Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[BettyG]

Esquilax already tore your post down, but I'll just add a few things here and there.

I need to define some things about the nature of God.

And why should a god require you, lowly human, to define these things?
Why should a god require that I accept your view/interpretation of what other humans wrote about that god?
What does god need with a starship?!!?

The whole point I'm getting at is that there had to be some being that did not need to be created. This something we know from logic since the universe did not and cannot create itself.

And this is the part of Krauss's book that you failed to understand.
There is a very real chance that all the constituents of the Universe have always been there... under some other guise, true, but it was always there... at some point, for whatever reason, we got the big bang. Krauss's major point on this is that, adding up all the energy and anti-energy you get a nice fat ZERO. Conservation of energy? check!
A God-like interference would have added some energy into this mix and the whole would be far from zero.
So.... on the whole, the Universe is nothing.
Try to wrap your head around that... it's not easy, even I have some difficulty with it...

There had to be an intelligent being to create it because we observe a complex universe.

Aren't you working backwards?
We see a complex universe... well, not that complex, but a bit more complex than "sleep, eat, fuck & die".
So our limited comprehension leaps to some higher intelligence behind that "complexity"... I wouldn't make such a leap. There may be other explanations. Why don't we try to find them, instead of getting stuck in one that has no evidence to support it?

God is the nth degree of perfection, so since to be a being is a greater perfection than not being a being, God is a being.

Superman is the nth degree of perfection... n=10?... so since to be a being is a greater perfection than not being a being, superman is a being.
Way to go, supes!
Now, the same for Wolverine, Spiderman, The Spawn, Freddy Kruger, darth vader, yoda, etc...

Nothing comes from nothing.

Krauss is still making your head ache, huh?
The Nothing which is empty space is not really nothing. It's full of virtual particles and fields.

God is not a thing, though Jesus did take on flesh about 0 AD give or take a few.

This view of Jesus was made up some time later. Here's what a scholar of the subject says:

Since He is uncreated, He is not limited by time and space. Instead, He created time and space.

No, space-time seems to have always been there.

By definition, God is the uncaused cause of everything. God, by definition, is eternal, omniscient, and omnipotent.

Yes... a pretty definition.
But where is this being? How did you get to know this about it?
Let me guess: someone told you, someone wrote about it in a book.

Well, I will only accept such information coming directly from the origin. I dislike the human chain of information transfer regarding this kind of entities. Too many inventions get put in the story along the way...

The Higgs particle and other particles had to be created, so they exist in time and space because there was a time when they did not exist. So you cannot compare the characteristics of God to particles.

How do you know there was a time when time and space did not exist?

My source is St. Thomas Aquinas. Go to his Summa Theologica, Part I, Question 2. The existence of God, Article 3 at http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1002.htm.

To summarize the Second way:
The Second Way: Argument from Efficient Causes

1 We perceive a series of efficient causes of things in the world.

2 Nothing exists prior to itself.

3 Therefore nothing is the efficient cause of itself.

4 If a previous efficient cause does not exist, neither does the thing that results.

5 Therefore if the first thing in a series does not exist, nothing in the series exists.

6 The series of efficient causes cannot extend ad infinitum into the past, for then there would be no things existing now.

7 Therefore it is necessary to admit a first efficient cause, to which everyone gives the name of God.

St. Thomas Aquinas is difficult to read, so I was trying to explain his arguments.
When I say "nothing comes from nothing" I am defining nothing is what rocks dream of: nothing, not particles or energy. Absolutely nothing. Zilch, nil, nada, zero. Only a spirit can pre-exist matter.

By the way, you have not demonstrated that it is impossible for God to exist.
Your arguments sound like "it is impossible for God to exist because God does not exist." That is not logical. You are still comparing apples to oranges, because God is not composed of any matter. It is important to define the nature of God so that we are both discussing the same thing.

Tell me about your idea of the God that doesn't exist. Maybe I don't believe in that either.