Hi,
I don't think that the 'god from beyond' concept is an hypothesis. It is not an axiom put forward to be extrapolated from and to be tested. It is simply a concept to be accepted (or not) on faith. It has no ontological basis (unlike the disputed ontological argument for an unlimited god) and makes no predictions. Thus, it is a viable, harmless, and vacuous belief which, if it gives comfort to some, if it relieves them of the uncertainty of their reason for being, has some value. Myself, I fill the gaps with "I don't know."
--Pete
Quote:What I suppose I mean is that the god of the gaps always has a place to hide; no matter how long our reach gets, even if our reach grows beyond what we currently think of as the "universe", it is always possible to put god one further step past that. Therefore, the "god from beyond" hypothesis lacks falsifiability.Well, yeah. But a religion truly based on a 'god of the gap' which does not try to proselytize nor make its 'morals' the common laws is not something I have any quarrel with.
I don't think that the 'god from beyond' concept is an hypothesis. It is not an axiom put forward to be extrapolated from and to be tested. It is simply a concept to be accepted (or not) on faith. It has no ontological basis (unlike the disputed ontological argument for an unlimited god) and makes no predictions. Thus, it is a viable, harmless, and vacuous belief which, if it gives comfort to some, if it relieves them of the uncertainty of their reason for being, has some value. Myself, I fill the gaps with "I don't know."
--Pete
How big was the aquarium in Noah's ark?