Vlad,
From post 51 of this thread, Alien said:
As I understand the term God, it means, "the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being" (OED definition). That seems a good enough place to start. Christians claim to be able to fill in some more details, but do you have any problem with that OED definition?
Well you seem to have mutiple problems with this, don't you?
Creator of the universe? Yes, box ticked.
Ruler of this universe? No, box not ticked. In the SU conjecture, it might well have been left to go its own way with no further attempt at control at all. Indeed, it may have been put into a metaphorical drawer to gather metaphorical dust. Indeed the being that created it might have died soon afterwards.
The source of all moral authority? No, box not ticked, as there is no sign that the universe obeys any moral laws at all or even that they exist. Incidentally it seems that NDG Tyson was of a similar view when he said:
The more I look at the universe, the less convinced I am that there is something benevolent going on
The supreme being? No, box not ticked, as there is no way, even in the SU conjecture, to establish that the being or beings (it could have been a group thing) that created the simulation was not contingent or in other words was the reason for its own existence. There is therefore no reason to consider that this creator was supreme.
So it seems at the very outset you put your necessary conditions for the divine abysmally low.
As a conjecture I have no problem at all with the SU approach, but if the creation of the universe is the only necessary condition for you to claim divinity in action, then so be it. I suggest, if this is what you are claiming, then you are really saying very little.
