Disproving Odin - An Experiment in arguing with a theist with Theist logic

[SteveII]

Goodness no one is saying that the symphony is made of the same material as the object that might create them, just like no one is saying that a symphony is brain matter re-arranged.  If I create a Mandelbrot on my computer and print it out or look at it on the screen would you claim I was inferring that the computer had re-arranged it's matter ?

but a symphony just like the Mandelbrot is entirely created in, stored and distributed by the material world, if not, when does it leave those confines ?   Music is simply a re-arrangement of notes, just because it's the first time we have heard it in that arrangement does not mean we have not heard its constituent parts before, in fact it's probably vital for our enjoyment of it.

Our universe and everything in it is material (so far as we know) to say it's a feature really is redundant.

I'll use your post to summarize several of them.

Yet, the new thing, whether it be an idea, a novel, a symphony or a Mandelbrot is created. It begins to exists. They are not the same thing as the material that is holding the information (Therefore we have examples of things beginning to exits that are not themselves material. So, a material cause is not needed, only an efficient cause is needed. 

Yes we know they are not the same material as the thing that created it we have already established that.. twice, again no one is claiming that what we see is a part of the computer or brain become unstuck.

Until it appears as a pattern on a printer, screen or sound or written down, it is electrical pulses it never breaks free of our material world the same is true for the brain as in the computer, and just like in a brain or a computer if those  pulses are shut off before being transferred the idea cannot persist, it is a part of those pulses.  They at no point become immaterial.

This is getting silly. An idea is always immaterial. What you mean is that at no time does it not reply on the material. Even if I granted that, so what? It is still an abstract object which by definition is not material. 

Abstract and concrete are classifications that denote whether a term describes an object with a physical referent or one with no physical referents. They are most commonly used in philosophy and semantics. Abstract objects are sometimes called abstracta (sing. abstractum) and concrete objects are sometimes called concreta (sing. concretum). An abstract object is an object which does not exist at any particular time or place, but rather exists as a type of thing, i.e., an idea, or abstraction.[1] The term abstract object is said to have been coined by Willard Van Orman Quine.[2] The study of abstract objects is called abstract object theory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstract_and_concrete