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

[GrandizerII]

Please explain HOW god did all the things you assign him. What was the process and where is your evidence in support of it?

Because without any of that stuff it is just unsupported speculation.


Well that is a non-answer of previously unheard of magnitude.


But they explain nothing and beg more questions than they are supposed to answer. It is easier to say the universe was created by some at present unknown natural event than to posit an intelligent agency that exists out side of every known aspect of the universe.

There are some philosophical reasoning, that there must be a necessary prime mover.

You mean ancient Aristotelian reasoning? Why then do you reject the necessity of material causation? Be consistent at least.

These things also follow from what the Jewish/Christian God has said about himself (a long long time ago).   Are you not familiar with Christianity?  You seem to act like these are some ad hoc explanation?

Oh, your god speaks then? When was "a long long time ago"?

As to being a non-answer.  I don't know how else to explain it.  If there was no beginning, then it doesn't make sense to ask about a beginning which never occurred.

So, if it is possible for the universe not to have had a beginning, then why the massive leap of faith? Why posit a supernatural being for which there is an utter lack of evidence?

As to your claim, if the only difference that you are positing is that one is an unknown natural event, and the other is an intelligence, then that doesn't get around your objections either.  Also, why do you say that it is easier?

Because an added entity implies an extra set of assumptions. And in this case, it appears to be a set of unwarranted assumptions.