Evidence for God from Science

Correction? I've been consistent in my position since the start of this thread. You're right, Deism is not monolithic, it is divided mainly into two major camps, Classic Deism and Modern Deism. The Classics believe in a personal God while the Modern don't. This is consistent with everything I've sai...

I put the last line in a different paragraph because it wasn't addressing your post. Not really. I am aware of the work of Sheehan, Porter, Young, etc. that is attempting ot make that case. Suffice it to say that where they are correct insofar as they argue that we ought not paint classical deists w...

Assuming God exists? Probably not.

Not assuming God exists? Yes.

That , which was the old Deist position (which seraph claims not to adhere to), would be incoherent. The idea that Deists believe God is unattached and unloving is actually a much more modern idea and is not what the old Deists believed. Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, and Ben Franklin were Deists ...

Ok. Let me be clearer. Some thing that we actually know exists, that is infinite. You: Multiverse exists as an infinite because infinite things exist. Me: Tell me a thing that is infinite? You: The multiverse, of course! Me: :pound: What? That's not what I said. I said it COULD be exist and be infi...

Ok. Could you give me an example of something infinite besides God? Or explain what you mean? Well, a Multiverse for example, like Silvertusk was describing. More particularly one that exists on its own and was never created by a living being. Multiverse thoeries often claim that the Multiverse as ...

That's Christian theology, but the idea of forgiveness always requiring sacrifice is not very intuitive. What if I said I needed to kill a rabbit and have a person accept the death of that rabbit each time I needed to forgive a person? Any logical person would say "Why the **** did you have to ...

I don't see why infinity is a quality that can only apply to a sentient being, as opposed to a non sentient thing.

That is a good question and for me the answer is this. If you agree that there is a God then logically you have to assert certain attributes to him - for instance - Omnipotent, Omnipresent, Omnibenelovant. All Holy and with perfect justice. Which those attributes in mind then the Christian God is t...

RickD wrote:History? The person, Jesus of Nazareth.

Islam is true because of the person of Muhammad. Can you prove that wrong, considering there is equal evidence for the existence of both Muhammad and Jesus, if not more for Muhammad since he lived more recently?

How is God not even defined as a "thing"? That's quite the cop out to avoid needing to explain God, in my opinion. If he's an existing entity, of course he's a "thing". If he weren't a thing he wouldn't exist at all.

We spend a lot of time reasoning out the existence of God through methods like the cosmological and teleological arguments. But people often seem to make the leap that this is proof for the truth of Christianity, while many like myself say that this only supports Deism or a likeminded philosophy. Wh...

I think I'd agree with that, I was mainly just saying that infinity is possible, even for things aside from God.

The multiverse idea is usually invoked as an alternative to a Creator, so yeah, in the scenario of a multiverse God may well not exist. If he doesn't exist, the multiverse can well be infinite and not need to be compatible with necessary characteristics of a reality where God exists.

Is it even possible to have an infinite number of any thing? If it were measured in days, how many days is Gods total lifespan, from birth to to death? I said any thing . God is not a thing. Numbers are infinite also. But they're not things . Why not? He's an existing entity, if infinity can apply ...