Evidence for God from Science

I don't believe God would of created humans with the desire to seek Him if He didn't want to stick around. Because we came from God, I believe God has some similarities to us. He wants love and, yes, attention. He also loves to be in relationships, we all do. We are way too complex, emotionally, for Him to place those emotions in us and just say, "Adios! Aloha! Mahalo!". No, God loves us and wants to be near us.

7777777 wrote:I don't believe God would of created humans with the desire to seek Him if He didn't want to stick around. Because we came from God, I believe God has some similarities to us. He wants love and, yes, attention. He also loves to be in relationships, we all do. We are way too complex, emotionally, for Him to place those emotions in us and just say, "Adios! Aloha! Mahalo!". No, God loves us and wants to be near us.

God wants nothing. If He did He wouldn't be God.

Byblos wrote:God wants nothing. If He did He wouldn't be God.

I guess "want" is a poor choice of words. I think He expects something. If He didn't, how could He be a jealous God?

I think God desires relationship with man, and created him in part for that reason. It's not a need. It's an extension of the relationship God has internally as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. God created us to share in part with this internal "dance" (the greek word used is perichoresis). That's the best explanation I have, but I know it's incomplete and doesn't capture everything that is there.

If Deism were true, than we would have no way of knowing it to be true, since a deistic God, by definition, does not reveal himself to his creation. On what authority will a deist claim deism to be objectively true?

If Deism were true, than we would have no way of knowing it to be true, since a deistic God, by definition, does not reveal himself to his creation. On what authority will a deist claim deism to be objectively true?

A Deist would probably say that knowledge is both purely naturalistic and is valuable for discovering truth, and that God's existence can be discovered through this alone without divine revelation.

Which I think in itself is a somewhat noble viewpoint even if though they ultimately reject Christianity, which is where they go wrong.

Seraph wrote:A Deist would probably say that knowledge is both purely naturalistic and is valuable for discovering truth,

They could say this, but they would have to justify such a view of knowledge. What is the naturalistic foundation of knowledge, and how can it discover any truth?

Seraph wrote:and that God's existence can be discovered through this alone without divine revelation.

In Deism, God doesn't reveal himself in natural revelation. He simply "wound the clock" and let it run on it's own. We still need some authority by which we can judge whether or not Deism is objectively true.

Seraph wrote:Which I think in itself is a somewhat noble viewpoint even if though they ultimately reject Christianity, which is where they go wrong.

I actually view Deism as a copout. They need a god to fill in gaps of their naturalistic worldview, but don't want any accountability to him, nor do they want to deal with any tough issues in either naturalism or Christianity.

puritan lad wrote:

Seraph wrote:A Deist would probably say that knowledge is both purely naturalistic and is valuable for discovering truth,

They could say this, but they would have to justify such a view of knowledge. What is the naturalistic foundation of knowledge, and how can it discover any truth?

Seraph wrote:and that God's existence can be discovered through this alone without divine revelation.

In Deism, God doesn't reveal himself in natural revelation. He simply "wound the clock" and let it run on it's own. We still need some authority by which we can judge whether or not Deism is objectively true.

Deists don't claim anything as being objectively true. We assume a God based on our understanding of the laws of nature. The laws of nature exist throughout the universe, and exist before man, and effect matter, and all of creation. These laws existed as long as matter space and time, and our independant of them, and are laws controlling them. Someone had to create these laws, we call that God. Anything more than that is assuming more than we as humans can possibly understand. That is done without authority. For God to create the world, and then let it run on it's own is not abandonment, and does not show any lack of love, or anything else. If God does help sustain the world, and the universe, I still see no reason to interfere and meddle in everday aspects of lives.

Seraph wrote:Which I think in itself is a somewhat noble viewpoint even if though they ultimately reject Christianity, which is where they go wrong.

I actually view Deism as a copout. They need a god to fill in gaps of their naturalistic worldview, but don't want any accountability to him, nor do they want to deal with any tough issues in either naturalism or Christianity.[/quote]

Deism is the exact opposite of a copout. We don't have Jesus to forgive our sins everytime we fall from grace, we are accountable. We don't have the ability to pray father forgive me and all is forgiven, we are accountable. We have to be accountable for every action and every decision we make here on earth. No forgiving, forgetting, washing away, etc. So we put more value on every decisions we make, with no "opt out" available for us. Filling in the gaps, as you say, is where man attempts to explain the unexplainable, and attribute the actions of man, as the actions of God, or to condone the action of men, as being inspired by God. That is a copout, to make yourself feel more comfortable while on earth. All I need is me and my God, there is no need for middle men to tell me what to believe, and what they think God wants me to do.

spiltteeth wrote:Anyone know of a good argument against deism? It seems to answer the presuppositional problems of where laws of logic and natural laws come from ...I'd appreciate any help, thanks!

I'll need to reflect on your question. Meanwhile, to me, deism's god seems immoral because he's indifferent to his creatures. He's unconcerned about it. After he creates the universe, he ignores it because it doesn't need him anymore. Say deism is true. Then maybe although there's a god, there's no divine providence.

JayDeist wrote:

JayDeist wrote:

puritan lad wrote:

Seraph wrote:A Deist would probably say that knowledge is both purely naturalistic and is valuable for discovering truth,

They could say this, but they would have to justify such a view of knowledge. What is the naturalistic foundation of knowledge, and how can it discover any truth?

Seraph wrote:and that God's existence can be discovered through this alone without divine revelation.

In Deism, God doesn't reveal himself in natural revelation. He simply "wound the clock" and let it run on it's own. We still need some authority by which we can judge whether or not Deism is objectively true.

Deists don't claim anything as being objectively true. We assume a God based on our understanding of the laws of nature. The laws of nature exist throughout the universe, and exist before man, and effect matter, and all of creation. These laws existed as long as matter space and time, and our independant of them, and are laws controlling them. Someone had to create these laws, we call that God. Anything more than that is assuming more than we as humans can possibly understand. That is done without authority. For God to create the world, and then let it run on it's own is not abandonment, and does not show any lack of love, or anything else. If God does help sustain the world, and the universe, I still see no reason to interfere and meddle in everday aspects of lives.

Seraph wrote:Which I think in itself is a somewhat noble viewpoint even if though they ultimately reject Christianity, which is where they go wrong.

I actually view Deism as a copout. They need a god to fill in gaps of their naturalistic worldview, but don't want any accountability to him, nor do they want to deal with any tough issues in either naturalism or Christianity.

Deism is the exact opposite of a copout. We don't have Jesus to forgive our sins everytime we fall from grace, we are accountable. We don't have the ability to pray father forgive me and all is forgiven, we are accountable. We have to be accountable for every action and every decision we make here on earth. No forgiving, forgetting, washing away, etc. So we put more value on every decisions we make, with no "opt out" available for us. Filling in the gaps, as you say, is where man attempts to explain the unexplainable, and attribute the actions of man, as the actions of God, or to condone the action of men, as being inspired by God. That is a copout, to make yourself feel more comfortable while on earth. All I need is me and my God, there is no need for middle men to tell me what to believe, and what they think God wants me to do.

You also have to assume that fallen man has sufficient means by which he can understand God, and that the laws of nature are sufficient to bring about such knowledge. Furthermore, you have to assume that the laws of nature are independent entities that operate outside of God's Providence. If you hold that God does not "interfere and meddle in everyday aspects of lives", then how would you justify the claim that "The laws of nature exist throughout the universe, and exist before man, and effect matter, and all of creation" (One of many objective truth claims that Deism cannot justify)? Such an assumption requires God's providence, and proper knowledge of God requires revelation from God.

Finally, who are you accountable to for your actions, and what will be the penalty? What moral standard will you use to put value on the decisions that you make? How do you know if your decisions are the right ones? What do you do about the observable evidence that you don't measure up? There are no worries if man is the final authority, for man can be fooled.

Like any naturalistic religion, you are forced to lower God's standard (or even deny that He has a standard), and view yourself as better than you really are. And like all others, the end will be failure.

spiltteeth wrote:Anyone know of a good argument against deism? It seems to answer the presuppositional problems of where laws of logic and natural laws come from ...I'd appreciate any help, thanks!

1. The required sustainence of the laws of physics, chemistry, biology, and mathematics ; they all must work flawlessly with each other to a very razor edge precise manner . The atoms ciculating the nucleus have to be held in preciseness by an external power force . The Cosmos doesnt 'just run itself' .

2. Over 150 extremely narrow scientifically defined Life Enabling Constants all working in unison and dependent on each other . Some to the 120th decimal place precision ... these have to be HELD in unimaginable close critical tolerance otherwise the entire set of Dominos collapses .

3. The many proven miracles that have occured thruout the ages to people which science or medicine cannot explain . Val Thomas is one of the most extreme cases ive heard of, where she was totally flatlined for 17 hours then came back to life totally unaffected except for a little bit of rigor mortis which set in her toes .
Ive personally witnessed cancer being totally gone in women on the very day of their surgery while they were about to be put under on the operating table...only to be wheeled back into their hospital room and released. The cancer was confirmed by three independent Doctors and visible on x ray.

4. It makes no rational sense for a personal theistic Creator to NOT interact with his most prized creative possession (mankind) since the entire Cosmos was designed and engineered for our arrival . Every human being has the spiritual component as part of his makeup ...an immaterial Soul which interacts with our Body yet is a seperate entity. We wouldnt need a Soul if we couldnt have a personal ongoing relationship to our Creator. But we do have one.

5. It is an affront to Gods nature and character to assert he just kickstarted the Universe then let IT finish the job in a haphazard manner . The Creator who makes his prized possession (Us) with highly personal traits (love, compassion, empathy, caring, etc...) must also have these qualities since they are non material and cant come from physical entities. Thus, removing his loving, caring, compassionate hand from Us after he formed the Cosmos, would fly in the face of his actual nature and actually make him an apathetic Being.

6. Jesus Christ coming to Earth and teaching us what our personal Creator is like, would be rendered a total Liar , Fraud, and Lunatic ... in addition to NOT fulfilling the approx. 200 prior predictions about him coming and his life, death, ressurection which followed . Christs life is exemplified by the highest of ethics, morals, and no sin could be found in him and no problems can be found in his teachings . His Disciples were so convinced Christ was authentic that they willingly gave up their lives based on his character , to a large part.

7. There would be no ultimate moral accountability for human beings since there would be no reason for a distant Deistic Creator to instill a Moral Code in each of us if he was totally seperated from us and didnt care .

8. The Bible which can be proved to be inspired by God and which describes God in detail...would all be nullified and completely inaccurate (which would contradict its proven validity...an impossibility in itself) .

9. It would be ludicrous to place ones trust and faith in a Deistic God , since he wouldnt WANT to reveal himself to mankind on a closer level.

10 . A Deistic God is void of any personal power to change individuals lives since he would REFUSE that kind of interaction -- yet we have the true testimonies of many many corrupt unkind people, murderers, thieves, adulterers, rapists, etc... who HAVE had a very real transformation experience to the depths of their Soul, completely changing their personality and character for the better. Complete reversals arent possible because a Person wills it for himself or from information in a book...a Soul transformation is only possible from a higher Source than ourselves who acts IN us, profoundly .

11. The consistent theme thruout the centuries, has been people who have claimed to have experienced the DIvines presence or power , in a tangibly felt way . It is highly unlikely that these many millions of people were mistaken or outright Liars in what they experienced .... evidenced thru renewed strength , commitment, wisdom, decision making ability, and huge goal accomplishments.

Deism ,it would seem, is akin to the sheer impossibility of an atheistic worldview.

Byblos wrote:
God wants nothing. If He did He wouldn't be God.

Not true. God needs nothing. We would not exist if God had not acted on the desire to create us. Because God is 100% autonomous, incapable of needing anything, He didn't need to create humans at all. But somehow we're still here But I'm probably just jumping on semantics here

koopa184 wrote:

Byblos wrote:
God wants nothing. If He did He wouldn't be God.

Not true. God needs nothing. We would not exist if God had not acted on the desire to create us. Because God is 100% autonomous, incapable of needing anything, He didn't need to create humans at all. But somehow we're still here But I'm probably just jumping on semantics here

No, you hit it on the head. The question remains : Why are we here when we didnt have to be , and why is our entire Cosmos designed in razor edge precision so we can be here , and why do we have the spiritual capacity we have ... if not to grow in knowledge and relationship to the Creator who made it all occur (?) Atheism or Deism can never adequeately answer these questions , and in fact, both carry the same underlying excuse : (that) God isnt desired in Ones life .

CallMeDave wrote:
Why do we have the spiritual capacity we have ... if not to grow in knowledge and relationship to the Creator who made it all occur (?) Atheism or Deism can never adequeately answer these questions , and in fact, both carry the same underlying excuse : (that) God isnt desired in Ones life .

I agree. Spiritual capacity seems like a good point to bring up with deists.

Why would an all knowing God create a universe that He didn't care for at all? I'm sure to Him, making a universe is like making a cup of tea to us... but our universe is designed with intelligence that we are barely beginning to understand, yet, this "god" of some sorts did it for no good reason?

This is one of those moments just like when an atheist will say "there is no objective truth/everything is matter/I know nothing." that i'll look at the deist and be like "really?" haha