@Mros Multiverse theory is just a postulation to try and explain the beginning of the universe. It is a secular theory for the first mover of this universe, even though it does not explain the ultimate first mover. It is special pleading.

Who proved what doesn't matter.

Ok, thanks for the explanation.

@Firefly That is semantics. How do you prove that it does not reflect reality? You need to use logic.

I've heard of the multiverse theory but I've never heard any convincing arguments for it.

Nope

You have to do an experiment AND use logic.

Sure. You need data.

And if you don't have data you have only naked anstraction

It is not prove

I agree.

The reason that no definitive evidence proving or disproving God's existence is that by definition God is a being that exists outside of reality.

The arguments based on logic is simply the best we have.

@Mros No, abstractions alone can't be a valid prove to anything.

Such an abstraction cannot disprove it either.

Which is why it's such a conundrum.

@Mros You don't need to disprove something that is not proven.

It is a theory, an explanation, is it not? Therefore it would need to be either proven or disproven.

@Mros Need?

No need.

So then you're just ignoring the possibility.

@Mros I ignore billions of possibilities.

I think abrahamic religions have internal philosophical contradictions; but that's out of speaking of god in general, which is a vague word

Everybody does

There is no proof, so just let people worship how they wish, whatever brings them most happiness in reaching Tengri

Elaborate on them, @Blebleh

Well, it doesn't need to be proven. God exists for your to believe with faith, not to beleive just because it's proven.

Firefly is right. Let me unpack a little here to help understand the logical framework. The evidence shows that the universe expanded (moved) from a single point. Given our current understand of physics this causes a problem because you can only regress so far. Eventually motion stops. That is the current state of science. So why did the energy of the universe go from no motion, to motion? What kind of thing can do that? That's where Aquinas' argument comes in.

Tell me why god allows all the misery in earth, in the end what they say is that god gave us free will

but this contradicts god being omnipotent and good

Why would it?

Because he made us in a defective way

Tengri is not necessarily working for good of man

He is there for man to reach out to if they wish

>The evidence shows that the universe expanded (moved) from a single point.

That is not true

It is questionable and discussed.

the god-particle theory remains a theory

I am not saying science is Absolutely correct in its abstractions about reality. I am basing the weight of the argument on what the pinnacle of science says so far.

First, there is the belief that God is all good, all powerful, and all just.
When man was created, he was given free will, with that free will man was given the choice to follow God or forsake him. From man's disobedience to God evil came into the world. It would then be unjust for God to undo that which is man's mistake because that would mean that God is absolving responsibility for man's actions.

@Deleted User You realize there is a lot of physic theories that do not support it?