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

[theVOID]

[fr0d0]

The singularity is also 'timeless' as described in relativity as it gave birth to both time and space. There is no difference between the claim that God is outside of the universe and that the singularity is outside of time - both are infinite by definition and do not require a cause.

So the two are the same. That's what I thought.

Carbon-14 atom produced Nitrogen 14 emitting ionizing particles are created by the Carbon 14 atom are they not? Can you show me a source for that if I'm wrong? And does this fact not then equally disprove the theory of a big bang? / Presumably these particles don't fall outside of the physical universe we understand to have emanated from a first cause?

The Decay it's self is uncaused (not part of a causal chain)

How does that even remotely disprove the big bang? Your argument makes no sense.

That it's part of the physical universe makes it consistent with both the singularity and first cause. If it doesn't then your first statement (above) is incorrect.

Equally to fine tuning we could apply the opposite standpoint: the rarity of life proving divine providence. I don't assume confirmation from 50/ 50 scenarios & wouldn't expect science to either.

The rarity of life proves nothing more than life is rare, whether the origins of life are naturalistic or supernatural is another issue entirely, however the idea that God put the first life forms of life is unfalsifiable and also has no evidence in favor for it and therefore cannot be proof for the existence of God.

& the same applies conversely. You're using a 50/ 50 argument.

[theVOID]

[Purple Rabbit]

What these discussions time after time show is that christianity claims definite answers with unsound reasoning and competes for it with science. If NOMA applies then why should christianity bother with the origin of the physical universe at all? Right, cause NOMA isn't accepted by christianity either. Christianity claims that the border between the supernatural and the natural world is somehow magically tresspassed. Accordingly, and most conveniently for christians, it is trespassed right at the borders of scientific understanding right now: in our brains and as the cause of the big bang.

Well, on the face of it, it should be stated clearly that science does not claim any definite (or even a near definite) answers on the beginning of the Universe. This at the moment is still a highly speculative field of research. But what science already shows, is that there are more possible models that fit the big bang and in each of them there is no part for a god. Yet these still clumsy models have more predictive and explanative power than the religious claim has ever had.

One model is that time itself originated from the big bang. Another model is that we are living in a Multiverse and that the big bang was triggered by collision of parallel universes (branes). The parallel universe model is the first model on the block that gives some clue about the distribution of matter in the early universe. Religion has no part in these discussions whatsoever. Still christians, theologians and followers, are putting forward the same totally unsubstantiated claims. These religious claims have no predictive and explanative power whatsoever since they say nothing on facts we can check (like why the cosmic microwave background (CMB) is at 3K or why there can be lumps of matter in what looks like a perfect symmetrical event, the expansion of the universe, the amount of hydrogen in the early universe, and so on). But predictive and explanative power are exactly the hallmark of reliable models. Religion only offers dogma and reinterpreted dogma instead.

Also observe how the world of christianity has outrageously grown, from the simple up in the sky and below our feet of the bible, to this immensely expanding observable universe in which humanity has a very minor role. Christianity has been trying to keep up with this by restating old claims (genesis is an accurate account of creation) in new ones (genesis is metaphor, but god is first cause for the universe). The bible addresses only humans on planet earth, but since there are roughly some 10 to the 22th planets in the visible universe it is unlikely that humans will be unique.

Where is the predictive and explanative power of christianity, one might ask. The baffling answer is that there is none whatsoever even after centuries of hard theological labour, literal and metaphorical interpretation and re-interpretation. The only conclusion can be that religion has no substance at all in explaning anything about this world we live in.

Science, not religious dogma, showed us that the earth is not flat.
Science, not religious claims, showed us that the earth is not in the center of the world and that with the heliocentric model, the orbits of the planets could be predicted very accurately.
Science, not religious magic, has shown that our sun is nothing but a star in a vast ocean of stars.
Science, not holy scripture, has shown that the 'bang' of the big bang can still be heard as 3K cosmical background radiation.
Science, not religious prayer, has shown that time and space are intertwined and that there is more to causation and detemination than a simple 'god did it'.
Science, not religious fortune cookies, has shown that the big bang took place 13.7 billions years ago.
Science, not religious healing sessions, has brought us deep insights in the working of the human body, medical treatment and some understanding of the human brain and mind.

Please christianity, leave these things to science, since the embarassment is taking on humongous proportions. Hide your gods, (arch) angels, prophecies, and all supernatural claims deep in the sand before it becomes impossible to avoid the eternal laughter of the multiverse.

[theVOID]

And the best part is this:

How many of the false claims did the religious authorities disprove themselves? None, they weren't interested in the truth, they were only interested in being right.

[fr0d0]

So from a perspective of science you are dismissing Christianity Rabbit? Reason enough to attract the eternal laughter of the universe in itself. What we're talking about here are indeed explanations from different perspectives... how the theological proposition may be found wanting compared to current scientific knowledge. So far the goatherders are doing perfectly well. Be a good chap and crawl back up your rectum until summoned.

[Purple Rabbit]

So from a perspective of science you are dismissing Christianity Rabbit? Reason enough to attract the eternal laughter of the universe in itself. What we're talking about here are indeed explanations from different perspectives... how the theological proposition may be found wanting compared to current scientific knowledge. So far the goatherders are doing perfectly well. Be a good chap and crawl back up your rectum until summoned.

I won't crawl in places where religion hides, thank you.

You still owe me that list of great beneficial achievements of century long theological fermentation on goatherders texts. Theology eplains nothing at all. But I'm sure you can tell me how the non-contingent actuality with theological certainty roams your arse.

Your anal preoccupation shows it got your deep attention. I have no part in the dismissal of any claims of christianity on phyiscal fact however. Christianity has dismissed itself explicitly since Galileo. Consider it sort of a suppository, my friend.

[tackattack]

[Ashes1995]

well the whole "designs must have a designer" thing comes up alot, but like many excuses ther are logical explinations that can push that idea away

[tackattack]

well the whole "designs must have a designer" thing comes up alot, but like many excuses ther are logical explinations that can push that idea away

please list some for my edification. Thank you.