
Communicate using suitable language and maintain a professional and respectful tone.
Rule 7: Report violations.
Report any violations of the community rules to the moderators for appropriate action.
Rule 8: Foster a continuous learning environment.
Encourage a continuous learning environment where members can share knowledge and engage in scientific discussions.
Rule 9: Source required for answers.
Provide credible sources for answers. Failure to include a source may result in the removal of the answer to ensure information reliability.
By adhering to these rules, we create a welcoming and informative environment where science-related questions receive accurate and credible answers. Thank you for your cooperation in making the Ask Science community a valuable resource for scientific knowledge.
We retain the discretion to modify the rules as we deem necessary.
You need to define what you mean by "god" first. Which god? What are its qualities? What are its falsification criteria?
You can't just say, "What does science have to say," because it's not a singular question about a singular being.
A definitive answer is impossible unless God makes itself known. There is no evidence for god and thus no scientific answer. God is a belief, belief is not scientific.
Since you’re asking science: The scientific method needs to be used to prove, not disprove, the existence of things.
I recommend a web search for the "god of the gaps" fallacy. You have discovered a 300+ year old concept.
what actual real evidence exists for a god?
the bible doesnt count as evidence.
Which one do you mean?
Well I would think the god that makes the most money off of ignorant sonsabitches and the catholic god certainly wins that shit!
Using science to explain God is like using breakdancing to explain engineering.
...what started off as a legitimate question has now become an extremely interesting (and amusing) social experiment. Keep the nonsensical, non-scientific answers coming, folks.
There are zero "gods". Any and all are fantasy created by humans.
Stop trying to figure it out.
There is one interesting connection that I have found.
In 1999, researchers in New York fired very powerful lasers at each other. When they intersected, they caused an electron and a positron to spring out of the vacuum.
If light can cause the creation of matter, then there's the possibility, however slim, that a hermit sitting on a hill blazed out of his gourd on some divine bush could have been given some sort of insight that perhaps he was linguistically incapable of accurately communicating.
I'm not saying that this definitively proves anything. I just find it interesting that a hermit on a hill 7,000 years ago could have somehow deduced in any way that light was one of the fundamental particles of the universe, or that matter could be made from light.
I think you’re giving Genesis more credit than it deserves. It doesn’t say God used light to create anything. In most translations, it just says God created the Heavens and the Earth without specifying how. It says at first the Earth was dark and formless, until God commanded light to exist, creating day and night and evening and morning.
I’d be much more impressed if Genesis told us that the entire universe was compacted into a hot dense state ~14 billion years ago, and that during its earliest moments it passed through a decoupling of the four fundamental forces, then went through a brief moment of incredibly rapid expansion, etc. etc. … but it doesn’t. Instead it incorrectly states that the Earth predates the stars, that day and night predate the Sun, that life on land predates life in the seas, and more. If a divine entity was capable of relating the origin of the universe and life on Earth to an ancient author, there’s no reason it couldn’t do so in a way that’s unambiguous to modern scientifically-literate readers.
I think it’s far more likely there’s no connection at all, and people only see one there because they specifically went and tried their hardest to find one, no matter how tenuous.
Okay, but the question I am being asked is what are the most convincing arguments for their being a god?
And my response is, is that science has redone a thing that God was claimed to have done, and it created matter.
If you are not a biblical literalist, if you can accept the idea that the Bible is correct, but not flawless in its data communication, then it has at least the tiniest little spider's web strand of reason that says that the hermit Moses, seven-odd-thousand years ago, received some sort of divine revelation that contained information that was later proven to be scientifically true, which lends at the very least a mote of dust worth of credence to the existence of God.
I’m an atheist, but my argument for a god of some sort is that we probably don’t exist out of nothingness
Yes but that generally just shifts the questions one layer lower. Where would God come from then? I know the typical answer is God has always existed but if God doesn’t need a reason to exist then really the universe doesn’t either.
We can’t know, so I don’t bother asking
Saw a video the other day that compared Norse mythology with Christianity. It painted an eerily striking argument for the God worshiped now likely being either Loki or Balder. The garden of Eden and Apple stuff is almost copy/paste the way he put it.
The God of Christianity is most likely a Canaanite god of the forge who was among other gods, including El and Ashura.
Gods of the forge were often also war gods (swords and armor come from forges), and we see evidence of the ancient Israelites making war with their neighbors on a frequent basis. It follows that Yahweh would therefore rise in cultural importance, and it would eventually assume the roles of its peers in the pantheon.
The early Biblical stories were likely adapted from existing Mesopotamian stories. The parallels between Norse mythology are interesting but not what the current historical consensus accepts.