You have done nothing here but add unnecessary theistic language, e.g. "God" to non theistic concepts, e.g. laws of nature. Again, a law of nature is an observed regularity within the natural world. A natural law is not a person, does not think, does not plan, does not "act" consciously and is not sentient, as the definition of God as given in classical theism postulates.
It appears that you want me to argue "classical theism".......
In that case you probabaly should have signed up to debate do you want to go to heaven *no diss to the brother*
All thinkers, in all lands and in all times, have assumed the necessity for postulating the
existence of this Substantial Reality. All philosophies worthy of the name have been based
upon this thought. Men have given to this Substantial Reality many names–some have
called it by the term of Deity (under many titles); others have called it “The Infinite and
Eternal Energy”; others have tried to call it “Matter”–but all have acknowledged its existence.
It is self-evident–it needs no argument.
come on, then the opportunity to show his providence through the lions would be non existent. and all the countless times you or a loved one didn't get kidnapped, did u chalk it up to God then?