This is the the least important. I should have called it "verification". What I am referring to here is the fact that in Mormonism, for example, supposedly there were advanced civilizations in S. America with iron, swords, chariots, various coins, etc., none of this has been verified by anthropologists. Many artifacts from the Bible have been of course. That's all I was talking about and that's why it was #1.
jesus is god......lmao
- Thread starter Gordon Gekko
- Start date
This is the the least important. I should have called it "verification". What I am referring to here is the fact that in Mormonism, for example, supposedly there were advanced civilizations in S. America with iron, swords, chariots, various coins, etc., none of this has been verified by anthropologists. Many artifacts from the Bible have been of course. That's all I was talking about and that's why it was #1.
Of course, I disagree. My point with all of the above is that all of them appear exactly as one would expect if there was a God and He was actively involved in our planet.
And I cannot disagree more strongly with your statement that the physical evidence does not agree with theism. I would agree with you that the physical evidence does not prove theism, but the physical evidence in my mind looks exactly as one would expect it if there was God.
The Holy Spirit is in a tie for #1 because He is so inwardly powerful. When you see something supernatural like some of the events I described earlier in the thread, it is impressive and a verification. But that simply does not compare to something that occurs on the interior of your own person of course.
I realize that something that happens on the inside of a human being will not be accepted by a semi-materialist like yourself as valid evidence. But, that said, I can again state clearly that the Holy Spirit does exactly what you would expect Him to do if there was God...
Quote from LongShot:
yes well if your looking for god i guess you'd "see" him in everything
No, this is where we disagree logistically. I am saying this: "Why does the universe look created when we examine it astronomically, geologically, cosmologically, psychologically, morally, spiritually, etc., etc."?
Materialists always claim that theists must fabricate their paradigm in order to fit reality. I am saying, "No, the universe looks exactly how you would expect it to if there was truly a theistic paradigm."
Science is about models. And I believe theism is the best model to explain the universe. And, for the record, I think naturalism falls "woefully short".
Science is about models. And I believe theism is the best model to explain the universe. And, for the record, I think naturalism falls "woefully short".
I do want to be clear though that every model has its issues, its "tougher" areas. I just think theism is the best model that makes the most sense and matches both the physical and spiritual evidence...
I feel that's a pat, knee-jerk response, but maybe that's because I haven't explained myself. Here's an example:
Why does the universe suddenly explode from a singularity with all astronomical parameters perfectly tuned for life?
Now, you would say, I believe, "We don't know why. It could just be part of a random process."
I would respond, "If there was a God, this is exactly what you would expect: the universe would appear miraculously finely tuned for life."