God is Not Silent

God is seen and heard through the evidence of His creation. Pastor Keith explains how a famous atheist turned to deism as a result of the evidences seen in the obvious design of the universe. A good follow up can be found here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNkxpTIbCIw

Category:

Education

Tags:

• intelligent
• design
• creation
• god
• jesus
• christian

[IamDeityOne]

No, the '"god" of creation is not silent, he's dead. The Mother saw to that. Well, I guess things that no longer exist could be described as silent, in a poetic way.

[Iconoclastithon]

All legitimate scientists reject 'deign" as scientific, even if they see it as valid or lean towards it "philosophically". That's the point Stein and you and so many others seem to miss.

Take physicist Paul Davies{an Agnostic-PanDeist of sorts}, or Stephen Hawking{essentially the same as Davies}, they both like some others "think" PHILOSOPHICALLY that the evidence persuades them to lean in that sort of deistic direction. But they reject I.D./Creationism as the pseudo-science it is.

[Iconoclastithon]

...CONT;

...Non-theism{including atheism, agnosticism, and deism, and anti-theism} or "rationalism/reason" and secularism, as well as scientific method FTW!{for the win}

: )

Revealed religion, faith, theism, supersition FTL{for the lose}.

[Iconoclastithon]

...CONT;

...It's also amusing tos ee christians celebrate Antony Flew becoming a Deist. It's amusing and ironic to see them do that with any Atheist that becomes a Deist; yet when a christian/revealed religionist/ or theist becomes a Deist- the opposite of celebration happens. When an atheist becomes a deist they act as if that validates their absurd religion and them, but one of themselves becomes a deist- and that person is now seen as not much better than an atheist. LoL!

CONT...

[Iconoclastithon]

...CONT;

..utilizing the findings OF science. I.D. at best can only "philosophy", not 'science". Not unless God is natural and is dicovere dby natural means{which MAY be the case; and someday maybe that's happen and I.D. will be science; but the I.D./creationism masquerading as science today, the christians/revealed religionist tjeists bastardizing deistic arguments and in part masquerading their arguments as deism both mock deism and their own religion in the process}..

[Iconoclastithon]

Antony Flew is'nt a scientist. He's a philosopher.

I.D./Creationism ISN'T science, it is a specific undermining of material sciences by revealed religionists. I.D./Creationism does'nt except evolution by natural selection, DEISTS DO! Deism only prposes that the mathematical preciness of the over-arching natural laws imply the likelyhood of something creative & calculating{or 'intelligent" if you wish} behind or wihin them. THATS IT!

And it's philosophy UTILIZING science, but it's not A science

[caveman0101]

God created the Universe right.

We are all eternal being.

Birth and re-birth repeats it self.

Unit we realize God.

[friedlish]

One problem lies within the term "supernatural". It implies that the laws of physics should be set aside for the sake of wishful thinking. Perhaps there is an underlying tendency towards intelligence in out universe, but since life and intelligence are not inherently supernatural things, why should they need a supernatural origin? The problem is that ID/Creationism is merely a quest to find ways of making humans as individuals important. Futile, as we're only important as a part of the universe.

[mkfoskey]

Yes, science is limited to the natural world. But there are questions that the natural world does not answer. So the observer makes certain deductions based upon what is seen in the natural world. These are deductions based upon evidence, not denials of evidence. ID is one theory of why the universe functions as a system, and is not utterly chaotic, as would seem to be the case if it were not for an intelligent, guiding force.

ID seeks to explain why we have cosmos rather than chaos.

[StandForScience]

"lens of anti-supernaturalism"

That's the funniest thing I've heard for a while...

You do realise science is restricted to natural world, so it cannot say anything about supernatural causes. Thus, ID or creationism is not science. Period.

Creationism/ID is NOT intetpretation of evidence; it's denial of evidence.