Stephen Hawking has died at the age of 76.

[Edwardo Piet]

Yep.

Indeed.

Nope. Christianity is called a faith you know.

And faith is irrational by definition as it means belief without evidence. Exactly my point.

Sure there is. Read the Bible. Consider existence, and life.

See how confused you are? On the one hand you say God's unfalsifable, outside of nature and there can be no evidence of him, you have to take him on faith... and on the other hand you say that nature is evidence of God, and you don't have to take him on faith. Total contradiction. Either there's evidence for God or not.

Er, why not? What would stop such a god from appearing right now?

... the fact that he would be completely indistinguishable from a supremely powerful alien pretending to be God.... have you not heard of NOMA?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-overla...magisteria

Either he's unfalsifable or he isn't, either you have to take him on faith or you don't, either there can't be evidence of him or there can, make your mind up.

You're literally proclaiming what can and cannot be considered evidence, and what can and cannot happen in the future. That's both arrogant and irrational.

You're defining God as something unfalfifable that you have to take on faith and then claiming he's not unfalsifiable and not only can you have evidence of him but nature already is evidence of him.

You're a confused mess, I'm just pointing it out. If God is outside the reach of science, he's outside the reach of science. If you have to take him on faith, you have to take him on faith. You are trying to have your cake and eat it too.

There's nothing arrogant or irrational about claiming that a being that is described in such a way that he is outside of the scope of empirical evidence is outside the scope of empirical evidence. You're irrational for on the one hand saying you need faith and God is unfalsifiable, and on the other hand saying nature is evidence of him, and he can show himself any time. Make your mind up, either God is a being that cannot be detected or he is. Either you need faith or you can have evidence. Faith is not needed if there's actually evidence of him.

It's extremely irrational to think that evidence of nature is evidence of some imaginary being that is completely undetectable and unknowable and theists just made up. You literally have an imaginary conception of a superperson in your head, and you think that the natural world is evidence of that silly conception of that superperson being outside nature and making it all, despite the fact that that 1) That all has natural explanations 2) Even if it didn't, the non-arrogant thing you do when you don't have the answer is to say that you don't know, not to make up some imaginary superperson that made it all.