Show me your proof

[smax]

In a non-deistic universe, yes, and ad infinitum. This is not the argument I am making.

That's good, because it's a weak one.

Existence itself is a being.

Not an entirely irrational theory, but a theory nonetheless.

Answer is above.

No, a theory is above.

Religion is the organization of a belief. You're correct, no existence of an organization proves a god. Reasoning from effects to the cause (logic) or the experience of the direct cause itself (God literally shows up and says hi) are the only ways to have complete certainty. If one has divine revelation, that is probably a very bad way to convince people. Logic should be the only route of teaching there is a God.

Man has been around for around 200 thousand years, and he's invented thousands upon thousands of gods and religions during that span of time. The vast majority of those gods are basically dead now.

Some gods last longer than others, but all gods eventually die. Your god, the Christian god, is fairly new to the scene, but he will eventually die as well, and will probably be replaced by a more socially acceptable and modern god. Scientology is a strong candidate to pick up where he left off.

In short, logic cannot be used to teach the existence of any particular god, because history has basically proven that god is merely an invention of man. As man evolves, so does god. As man learns about science and reality, so does god. God comes and goes as man sees fit.

This is baseless. Perhaps there are reasons for not interfering often, even if heavily concerned. For analogy, the government does not force business deals, even if it is beneficial to everyone.

Bad analogy. The government is available for comment, even if it is often unsatisfactory.

The reason god isn't interactive is because he doesn't exist anywhere outside of the delusional minds of human beings.

The universe is not infinitely large. The last estimate I heard is that there are 10^80 atoms.

I don't mind admitting, I'm not familiar with advanced equations, assuming that was one. LOL. What is evident, however, is that the universe stretches well beyond any of our present or future conceivable capabilities.

For all practical purposes, the universe is infinite. We have no reliable knowledge to challenge such a notion. And it's almost certain that we wouldn't understand the information if we did have it.

But my point was simply that there are many things the human mind is not currently capable of understanding. Evolution, science, and technology may change that some day in the extremely distant future. But right now we are very small, and so is our understanding.

Dogma. You sound like a catholic.

Saying we should have enough sense to reject fairy tales being passed off as reality is your idea of dogma?

I also think people should breathe. I should run for Pope!

But you accept philosophical and theological that presuppose your theories!

Examples?

What scientific data says that gaining more scientific data is better? What science experiment says that the survival of our species is good?

I'm going to field both of these questions simultaneously. In order for the human species to survive, science must play a critical role. As for the importance of the survival of the human race, I'll ask you one simple question:

Assuming you have a child or children, would you want them to die? How about your children's children?

The goal to preserve the human race is an obvious one for me.

But I get that Christianity teaches that "the flesh" is despicable, disgusting, and wretched, and not worth preserving.

Some questions are not answered with physics and chemistry.

Religion answers no questions. What's your point?

[/quote]