So true Joan. Irrational claims are infinite.
If science proves god's existence, then it will be a god of war, of dispute, of intolerance, of domination, of oppression, of violence, of alienation WRIT BIG! If he/she/it/they created all these universes in one day, or one millennium, depending on how you define a day, then god should go on trial on poor engineering, faulty reasoning, lack of judgment, and irresponsibility. If god exists I will burn in hell and figure out a way to rebel.
Given that science only deals with material objects and effects on them, it would mean that God manifests himself as a material entity. That is, he would have a body, be visible, and be locatable in space.
This would certainly contradict most religious descriptions of God and would pose far more problems for religion than for disbelief. So the answer is that it would nullify all major religions which claim that God is pure spirit.
I agree with SGA Atheist that science cannot logically prove God. Perhaps he is an agnostic like me. However, God manifesting itself in material space doesn't necessarily contradict my agnosticism, nor most religions that I know of. For instance, at least 2 of the Big 3 -- Christianity and Islam -- explicitly state within their canon that God can manifest itself in physical form (i.e. Jesus). Most ancient religions also allow for Gods/deities interacting with mankind, influencing wars or natural disasters. Even some forms of Buddhism have deities that are personifications of humanly traits.
The only religions that disallow for physical manifestations of God that I think of are probably religions that exist entirely within the mind, like Zen Buddhism, Rastafarianism, or folk religions that state that when we die, we all return to the Earth or something.
I'm not quite as sure as you that Christians believe God manifests himself in physical form. If asked whether he could, most would say yes, God can do anything; but if asked whether God has manifested physically, I think most would confine that to his single appearance as Christ. Much of Christian tradition has affirmed the ineffability of God. It is a constant theme of theologians throughout history. The experience of God has usually been characterized as the mystical experience of a single individual.
With all due respect Dr. Clark, in its contributions to Genesis, the Yahwist (J) Source, writing around 950 BCE, consistently imagined a god capable of visiting earth in human form.
Yes, indeed. Moses saw God's backside, Adam and Eve heard his footsteps, and others heard his voice, but as time went on, God was less and less manifest in any physical way. The physical Christ is most always distinguished from Christ as God. This helps to explain such things as Christ saying that no man knows the time when the world will end: it was his human character that failed to know. A similar explanation is offered for his saying that none is good but God.
RE: "as time went on, God was less and less manifest in any physical way."
The Hidden Face of God, by Richard Elliot Friedman, addresses this phenomena.
Shit? Then there's a god. What god, that's to be determined.
I think that if science proved "God's" existence, then really we didn't discover a God at all. Science can only prove things that have natural explanations and if something "like" a God were to be discovered it would humble that being down to a mere force of nature, etc.
That's exactly right! Science cannot discover God. In the Hindu tradition, God is never an object of its own knowledge. Alan Watts uses the analogy that you cannot bite your own teeth or touch the tip of your finger with the tip of your finger. It's described as being an ultimate state of consciousness in which there's no room for an observer to observe anything, which is how science works from the perspective of any scientist.
"Scientists are stumped at 'why'... one of these days one of them will have this flash and realise all is consciousness ... the flash will happen when the mind is exhausted." - Ramesh Balsekar
So, I always lean towards what Sam Harris always espouses which is ignosticism which aims to define God before questions like this one are asked, because in eastern religion, this question would not make any sense.
Quite right. Only a material manifestation could be discovered by science and that would leave as inaccessible the spiritual nature.