Oneiron, must you constantly redefine my terms? sigh....



Ok, I'm going to readdress some things. But first, I'd like you to qualify your statement that god, if he existed, would have to exist in an objectively real sense. why?
You seem to think that subjectivity doesn't exist in the world. But I think, and could quite eloquently argue, that subjectivity is the heart of world-formation.
Since this matter cannot be proven, even in your own objective sense, isn't rather fundamentalist to refuse to allow for other possibilities beyond your current scope of thought?

Second, with the physics example, I wasn't attempting to make any claims about the unified force being god. My point is that we can perceive this force as seperate, or as unified. All that really changes is the math. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure a unified theory will do wonders for physics, but we won't abandon our earlier conceptions of it, just as we still use newtonian physics today.

Yes, Einstein was apparently right, or at least, more right than Newton, but we still use Newton's system. Why? Hasn't Einstein rendered it utterly false?