Christians, what is your VERY BEST arguments for the existence of God?

[roundsquare]

Tavarish i appreciate you taking the time to read and respond to my points. ok lets get underway. KCA:again you have misconstrued the kca. it does NOT say everything has a cause and the first cause is GOD. This is y your objections miss the target. VALIDITY OF KCA: deduction is widely used and generally trustworthy logic, an example is. 1. animals are made of cells. 2. a dog is an animal. 3. thus a dog is made of cells. the kca follows from this logic and is a logically valid conclusion. yes iam aware that in some cases deduction is spurious but to challenge the kca, you clearly must show that it is spurious. kca doesnt need to define GOD because it doesnt doesnt make reference to GOD. IT is used as an argument for GOD, the big bang too is used as an argument for GOD. BUT one would never say that the it must first define GOD. THE KCA simply reasons that the universe must have a cause in keeping with the causal principle, because it had a beginning, that is there was a first moment of its existence. there was a moment when no space, no vacuum, no time no matter no energy existed hence the universe, which is simply the sum of these phenomena had a starting point.

---

ID: TAVARISH you say that ID fails because replication and enviromental stressors account for the emergence of specificall complex structures pretty conclusively. my question where is the concrete evidence IN NATURE not in a computer model that accounts for specified complexity? when i asked for evidence you linked me to a paper studying a genetic algorithm, i expected some real evidence from nature. i am compelled to conclude that the absence of examples of upward evolution from nature drives evolutionists to resort computer simulations. so as long as simulations are accepted as support for evolution as a skeptic i can rest assured that no concrete evidence for the monkey-man type of evolution has been found. the exaggerated faith shown to computer simulations by evolutionists is noteworthy since they frequently cant even predict next weeks weather accurately. also simulations need to be testdd in the real world to verify their validity so far simulations that claim to provide insight into evolution r massively oversimplified caricatures of the real world.

---

GENETIC SIMILARITY: TAVARISH, genetic similarity between organisms can be used to support both ID/creation science, so its a tie. also note if there were not strong genetic similarities between us and other organisms we could only eat other humans. for the reason that if every other organism was fundamentally different genetically hence biochemically, there would be no way for us to digest them because their amino acids, sugars etc would be different from the ones in our bodies. ok. here is a link showing how genes r challenging the evolutionary tree of life.

---

Dang it i cant posts any links until i have 10 posts.