alright heres my pov, im interested in facts and such so i watched this thing on bigthink.com. So basically if you want to know how it started you have to understand what the universe is! leading theoretical psychisis michio kaku explains that we are in a multiverse of a infinite number, each universe is in a bubble, when the big bang happens it was the bubble splitting into 2 like mitosist causing the explosion. all the universe's are in a arena-like phantom called the universal plane and this is 11 dimensons big, our univeres has 4 dimensions. Most scientist agree with this and they are as certain of this as the big bang so now you must stem of this instead the theroy there is only 1 universe.

Quote from Halseyy

I love when people take what I say and say the exact same way but in a way that makes it seem as though I don't understand the concept. This turned into a pissing contest. I'm glad you think you're smarter than everyone.

I'm sorry that I offended you by clearing up that a deistic god doesn't have to be unable to affect things. I meant no disrespect. Putting words in my mouth isn't going to help the situation, btw.

Quote from Leokill

I'm sorry that I offended you by clearing up that a deistic god doesn't have to be unable to affect things. I meant no disrespect. Putting words in my mouth isn't going to help the situation, btw.

No, it is you that put words in my mouth. I never once qualified why the mover was not intervening.

Quote from Halseyy

No, it is you that put words in my mouth. I never once qualified why the mover was not intervening.

Well I assumed you did, since first you used the word "cannot" which implies that he is incapable of intervening.

I suspect a god could be considered UNWILLING to intervene, even under extreme circumstances. So using the word "cannot" isn't fully invalid.

An omnipotent being doing something unwillingly seems a bit silly. Regardless, can't blame me for the mistake all that much.

Quote from Leokill

An omnipotent being doing something unwillingly seems a bit silly. Regardless, can't blame me for the mistake all that much.

Really? Why is it silly?
We have only free will and we can be unwilling. The god in question has complete freedom and complete willpower. The god exists outside of our realm of rules and meaning, said god can create the universe at a will and it is entirely possible said god would be unwilling to do anything it didn't want to. Who would I be to judge a being that has a level of sentience I couldn't fathom in it's motives?

Quote from Jutsu

Really? Why is it silly?
We have only free will and we can be unwilling. The god in question has complete freedom, the god exists outside of our realm of rules and meaning, said god can create the universe at a will and it is entirely possible said god would be unwilling to do anything it didn't want to. Who would I be to judge a being that has a level of sentience I couldn't fathom in it's motives?

Fair enough. Most religious dogma describe god as a being who has a divine plan, but since the original topic was a deistic god, who generally doesn't have to have any understandable motives, it doesn't matter.

Quote from Leokill

Fair enough. Most religious dogma describe god as a being who has a divine plan, but since the original topic was a deistic god, who generally doesn't have to have any understandable motives, it doesn't matter.

Well I think if there is a god who created us, I think the god has a divine plan. I think that the whole point would be simply to find that god and have faith in that god. Faith is letting go of what you think you believe, a journey into the unknown, because we don't know. I think the god would choose not to step in, because should we know for fact that the god exists we'd no longer have a choice we would have to believe. That wouldn't be faith, and as such would be why I think the gods divine plan would be to not step in.
Everyone uses the same argument "If there is a god why doesn't god save all the sic and dying, blah blah, war, blah." Dying in sickness may seem like a big deal to them, but to a god that knows, wouldn't it stand to reason that the concept of mortal death is miniscule in the grand scheme of things? Maybe there is a Valhalla, maybe there is paradise on the other end, or rejoining the collective spirit, or whatever.
Edit:Besides, we have free will, WE'RE killing each other anyways, why should anyone else have to clean it up?
Either way, I am certain the real truth is much much more magnificent than I could even imagine.

Aside from all that, I didn't even really read much of the first posts. But I feel like in this thread all options should be explored.
And you were the one who thought it was silly, whether it mattered or not.

I dislike the glorification of the word "faith". It simply means belief in something without evidence, and I don't think that is a virtue. It's gullibility.

Quote from Leokill

I dislike the glorification of the word "faith". It simply means belief in something without evidence, and I don't think that is a virtue. It's gullibility.

What's gullible is that you think faith and belief are one and the same.

Faith isn't just belief.

You're right. The definition of faith is belief without evidence or logic.

That said I don't think faith is necessarily a bad thing.

Quote from TAG Pieguy

Most scientist agree with this

M-theory is an extremely specialized area of research and it's not something that's largely supported by the scientific community.

Quote from Jutsu

What's gullible is that you think faith and belief are one and the same.

Faith isn't just belief.

I think having faith in small things can be a good and a rational thing to do, because we can't live our lives constantly doubting every little thing.

BUT.
When it comes to extraordinary claims, that requires extraordinary evidence. If someone comes up to me and tells me that some dude nearby is selling ice cream, I really have no reason to disbelieve something like that. However, if the same person were to tell me that some dude nearby is resurrecting the dead, I'd have to go see it for myself before I would believe a word of it.
A religious person would be more likely to believe in the extraordinary claim on the basis of faith. I do think that if you buy in to something without evidence, that's gullibility.

What's your definition of faith?

Quote from Exilement

That said I don't think faith is necessarily a bad thing.

Well, having faith can result in a positive outcome. I have heard stories of people turning away from the life of crime because they joined a religion, had a vision or such. Generally though, I don't think that having a twisted perception of reality is good, even if it happens to result in people behaving better.

Quote from Leokill

I think having faith in small things can be a good and a rational thing to do, because we can't live our lives constantly doubting every little thing.

Why not?