I don't believe in a meddling God

Scientific evidence there is a god?

Scientists say that the backwards time travel may theoretically be possible. If it is indeed possible, just very difficult, then we can say that it has almost certainly already happened, as any technical difficulties can be overcome some time in the future. A person from the distant enough future may appear as a God to a primitive civilization.

I'm just starting from the point that there is a strong evidence for a God in creation but not a micro managing god

Can I start with, there's no strong evidence for a God? You can Google it..

An unforeseen future nestled somewhere in time.

Unsuspecting victims no warnings, no signs.

Judgment day the second coming arrives.

Before you see the light you must die.

Forgotten children, conform a new faith,

Avidity and lust controlled by hate.

[The] Never ending search for your shattered sanity,

Souls of Damnation in their own reality.

Chaos rampant,

An age of distrust.

Confrontations.

Impulsive habitat.

Bastard sons beget your **** daughters,

Promiscuous mothers with your incestuous fathers.

Engreat souls condemned for all eternity,

Sustained by immoral observance a domineering deity.

Chaos rampant,

An age of distrust.

Confrontations.

Impulsive sabbath.

On and on, south of heaven

The root of all evil is the heart of a black soul.

A force that has lived all eternity.

A never ending search for a truth never told.

The loss of all hope and your dignity.

Chaos rampant,

An age of distrust.

Confrontations.

Impulsive habitat.

On and on, south of heaven

OP I don't know if this will interest you but something that's helped me a lot is discovering Mormon theology, which says that God has limited power and is a created being among beings.

In fact the idea of God being omnipotent doesn't appear in the Bible and was borrowed from classical metaphysics (Plato, Aristotle etc.)

This book is a good starting point:

The God Who Weeps: How Mormonism Makes Sense of Life by Terryl Givens

Its my opinion that a lot of the incoherencies of mainstream Christian theology are a result of the meshing together of classical philosophy and Christian scripture. This matters more now than ever since in Western countries the mass of people are educated and they demand real answers to questions like e.g. theodicy.

I tend to agree there is strong evidence for god/s. It needn't be material (i.e. scientific) evidence.

Let me paraphrase something I saw on a blog:

"I wonder what compels people to convince themselves they are living in a world made up of completely random events that somehow form the level of coherence that we are at now.

Why is it difficult to imagine avenues of perception and communication and being that are non-material, and that the non-material exists?"

Examining the material world does not/cannot in and of itself prove that nothing apart from the material world exists. Don't confuse science with metaphysics.

What kind of evidence a person considers "admissible" will be pre-decided by their metaphysical assumptions. Often a person will rule out or rule in certain kinds of evidence a priori.

Or far more likely he doesn't exist.

..

This I'm curious in.

In Plato's dialogues his Socrates (a mouthpiece for Plato's opinions) gives long disquisitions on virtue, and in 'Timaeus' talks about a kind of proto-salvation as the culmination of a virtuous life.

These works and other Greek philosophical works, such as Aristotle's De Anima and Nichomachean Ethics, were translated into European languages and declared to be compatible with Christianity by early Christian scholars. (Aquinias draws on Aristotle quite heavily for his scholastic philosophy.)

But I personally question this.

It seems that many concepts were smuggled into 'Christianity' that don't obviously come from the Gospels and don't seem to fit.

Here is a famous quote from Epicurus, describing the theodicy problem, that atheists usually like a lot:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”

Now if you check you will see that Epicurus lived from 341–270 BC! Greeks didn't paticularly know or care much about Judaism at that time. He was arguing against existing Greek/Roman conceptions of the Gods.

These Greek/Roman metaphysical ideas were fused with Christian beliefs early on, either because they were already so familiar or to give a new religion a kind of philosophical respectability or because they appealed to those early scholars.

It happened so long ago that it seems impossible to pick them apart.

The fact that a lot of Christian theology seems to 'not fit together properly' and is just incoherent or leaves more questions than answers is cited as a reason people become atheists. So its worth digging down and going back and questioning everything right from the beginning imo.

Astronomical? Not really, given the vast size of the (observable) universe and the large number of "goldilocks zone" Earth-like planets which have recently been observed, it's conceited to say the least to assume that this whole universe was created just for us, or that we may be the only planet with intelligent life.

It appears reasonable to assume that life will arise anywhere where suitable conditions exist (look at extremophiles) and that given sufficient time under suitable conditions, increasingly complex and ultimately intelligent lifeforms will evolve.

The question isn't so much "are they out there" but "will we, or they, survive long enough to be able to communicate across many light-years before we, or they, destroy ourselves".

We can deduce that this universe is, under certain local conditions, conducive to the existence of intelligent life by the very fact that we exist.

The backwards time thingy relates to quantum particles, not deities who can interve to create whole universes

The direction of time relates to entropy. The whole universe is probabilistic

Well, I wouldn't be starting thread built on some fairytales man made beings. Seems like you did it. And I just happened to reply to one of your posts...

No such thing as random. Perhaps you meant chaotic?

Chaos is an interesting idea.