Deism does not necessarily exclude theology. In fact, I find that very difficult to believe. Plesse explain.
Even if the outcome did have proof, there will be someone who challenges said proof
I would say that is a nonsense definition because in this case God would be revealed through reason and observation of the natural world. An opinion I myself have expressed.
No, I am saying that your definition is nonsense because it implies that what it states in place of revelation isn't itself a type of revelation.
The reason theists use deist arguments is because there is no evidence (outside of holy texts) of the existence of their particular god.
You know there's no evidence? How? Please elaborate.
You're handling this quite well, i hope you two continue this evidence topic in this thread.My two cents... they do not have any hard evidence that would convince everyone, to date. Is there this evidence? Will there be this evidence? I don't know. If we are going off their holy text... i basically throw that out as evidence bc it's clearly man made. But once we get into subjective evidence, being someone that has witnessed some profound unexplained phenomena, i can't rule out that they may have witnessed something too. However, that evidence can easily be misinterpreted bc as far as i know... it's not repeatable. And, it's very easy for one to correlate these events with ones faith; confirmation bias. I personally would say there is evidence of "something." But going as far as saying it is of any one particular god... i agree with Press that there isn't evidence of that in particular. Simply bc it would contradict a hindu that see's Vishnu or a Christian that witnesses god... maybe it was both the same god, but how can we know which one? I agree with you that he should back up that there is no evidence, but i am on his side that (even though i think there is evidence) it doesn't point to anything other than the unexplained.
Besides you are wrong.
Do you know what no God looks like? Nothing.
There can't be anything without God.
This whole topic is nonsense.
I don't believe that belief in the existence of Deity or deities is not functionally the same as lack of belief in Deity or deities.
You're handling this quite well, i hope you two continue this evidence topic in this thread.
My two cents... they do not have any hard evidence that would convince everyone, to date. Is there this evidence? Will there be this evidence? I don't know. If we are going off their holy text... i basically throw that out as evidence bc it's clearly man made.
However, that evidence can easily be misinterpreted bc as far as i know... it's not repeatable.
I dispute that noumenon is spinoza's God to begin with.
God is not a manifestation of the mind.
If that was the case, mind would be God.
At that point, you wouldn't say God is noumenon, instead you would say that God is nous.
And even that sounds pretty new age hippy dippy.
You didn't tell me how you understand belief.
For all I know, you could be saying something meaningless like "There is no functional difference between belief in the tastiness of apples and belief in the fluffiness of clouds."
But in any case, these are functionally different.
Maybe you should say what you mean by functional as well.
Belief is functionally different than non belief.
Belief in Truth is definitely different than not believing in truth.
I couldn't lose faith because I understand what it is our faith is in and thus realize nothing else can be valid.
You don't understand what our faith is in, and so your grasp of it is very superficial. You only see the created externals of faith, not the spirit that inspires these manifestations.
What is my religion? Sincerity of faith and charity. Where could I go after this? Self deception and apathy toward my neighbor? It would be like a dog returning to his own vomit and eating it for me to choose worldliness over godliness. Everything in this world is vanity, I gain no pleasure from it anyway. Even the things that bring brief enjoyment leave empty soon after. My fortress, my home, my rest is in God. My life's focus is to abide in God with both my heart and mind. In my walk.
What is life without God? Meaningless. Vain. Not even really life, but death. Endless suffering and no consolation.
With God, I have my consolation.
With God I can endure the suffering and even transcend it.
Without God there is no reason for anything.
It is an empty existence where life is simply the satisfying of the lusts of the mind and flesh.
What else is there? Where is the motivation? Where is the conviction? Everything is done for the hell of it.
I would appreciate it if you wouldn't mutilate my posts. Do I have to make smaller posts?
How does belief in God effect my values? It doesn't as I already stated. Love of God is where the effect is.
Why does its being "man-made" as you put it disqualify it as evidence?
And how do you know this?
