Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[Undeceived]

Do you know how we get to the point of discounting or accepting the idea of flying unicorns? Evidence. The same is true of universal origins, and as it stands the idea you propose is impossible to verify, and therefore impossible to hold rationally.

You mean to say that everything you believe has been verified by the scientific method? Has your wife's love has been demonstrated through instruments or have you used logic to interpret the evidence? That's all we're doing in this argument for God. We have realized certain truths, such as the probability that all actions need causes (inductively speaking), and we let them lead us to conclusions.

Because the answer you're proposing has as little explanatory power as infinity does;
The only reason I'm here arguing is because you guys are making far too many unfounded assumptions in the process of confirming a belief you already have, which is inherently the wrong way to go about this.

You're right, this argument is not enough to believe in God. But it is enough to compel us to seek Him, if we are willing. My belief is not confirmed by science, but by experience. When I developed a relationship with Jesus, my life changed completely. I've seen friends' lives changed too. I've seen bigots become lovers. I've seen drug addicts become leaders. I've seen criminals turned into citizens. I've seen miserable rich people become joyous missionaries.

Galatians 5:19-22
"The acts of the flesh are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, forbearance, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control."

You can tell a tree by its fruit. We know the Spirit of God exists by what He produces within us.

A creator is one thing, but at the moment you've got no basis at all for assuming a competent one too.

This changeless being is the first efficient cause, meaning nothing around it/him is changing yet. There is no matter. This is step one, before anything exists at all, in our universe or preceding universes! Therefore anything the being creates would be fully grasped by its/his mind. There is nothing it/he cannot comprehend, because it/he is the first thing that's not nothing. While we have no control over our building blocks, it/he invents the blocks themselves. And again, there must be a first thing that's not nothing unless we wish to do the irrational--break causal chains or go to infinity. So you can dispute causation or infinity, but it doesn't seem that the "incompetent first efficient cause" objection holds any water.

The creator could imagine something perfect, but that doesn't entail he has the creative skills to enact it. That's yet another claim, and one that requires evidence for it.

Yet the claim is not vital to my argument. If I can logically demonstrate the existence of a creator, he is obviously creative enough to make us... because here we are. In my effort to prove that a steam engine must have had a designer, I need not track the engineer down and ask for his credentials.

What if your creator's motive wasn't just to create, but to build himself a food source? What if it's an emotional vampire, and feeds off of suffering? What if it's a sadist on a cosmic level and loves watching universes die?

Why do you give our creator motives so unlike and beneath our own? If it/he created us, it/he would be similar, yet greater. It/he must also know love, peace and patience. If it/he sought only suffering, the world would be a much more terrible place. But since the creator knows both love and torture, which do you think he would choose? Which is more logical--to care for and nurture your creation or to erase all the hard work you put into it?