Intelligent Design vs. Casino Universe

Edit: Wait. After I see this god, am I going to start denying medical treatments

Does this mean that you're not going to show me how to see your god?

Conclusion
If gaps in scientific knowledge are the basis for belief in God, then as science progresses, evidence for God’s existence continually diminishes. Fine-tuning does not rely on divine action as an explanation, but points out the striking precision of nature’s order in line with the requirements for human life, thus establishing a mysterious connection between physics and biology. As for the moral law, its use as a pointer to God can be understood in that human behavior has evolved in a way that is consistent with the idea of a good and loving creator. Belief in any moral truth rests upon the assumption of God’s existence or some other ultimate standard.

Finally, although these pointers to God should encourage one to consider God’s existence, they must not be placed at the foundation of faith. The belief in a creator and the experience of a relationship with God should not rest solely on a logical or scientific justification. But then, as Collins himself wondered, “How can such [religious] beliefs be possible for a scientist? Aren’t many claims of religion incompatible with the “Show me the data” attitude of someone devoted to the study of chemistry, physics, biology, or medicine?”8

FBM wrote:

Edit: Wait. After I see this god, am I going to start denying medical treatments

     I am incompetent to discuss medical treatments, but the medical treatment is nothing without the self-healing abilities of the body.
     BTW I am not seeing any God, but what I see with the Big Bang 'theory' is more than enough to me.

     Why don't you stop copy-pasting various irrelevant texts and start participating in the discussion here and now. This idea to over-trump somebody by some super-quotes is road to nowhere.
     Do you have the rate of expansion of the Universe? Do you have any number of what the order of the energy of the Universe could be?

Illustrating God-of-the-Gaps
The familiar story of Isaac Newton and Pierre Simon de Laplace is a classic example of the God-of-the-gaps argument. Newton devised a mathematical equation for the force of gravity that he used to explain and predict the motions of planets with outstanding accuracy. With pencil and paper, the orbit of the planets around the sun could be calculated with great precision. But planets also have gravitational interactions with each other, not just with the sun. For example, when the Earth passes Mars in its orbit around the sun, there is a small but significant gravitational interaction between Mars and Earth. Because these tiny interplanetary interactions occur often — several times per year in many cases — Newton suspected that these gravitational perturbations would accumulate and slowly disrupt the magnificent order of the solar system. To counteract these and other disruptive forces, Newton suggested that God must necessarily intervene occasionally to tune up the solar system and restore the order. Thus, God's periodic special actions were needed to account for the ongoing stability of the solar system.

The new measurement has determined that space is expanding at 74.3 plus or minus 2.1 kilometers per second per megaparsec. In other words, about 74.3 kilometers per second per 3-million light-years – that is about 46 miles per second.

So you're saying that it's fine to pray while your kids die of easily treatable medical conditions.

Just because you personally can't understand the Standard Model. Nice.

FBM wrote:

So you're saying that it's fine to pray while your kids die of easily treatable medical conditions.

     This is such a straw-man that I am not going even to discuss it. Do you have the number of the rate of expansion of the Universe? Do you have the assumptions that the Universe has not always existed? ...

FBM wrote:

Just because you personally can't understand the Standard Model. Nice.

     Perhaps you are going to explain it to us - without any quotes, if possible.

     A 'standard model' should have clearly and well defined assumptions: what are the assumptions of the Big Bang 'theory'? ... and how did you come to know that if the theory of the Big Bang is proved to be fake, as it actually is, this automatically recovers the cult to God as we know it from the past?

that is about 46 miles per second.

FBM wrote:

that is about 46 miles per second.

    This is space, it cannot be expanding in miles/sec - it must be cubic miles per second. And how much is the acceleration?

Moving the goalposts

“”If at first you don't succeed, redefine success.
—Unknown
Moving the goalposts is an informal logical fallacy in which previously agreed upon standards for deciding an argument are arbitrarily changed once they have been met. This is usually done by the "losing" side of an argument in a desperate bid to save face. If the goalposts are moved far enough, then the standards can eventually evolve[1] into something that cannot be met no matter what (or anything will meet said standard if the losing side is trying to meet the standard using this tactic). Usually such a tactic is spotted quickly.

What have you got against bringing in outside evidence?

80 Child Deaths Linked to Oregon Church, Parents Say It is a Matter of Faith
By: Tamar Auber April 25, 2014

"it must be cubic miles per second." Why?

Meanwhile: ...

You really, genuinely don't give a rat's ass how many children have to suffer and die over this fairy story, do you?

FBM wrote:

You really, genuinely don't give a rat's ass how many children have to suffer and die over this fairy story, do you?

     I doubt that you are concerned about any children, for most probably you are some careerist from the Institute of Psychotronics & Mind Control and are making some career from the misfortune of the people.