There could be thousands of answers depending on which god we're talking about.
If I understand correctly, the average christian god demands faith and insists on remaining hidden. That means science could never prove his existence. Being smarter that human scientists, he could remain hidden forever.
If he changed his mind and let science prove his existence, then he would not be god. At least not the god that is supposed to be the same yesterday, today, and forever.
My mind is going around in circles on this subject because people's ideas of god are all over the place, contradictory, and can't be pinned-down, which is good evidence that gods are man-made ideas.
Taking the question at face-value, the god that science could prove existed would be one that did not demand faith, but one that perhaps started the big-bang and/or evolution and then took a hands-off approach, leaving us to our own devices. That god doesn't sound as scary as the others, but who knows. There are too many possibilities to answer the question what can we do?
As long as I'm participating in this topic, I'll just add some of my thoughts that I find interesting. I think it highly likely that someday "gods" will reveal themselves to scientists. They will do amazing things that will convince most people that they are gods. But, of course, they won't be gods -- just scientists that have been around millions or billions of years longer than humans and know how to do "miraculous" things. Because they will be scientists, I think they will be truthful and tell us they are not gods. I'd love to see that day. Beings that advanced may even know how to survive the expansion of the universe (the big freeze), or even how to survive the big crunch, if the expansion reverses.
Why do you keep repeating these sentences? The second is incoherent and the rest needs more context.
That is quite a weird comment. If you want a definition for science, google it, you're on the internet, you have no excuse. And no religion and science don't match; one relies on faith and the other on facts. They're irreconcilable. Are you a deist or an agnostic? Quit sitting on the fence mate, about time to make up your mind.
Fucking,I need peoples Revulsion,not a explanation.
Actually T.A.D., the Bible's god has been portrayed in a variety of ways - in Genesis, written mostly by the Yahwist Source and the Priestly Source, the writers of the Yahwist Source saw him as an anthropomorphic being who strolled over to Abram's tent for an afternoon snack before moseying on down to destroy thousands in Sodom and Gomorrah, yet in the New Testament, Yeshua (Jesus) said, "God is a spirit." The truth is, since Man created god in His own image, as Man's sophistication evolved, so did his concept of a god.
As for testing for god, Michelangelo, as he was carving the Moses, was reputed to have said that he saw Moses in the stone, and simply chipped away everything that wasn't Moses. I suppose you could use the same razor - examine everything, and whatever cannot be rationally explained, place it in a "Possibly God" folder, but I suspect you will ultimately reach the same conclusion as Neill Degrasse Tyson, who said: "God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance, that gets smaller and smaller as time goes on."
Thanks for yer Revulsion
I agree completely, but you asked, "If such things were true, and if god is non-physical how would we detect such a thing? How would you design an experiment for it?"
I gave you the only one I could think of, an adaptation of Occam's Razor. Even then, I advocated a "Possible" file, rather than a "Probable" file, on the assumption that over time, these too would evaporate when coming into contact with inevitable actual scientific knowledge.
I would say a hundred Hail Mary's and pray the rosary for days on end, but I assume I would still go to hell.
He will certainly have a lot to answer for. As Nietzsche said: The only excuse for God is that he doesn't exist.
Then What ?