(March 26, 2014 at 5:34 am)Esquilax Wrote:(March 26, 2014 at 5:10 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It strikes me that adding God to the admittedly thorny problem of explaining the interworking of brute facts adds - quite literally - nothing. If the sensible world does indeed lie within a larger reality, what is accomplished by labeling that reality 'God'? Why is the term 'informing principle' more useful than the term 'physical laws'?
Boru
Nailed it. That's what gets to me about these kinds of discussions; the theist involved will always scoff at how unjustified the atheist's universe is, and then they'll turn around and present god which A: they can't justify and B: is nothing more than "this is the thing that does the things that I can't account for."
It's a panacea, nothing more.
Hammer....nail....head.....
As if Chad's explaining a mystery with a bigger mystery answers anything.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
