Q's from a theist

[lilphil1989]

I realize that there is a line that is drawn where science can go no further, and in my past responses I have been partly wrong for blurring this line. It is quite interesting to see how one may believe that something has certain implications where as others don’t see it like that. Often times when I have discussions with people it’s often frustrating when they don’t see what you see, but to be fair I’m quite sure atheists think the same about theists.

It's not that there's a boundary beyond which scientific knowledge may never pass, just that there is an edge to our current knowledge. So I'm not saying that we may never have a scientific explanation, just that we don't have one at the moment.

I see what you’re saying, but I’ll stop at just a creator for right now. I see no reason to believe that we can or will ever know the origins of the creator.

If you're willing to say that it's impossible to know the origin of something, why not let that something be the universe, instead of introducing some new entity to explain away your ignorance just to admit ignorance all over again? That's certainly the better proposition, since the universe is known to exist.

So I can’t demonstrate that a creator exists, but I infer that one does and for me that’s enough

And if your inference is logically sound (which I would disagree with, but I take it as a given for the sake of the argument), then you can further infer the existence of the creator's creator and so on ad infinitum.



As for evolution, it provides no evidence against the existence of a generic deity; however it does provide evidence against the god of the bible, since the explicit claim is made that mankind was brought into existence fully formed.