How do you know God isn't dead?

[pocaracas]

yeah... the atheist has no justification for the fact that all electrons behave the same, all protons behave the same, all neutrons behave the same, all photons behave the same... maybe it's because an electron is an electron and there's no reason for an electron to behave differently from another electron, is there?
The behavior of electrons doesn't change with time.... because... I don't know... It's a good thing they don't, though. Why should they change?
But, in spite of my not knowing that, it does not mean there must be an entity keeping all electrons in the Universe behaving... keeping all protons in the Universe behaving, keeping all neutrons in the Universe behaving, keeping all photons in the Universe behaving, etc, etc, etc.

You do not know? Then why do you assume that the behavior of electrons observed yesterday or today will allow us to make predictions about how they will behave in the future? Keep in mind, without this principle, science is impossible.

Why do I assume it? Because every measurement seems to agree with it... of course, if the measuring instrument changes in the same way as the thing which is being measured, then the result will tend to be the same... and remember, your senses may be considered a measuring device.
In the end, it doesn't matter if they're all the same or not... our perception of them is what remains the same.

Our senses and memory are generally reliable, yes... but we are aware that they fail, and have hence established the peer review process to eliminate (it's more like minimize) any bias or faulty evaluation by the scientists.

How do you know they are generally reliable? I missed your demonstration of that.

Still messing up quotes, heh?

How do I know that? Wasn't it you who asserted it? I just went along with it, because it seems a reasonable assumption, taking in consideration my experience of my own senses and memory... ok, this last one is a bit dismal and I don't trust it too much... but it's amazing when it works well.

In the "atheistic Universe" we acknowledge that our senses and memory work in a given way and proceed to deal with them like that. Again, we put no assumptions on how electrons, ions, proton, neutrons, photons keep working the way they do as time goes by. But we do note that it's a good thing they do... memory and senses are just electrons and protons and neutrons working together in a particular way...

Do you not have to assume your memory and senses are reliable in order to claim that you know how the memory and senses function? Wasn’t that knowledge gained through your senses and retained in your memory?

I didn't say that we know how memory works... we just know it does work and use that fact to our advantage.
On the other hand, we do know how memory work in a computer.... but I guess the biological counterpart works in some different way.

Now, how on Earth did you come across the info that there is an entity capable of controlling all those particles and keep them behaving like they do?

It’s a crucial part of my view of reality, which is Christian. The Christian God has promised to uphold His creation in a predictable and uniform manner (Genesis 8), so these sorts of questions do not create problems for Christians.

Awwww, isn't that cute...
Stat refuses to assume anything about reality, with the exception of what his mind was infused with at a young age... no matter how erroneous it may be.
The christian god is your assumption. An assumption that has no backing whatsoever, except a very old book and other people who believe it too... and other people who have believed it and are now dead.
There are and have been people who believe/d in other gods... how does that work for those assumptions? "oh, they were the wrong assumptions, clearly... my assumptions is the one and only that has to be correct" you would say... or it would sound to me, from what you say.
This is exactly what Muslim Scholar says about his Allah... but let's leave that for the next quote...

All electrons repel one another because that’s part of God’s uniform governing.

Like Rhythm says, I'd like to see this tested and proved.

I was under the impression that electron repel each other because they all have what we've arbitrarily defined as negative charge... well, it wasn't so arbitrary... turns out it has to be negative, in order for mass to be positive... anyhow...
Equal electrical charges repel, because they cause the electrical field between them to curve outward. As they come closer, the field curves more.... curving a field takes energy, so it becomes increasingly "difficult" to bring equal charges close to each other.
It's not impossible, or nuclear fusion wouldn't happen... but that's for protons and neutrons, not electrons. Protons and neutrons are composed of 3 quarks each and these are governed by another force... somewhat stronger than electrical or magnetic.

It renders your theism very similar to his.
Which leads to the question: why would your version be the most accurate representation of reality, and not his?

They’re not very similar though, the concept of Allah undermines our ability to deduce logically, the concept of Yahweh establishes our ability to deduce logically. If Allah existed I’d have the same philosophical problems you’re struggling with above.

Allah is arabic for god.
Arabic derives, at least in part, from aramaic.
AaLaHaA (and some variations of it) is aramaic for god (accoring to these guys: http://www.peshitta.org/cgi-bin/lexicon.cgi)

They are supposed to be the same... only the muslim god does not include your trinity thing, for it is an "evolution" of the jew god, where your Jesus is nothing more than another prophet.
In terms of power to create and control the Universe, your gods are precisely the same...
See how I can make sense of two different fiction novels which fork from an original one?

I'd really like to see you and MuslimScholar make sense of your (shared) god... and how would each justify that his notion is the correct one.
You are both creationists, so you can start with that common ground