That could only be the case if your religion was factual. I am neither for nor against your deity, because there is no deity to be for or against.
Interesting, that you know that for a fact.
It’s not particularly interesting. It’s as much a fact as knowing that, for example, the Earth isn’t rectangular, Donald Trump isn’t a lizard from Aldebaran, and the Loch Ness monster isn’t real.
Your examples are disanalogous, but obviously not in your mind.
They’re examples of facts, not examples of non-existent ultimate deities. Though if you want, I can provide those too: Ptath, Aten, Waheguru, Unkulunkulu, Viracocha, Shangdi.
They’re all similar in concept to your deity, albeit with differences in their nature and secondary characteristics, and much of the claims you make about God can apply equally well to any of them.
Yeah, I guess there is no way to compel an unbeliever to understand about God’s providence, that sets of concatenated co-instants impute meaning and that God is sovereign over time and place, timing and placing, and that they are not just flukes. (I noticed that you did ignore the diameter of the moon. 
)
Timely RVs
Did I mention that he is personal?
I’m quite happy to talk about the diameter of the moon, but you’d need to support your claim that the closeness in relative size of sun/moon actually does serve a purpose, and how you know that is the purpose - and remember that neither their relative sizes nor the moon’s distance from Earth are constant. Also, if your deity is helping us to understand astronomy, why didn’t he give Venus a moon, or make the moons of Mars (or other planets) large enough to be visible without a telescope? That’s have been a much greater help.
I’m not going to discuss the idea that your God is directing the movements of camper-van owners, though. That’s too ludicrous for words.
What does “with respect to God” here actually mean? In God’s opinion? Yours? How you personally interpret scripture?
Yawn.
Ignorance of God is evil? Judged evil for what you don’t know. This is the essence of totalitarianism. This is what Christopher Hitchens meant when he spoke about theism as a kind of celestial North Korea.
1 Like
Cute meme. Not a compelling argument answering the reality of God’s providence, though. Or did you miss that part.
This thread is essentially a discussion of Atheist vs. Theist interpretations.
GAE presumes a Theist position.
Yeah, so is the fact that the Bible speaks to global warming.
First of all I don’t think you provided any argument yourself. You stated a list of claims I see no good reason to accept as true. I don’t believe I am under any obligation to disprove your opinions.
I also happen to disagree that my response isn’t compelling. I actually think it is. That your views on ethics can be accurately analogized to totalitarian, and megalomaniacal dictatorships, is a compelling reason to reject it.
Or, God is a loving Father.
Forgive me but I have no idea what this means.
My first response to you in this thread is me responding to a set of claims of yours, quoted in my response.
As expected, what can I say?
A series of coincidences that in themselves may be notable, but taken as a group there is a connecting factor that it is unreasonable to say that it was mere chance. I have given examples and we have talked about it before. You may recall the name Rich Stearns?* Christians call it God’s providence.
*Here is a less sappy account than the one from a publication that I posted previously at PS – this one is excerpts directly from the book:
I was hoping that at least you could say something that took the form of an argument, instead of just stating your beliefs about the relationship between morality and ethics, to God.
Thank you, now I at least know what you meant by that sentence.
I have given examples and we have talked about it before. You may recall the name Rich Stearns?* Christians call it God’s providence.
That’s a nice story, I just don’t see how this relates to what you spoke about earlier, about your views on God, morality, and ethics.