The above can be taken as our challenge to further define and refine the possibility and probability of God according to the following parameters:Nick_A wrote: ↑July 28th, 2021, 4:30 pm"To restore to science as a whole, for mathematics as well as psychology and sociology, the sense of its origin and veritable destiny as a bridge leading toward God---not by diminishing, but by increasing precision in demonstration, verification and supposition---that would indeed be a task worth accomplishing." Simone Weil
0. There is an order to the universe, logically, giving rise to the deep emotion of awe that spurs the quest for supposing and then understanding God.
1. God is timeless/changeless, aka eternal, absolute, fundamental, 'IS' … A God operating in time would be a changing God.
2. God has Mind, and so is a God-Who-is-a-Person, not a God-that-is-not-a-person—such as quantum fields as basic would be. Mind is needed for thinking, intention, planning, and implementation of a universe.
3. God is not a personal God. God's Good Plan operates at the general, universal sense, not at a specific, personal sense. Example: water is good but also necessitates floods and drought; a farmer wishes for rain and the wedding guests across the street hope for sunshine.
4. God's presence is not to be shown directly.
5. The message of our reality in this universe is that we operate linearly in time, aka presentism.
6. The Universe has to be incredibly large.
7. The nature of our universe is of a specific structure with specific initial conditions.
8. Human nature must be imperfect.
9. We can learn and thus enlarge the range of useful decisions in our repertoire, good or bad.
More?