Evidence That the Absence of a God is Not Possible

[Nakosis]

I totally disagree with you. We have sight, smell, taste, and all kinds of other wonderful features that wouldn't just randomly appear.

That's where an understanding of evolution helps. To see how eyes, nose, taste buds were developed. They didn't just show up one day.

Here's we are now so it all looks like magic, or divine intervention. Understand how these things evolved over time make what we have now less magical.

For example hands are pretty weird. I just hand an operation on my hands so I started looking into how they operate. So the muscles which operate your hands are located in your forearm. The muscles turn to tendons which operate your fingers through a series of sleeves. Understanding that it make more sense how fins developed into our modern day hands.

Turning Fins Into Hands

 

[BrightShadow]

@Nakosis & @F1fan
You guys are generating similar responses - so I am addressing both of you at the same time. However I agree - the conversation is fruitless. There is no light at the end of your tunnel!

Infinite regress is not necessary and I'll explain why.

X⇒Y⇒X

IOW, X is the cause of Y and Y is the cause of X. It is a simply loop of causation with only two elements. There is no need here then for an infinite number of elements.

What is X? How it came about? Oh! I see Y caused it!
So, we have egg because we have chicken and we have chicken because we have egg.
Aha! That's the best answer ever. No need to look any further.

Circular paradox in its finest form! Makes sense! Buzzer - NOT!
IOW - According to you - a creator isn't needed to solve the equation - you rather give credit to "random chance"?

I don't blame you for wanting to avoid it because it pretty much obliterates any creator God existing as a first cause.

How so?
I said - infinite regress is logically impossible. And you said if the option of "infinite regress" is considered - it pretty much would obliterate any creator God existing as a first cause.
So, now - my question is why? Please explain.

Let me ask in a different way...
You have a book, someone gave it to you. Someone else gave it to that someone and so on and on.
You can trace it back a million times and you may see that someone got it from someone else. If you trace it back any further - at some point you will find a last person - who did not get it from anyone. That final person - either manufactured the book or somehow created it and made it come into existence and then the passing of hands began - otherwise you could never have the book.
You have the book! The book is in your hands and therefore the book is in existence - hence there is a maker! A first cause! Right?

Obviously you will say no - because you rather give credit to random "chance". You like to think the book came into the first person's hand by chance!



@F1fan and @Nakosis

You are rejecting God because you only believe in verifiable entities.
Verifiable according to your own standards - I must add!
But beauty is in the eye of the beholder! Everyone see things differently and not everyone require the same evidence to believe something. Some use their heads and come to correct conclusion that there is a creator.

In my opinion - to believe the universe and everything in it - came into existence by itself and came into existence by "chance" is so remote that it could be compared to the following example....

Find a tiniest fish in the world that can survive in a ocean. Find the tiniest piece of a pebble. Find the biggest ocean (there is only a couple) so that shouldn't be hard!
Now - go to that ocean and release the fish. After that walk for 3 days to another part of the ocean and throw that pebble into the ocean. See if you hit that tiny fish.
If you don't hit the fish - then stop saying the universe and everything in it - came into existence by "chance" because it is less likely that happened than - you hitting that fish with the pebble in my analogy.

You are not looking at the nature properly to understand it is not a random event. Just look into the anatomy of Human body!

Time is simply a measure of change. The change of X to Y and Y to X.

That simple? Really?
In what mode?
In our natural world - time only has one direction and it is forward. How is your Y reverting to X?
Also if time is simply a measure of change then are you measuring in vacuum? Can you ignore all the other factors?

I can only know what I am capable of knowing. If something kills me beyond what I was capable of knowing I am not responsible.

Information is out there. You have the capability to seek, learn and thus know more. You are doing that by being on these forums but something is stopping you from finding & indorsing the "truth" and becoming a believer.

Now is the only truth we have. There is nothing to seek.

With that attitude - humans would still be living in the caves!

This is a terrible attempt at an argument. There is no tool here that leads anyone to an understanding or valid conclusion.

Yes! You don't have the correct knowledge or tool here (on earth) to find the kind of proof you are asking about. You need to settle for less until the judgment day!

There's a reason believers try to make their case using absurd stories because they have no facts nor real explanations.

So, you have a problem when someone points out your limitations by showing you - that you are nothing more than a bacteria inside of a mouse's body?
The example is shown to make you realize (like a virus inside a mouse) your resource is limited. You cannot analyze a realm you don't have access to.
You may think you have all the tools - but you don't! 120 or so years ago all a dentist had was a hammer and a chisel.

But no one knows why we are here, or even if there is any reason at all. There are many who believe they know, but it isn't knowledge, ir is speculation and belief for the sake of emotional comfort. What's interesting is that emotionally secure folks don't need to believe that there's inherent meaning in human existence.

So, you are NOT one of those emotionally secure folks. Right?
And that is why you are here on these forums - trying to see if anyone can tell you why you are here (on earth), right?
There is a burning desire in you to know the truth because you know your position makes no sense. Right?
Otherwise - why don't you go fishing - and try to catch that fish I mentioned up there?
Are you here to make the believers jump on your boat and head to "nowhere"?

But no matter what anyone tries to parse together into a better picture there really is no evidence that any sort of supernatural gods existing.

Waiting for the empirical evidence could have been ok if you weren't required to believe with what you already have - at the moment.

Don't you realize that "connecting the dots" means using logic and reason?

You are not connecting the dots. You are hopping over the dots and thinking each dot came into existence by itself. IMO

 

[anotherneil]

Brother. You are absolutely evangelical.

Sounds like a strawman, except that you're not specifying what you're qualifying with this adjective, so this is either unfalsifiable or nonsense.

That's why you are here.

I'm here, but I don't matter. I'm here to debate issues brought up by thread topics, not to commandeer threads to turn them into something about me.

I was trying to explain myself for the sake of clarification of the material I was providing that does stick to the thread topic.

Anyway, my answer still prevails as a response to your argument.

Your answer is wrong, or at least has issue; you said that the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is a physical being, but it was actually created a fictional character to make a point.

If there turns out to be an actual monster that can fly and is made from spaghetti out there, somewhere, no one is under any obligation to associate this fictional character with it as being one in the same entity, unless you can first show me that such an actual monster exists, then show why anyone would be under such an obligation.

Bertrand Russel is no God my friend.

Strawman; I never claimed he was one.

So you should use your reason instead of worshiping him.

Non sequitur.

Thus, rather than ignoring what I said, you being a nice person, why not looking at what I said and actually responding to it?

I'm not a nice person; I'm trying to be mean - very mean.

You're the one ignoring what I wrote by speaking about me as though I have a church and that I worship things; it's also not my "God", BTW. As someone who's for real not religious, I don't have a church, I don't worship anything, I don't have a "God", and I don't do dogma of any kind.

Thank you.

You're very welcome!

 

[ppp]

Hogwash - DNA is a code type sequence with intelligence behind it.

You can hogwash all you want. Or balderdash. Or malarkey. Or codswallop. The fact remains is that any guy in a bar can make bald assertions about anything.

You have nothing to demonstrate that you know, or are even capable of knowing, that walnuts repel kobolds, that Baldur is allergic to mistletoe, or that DNA is a code type sequence with intelligence behind it.

Show your work

 

[Nakosis]

@Nakosis & @F1fan
You guys are generating similar responses - so I am addressing both of you at the same time. However I agree - the conversation is fruitless. There is no light at the end of your tunnel!



What is X? How it came about? Oh! I see Y caused it!
So, we have egg because we have chicken and we have chicken because we have egg.
Aha! That's the best answer ever. No need to look any further.

Circular paradox in its finest form! Makes sense! Buzzer - NOT!

Yes, circular but not a paradox.

IOW - According to you - a creator isn't needed to solve the equation - you rather give credit to "random chance"?

No, not random chance but a natural process which doesn't need an intelligent designer to exist.

@F1fan and @Nakosis

You are rejecting God because you only believe in verifiable entities.

I'm not rejecting God, only looking for a reason to include God.

You are not connecting the dots. You are hopping over the dots and thinking each dot came into existence by itself. IMO

Ok, so how did God come into existence.

 

[McBell]

If you can't tell there is intelligence behind DNA I don't think I am going to be able to help you.

I knew when I replied to your bold empty claim you were going to leave it as nothing more than a bold empty claim.
Nor am I surprised at your ego masterbation.

 

[Sargonski]

Depends on who's standing next to me and where we are, I guess.

The triggering of the thought stopping reflex would definitely depend on who is standing next to you I guess

 

[IndigoChild5559]

In the same room as the sound of one hand clapping Where might that be ?

In the silent room where sounds echo.

 

[paarsurrey]

I've always thought that one could define a God into or out of existence.

G-d defined correctly, one could say, right, please?
First
2:164
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time:
وَاِلٰـہُکُمۡ اِلٰہٌ وَّاحِدٌ ۚ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ الرَّحۡمٰنُ الرَّحِیۡمُ ﴿۱۶۴﴾٪
2:164
And your God is One God; there is no God but He, the Gracious, the Merciful. Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Second
3:19

شَہِدَ اللّٰہُ اَنَّہٗ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ ۙ وَالۡمَلٰٓئِکَۃُ وَاُولُوا الۡعِلۡمِ قَآئِمًۢا بِالۡقِسۡطِ ؕ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ الۡعَزِیۡزُ الۡحَکِیۡمُ ؕ﴿۱۹

"Allah bears witness that there is no God but He — and also do the angels and those possessed of knowledge — Maintainer of justice; there is no God but He, the Mighty, the Wise."

Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

In Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Urdu.

www.alislam.org

Above, G-d is well defined, right, please?

Regards

 

[F1fan]

How so?
I said - infinite regress is logically impossible.

Yes, it's what you said. What you didn't say is how it's logically impossible. Your say so means nothing. You need evidence and a coherent explanation that follows the rules of logic.

And you said if the option of "infinite regress" is considered - it pretty much would obliterate any creator God existing as a first cause.
So, now - my question is why? Please explain.

Because you are claiming a God exists, and that it is the creator. Yet no evidence that you are correct. You believe a creator God is necessary to account for anything existing, but you don't apply this to how the creator was created.

Let me ask in a different way...
You have a book, someone gave it to you. Someone else gave it to that someone and so on and on.
You can trace it back a million times and you may see that someone got it from someone else. If you trace it back any further - at some point you will find a last person - who did not get it from anyone. That final person - either manufactured the book or somehow created it and made it come into existence and then the passing of hands began - otherwise you could never have the book.
You have the book! The book is in your hands and therefore the book is in existence - hence there is a maker! A first cause! Right?

Obviously you will say no - because you rather give credit to random "chance". You like to think the book came into the first person's hand by chance!

What a terrible analogy. Books and people actually exist. There are no gods known to exist, so you are making an assertion you haven't demonstrated is true. Demonstrate a God really exists, and then that it can create anything.

@F1fan and @Nakosis

You are rejecting God because you only believe in verifiable entities.

Which is what rational minds do. Gods are in the same imaginary category as Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy. On what basis do you consider a God a real entity, and show us all relevant facts. Remember, atheists are seekers of truth, not seekers of comforting beliefs.

Verifiable according to your own standards - I must add!

False. I use the normal standard used in law, in science, and logic.

But beauty is in the eye of the beholder! Everyone see things differently and not everyone require the same evidence to believe something. Some use their heads and come to correct conclusion that there is a creator.

Some evidence has to be interpreted, as we see in courtrooms. And jurors have varying degrees of biases and attitudes, whih is why juries are screened and vetted. The aim is to get the least biased jury who can be trusted to make the most objective decision. That standard doesn't apply in debates like this. You have a heavy religious bias and you want there to be a God despite the lack of evidence for any of the thousands in human lore. Critical thinkers look for evidence and do not want to form valid conclusions.

In my opinion - to believe the universe and everything in it - came into existence by itself and came into existence by "chance" is so remote that it could be compared to the following example....

No educated person believes this either. You might have been falsely informed about what non-believers think. First the Big Bang did not create anything. There was an existing mass called a singularity, and somehow it begn to expand into hydrogen and helium, with the four forces and the physical laws beginning to function within 2 seconds. All that has happened since has been how matter behaves according to natural laws. We don't know what happened before the Big Bang event.

Find a tiniest fish in the world that can survive in a ocean. Find the tiniest piece of a pebble. Find the biggest ocean (there is only a couple) so that shouldn't be hard!
Now - go to that ocean and release the fish. After that walk for 3 days to another part of the ocean and throw that pebble into the ocean. See if you hit that tiny fish.
If you don't hit the fish - then stop saying the universe and everything in it - came into existence by "chance" because it is less likely that happened than - you hitting that fish with the pebble in my analogy.

Irrelevant to anything. Why haven't you offered any evidence that any god exists? Thus far, zero evidence for any God.

Your fish exists, and the pebble exists, and that means there's more chance of hitting the fish with a pebble than you offering evidence for your version of God existing in reality.

You are not looking at the nature properly to understand it is not a random event. Just look into the anatomy of Human body!

So since you are pushing all this so hard, explain to me why God created cancers, some of which kill children. Surely you don't think your God makes mistakes, or is a sociopathic murderer, yes? So give us the reason why God created cancer, and why it's good.

Yes! You don't have the correct knowledge or tool here (on earth) to find the kind of proof you are asking about. You need to settle for less until the judgment day!

And look at you unable to state any actual knowledge, nor explain what the correct tools are. You're making claims, not stating facts.

So, you have a problem when someone points out your limitations by showing you - that you are nothing more than a bacteria inside of a mouse's body?

I guess you didn;t read my analysis on why it was irrelevant and meant nothing as an analogy. I also noted you make up bad analogies instead of proving facts, and that's because you have none.

The example is shown to make you realize (like a virus inside a mouse) your resource is limited. You cannot analyze a realm you don't have access to.
You may think you have all the tools - but you don't! 120 or so years ago all a dentist had was a hammer and a chisel.

Why can't you cite any facts that a God actually exists?

So, you are NOT one of those emotionally secure folks. Right?

Wrong. I am one of the rare folks that does not need to believe in religious lore to soothe anxiety and offset fears of the unknown.

And that is why you are here on these forums - trying to see if anyone can tell you why you are here (on earth), right?

Wrong. I'm here for the entertainment value.

There is a burning desire in you to know the truth because you know your position makes no sense. Right?

Wrong yet again. I have learned that rational inquiry is a desire to learn what is true about how things are. As I've noted critical thinkers seek truth, not justifications for beliefs and dogma.

Interesting what you bold above as it suggests a bit of projection on your part.

Otherwise - why don't you go fishing - and try to catch that fish I mentioned up there?
Are you here to make the believers jump on your boat and head to "nowhere"?

You sound like you are upset. Could that be because you are aware that you can't defend your claims with any actual evidence?

Waiting for the empirical evidence could have been ok if you weren't required to believe with what you already have - at the moment.

Evidence is what critical thinkers require. If you have none, then we reject your claims by logical default.

You are not connecting the dots. You are hopping over the dots and thinking each dot came into existence by itself. IMO

You don't have any dots to connect. Your dots are imaginary.

 

[Nakosis]

G-d defined correctly, one could say, right, please?
First
2:164
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time:
وَاِلٰـہُکُمۡ اِلٰہٌ وَّاحِدٌ ۚ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ الرَّحۡمٰنُ الرَّحِیۡمُ ﴿۱۶۴﴾٪
2:164
And your God is One God; there is no God but He, the Gracious, the Merciful. Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search
Second
3:19

شَہِدَ اللّٰہُ اَنَّہٗ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ ۙ وَالۡمَلٰٓئِکَۃُ وَاُولُوا الۡعِلۡمِ قَآئِمًۢا بِالۡقِسۡطِ ؕ لَاۤ اِلٰہَ اِلَّا ہُوَ الۡعَزِیۡزُ الۡحَکِیۡمُ ؕ﴿۱۹

"Allah bears witness that there is no God but He — and also do the angels and those possessed of knowledge — Maintainer of justice; there is no God but He, the Mighty, the Wise."

Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

In Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Urdu.

www.alislam.org

Above, G-d is well defined, right, please?

Regards

Sorry, I never saw myself or any human for that matter, worthy of defining God.

 

[1213]

1. It started with an electric spark.
2. Molecules of life met on clay.
3. Life began at deep-sea vents.
4. Life had a chilly start.
5. The answer lies in understanding DNA formation.
6. Life had simple beginnings.

I said two options:
1. created
2. or it was formed spontaneously on its own

What you give are in the option 2, because all of them are ways without a creator, unless you mean for example started with electric spark that was ignited by the creator. The two options are really, with creator or without creator. That is why it is not a false dichotomy. But, it may be that there is then many different ideas of how it may happen without the creator.

 

[1213]

As for your first option, there is no reason to consider that a valid option in the first place.

Sounds biased. Please explain why do you think so?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Sounds biased. Please explain why do you think so?

You got that backwards. You made the claim, upto you to give reasons to justify offering it up as a valid option.

Me saying that there is no reason to consider it, is precisely because people claiming otherwise aren't able to meet that burden of proof.
If you can't give a justifiable reason for your claim, I can only conclude there is no justifiable reason.

 

[firedragon]

Your answer is wrong, or at least has issue; you said that the "Flying Spaghetti Monster" is a physical being, but it was actually created a fictional character to make a point.

Everyone knows it's fictional. But again, spaghetti is physical and you could expect physical beings to have scientific or physical. empirical evidence which is a category error when speaking of a metaphysical being.

If you cannot understand that simple category error, your whole church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is scientifically and philosophically "wrong".

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Everyone knows it's fictional. But again, spaghetti is physical and you could expect physical beings to have scientific or physical. empirical evidence which is a category error when speaking of a metaphysical being.

If you cannot understand that simple category error, your whole church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is scientifically and philosophically "wrong".

What is the practical difference between a "metaphysical being" and a being that doesn't exist?

 

[Sargonski]

In the silent room where sounds echo.

Is that where you found out what the name of your God was ?

Do you happen to hold a contrary position to how I utilize the term God, perhaps more in line with what you have chosen to accept in an effort to dismantle and or dismiss religion and make light of those who utilize religious texts as a way to conduct themselves in life?

Yes - as the way you utilize the term God is logical fallacy .. not because I wish to dismiss religion but because I wish people to know the truth about God --thus steering people away from the false God .. and this false belief having a direct impact on how religious texts are interpreted .. efecting the way folks conduct themselves on the basis of these texts -and in doing so dismantle religious belief.

Seems we have a case of not only misdirection but projection as well .. some log out of own eye practice might be in order .. speaking of the way folks conduct themselves .. and this misdirection and deflection as thought stopping-blocking response .signs of the decievers influence .. not from the logical God -- nor the all powerfull God .. nor from the semi powerful God .. the one you have yet to meet and love as Jesus loved this God. How is that for dismantling of religion . dismissing and dismantling the God of Jesus - and any religion related to these beings.

I think a bit of priceless congratulations are in order Brother B -- a few steps we have taken towards extraction of the poison lizard ..

 

[Balthazzar]

Is that where you found out what the name of your God was ?


Yes - as the way you utilize the term God is logical fallacy .. not because I wish to dismiss religion but because I wish people to know the truth about God --thus steering people away from the false God .. and this false belief having a direct impact on how religious texts are interpreted .. efecting the way folks conduct themselves on the basis of these texts -and in doing so dismantle religious belief.

Seems we have a case of not only misdirection but projection as well .. some log out of own eye practice might be in order .. speaking of the way folks conduct themselves .. and this misdirection and deflection as thought stopping-blocking response .signs of the decievers influence .. not from the logical God -- nor the all powerfull God .. nor from the semi powerful God .. the one you have yet to meet and love as Jesus loved this God. How is that for dismantling of religion . dismissing and dismantling the God of Jesus - and any religion related to these beings.

I think a bit of priceless congratulations are in order Brother B -- a few steps we have taken towards extraction of the poison lizard ..

The premise is one shared by Dutch philosopher named Barouch Spinoza, although I didn't become aware of this until a few months ago. It's a basic concept, direct, and true, but whether anyone chooses to acknowledge this as a truth is up to each individual.

"Spinoza believed that everything that exists is God. However, he did not hold the converse view that God is no more than the sum of what exists. God had infinite qualities, of which we can perceive only two, thought and extension. Hence God must also exist in dimensions far beyond those of the visible world." Excerpt from: World Pantheism

We as living beings have a personal relationship with God as children born from God's own substance. This is true for all things existing. What you honor as God is a choice and true, whether subjectively, by proclamation, or by objective reason. The logical fallacy would belong to you no matter the "power" you might possess as an individual, or entity.

 

[BrightShadow]

Again @Nakosis & @F1fan
You guys are on the same boat! Nakosis is on the better end of the boat though! just my observation!

No, not random chance but a natural process which doesn't need an intelligent designer to exist.

What sparked your natural process in motion? What happened before the Big Bang?
What scientists have done - is sliced "events" into pieces and when looking at one piece - it looks like a creator is not needed for that particular equation. Just like if you start looking at the chicken and egg issue - from the "chicken" - you don't need to worry about how the egg came about because the chicken is laying the egg!
Yeah! So let's start from the big bang!

Lots of unanswered question! What you have is - minor realities expanding into or coming out of wonderland!
Literally you have a big black hole!

Just because there are evidences of natural process and natural selection - it doesn't negate the reality that processes of this magnitude can not initiate on its own. Something cannot come out of nothing! Even energy cannot be created out of nothing!
Ok. I get it - you are a 100% believer of the "natural process" (as you call it) - but the question is - why an intelligent designer is not needed to complete the equation? Your answer would be because the proof is missing... Right?
Do you realize that - in order for complex life to form on earth by evaluation process - billions of things have to be just in the right order to make it happen? Before billions of things have to be in the right order - our earth has to be created - before that out solar system, our universe and so on. Whatever way the universe came into existence - it requires a beginning. A few steps forward our galaxy (the Milky Way) has to come about then - our Solar system, Sun and when finally gravity came into play that pulled swirling gas and dust to form our planet earth - it had to be precise distance from the Sun where the temperature is just about right to have a habitable environment. Then in a very complex setting - the first cell developed and to do that - so many things have to be right and then complex micro organisms and finally through the evolution process Fish to Great Ape and finally Humans came into existence. But why some Apes (chimpanzee, gorilla etc.) decided they don't need to evolve and so they remained Apes? We can also ask why humans didn't feel the need to grow wings? That remains a mystery! After all - all species should want the best abilities when they are evolving - right? Why not? But they didn't! I mean if you can grow legs and arms then why not wings? With wings you could conquer the world - find food easily by flying around. Oh yeah - a super power nose could be very useful too; you could smell the danger before it arrived! So why didn't humans want to develop nose like dogs? We developed nose but just not the best and more efficient ones. Why?
Electric eel decided they need an ability to discharge electricity - while fireflies decided they need to generate light with very little heat. All this out of availability and necessity? If we can grow a nose - if we can grow an ear - we could surely grow more efficient ones.
Oh yeah - whales decided they need to develop telepathy from the get-go but humans decided - it is not necessary - we could just invent cell phones!
So, that's the bottom-line - we adopted into whatever available. But a Sheep decided to be a Sheep and not a Lion! Isn't it - the survival of the fittest? Why there was no rush for a Goat to be a bit more fitter so that it could tackle the tiger?
Hyenas and wolves figured out that they can attack in packs more efficiently but buffalos decided they don't need to help each other out when one is attacked by a pack of hyenas or lions! Why the nature didn't make the buffalos figure that out? They are too many - so it doesn't matter if a few of them die to feed the hyenas?
What about motherly instincts? Why mother animal protects but once their kids grow up - the mother stop protecting? Where that instinct come from? Who taught the birds to build their nests in different but identical ways? All the same birds got the same memo? And all the bees around the world got the same memo!
I think it is crazy to believe - all of it is due to natural process and no one programed any of it!

I'm not rejecting God, only looking for a reason to include God.

Good! Maybe you will find the reason!

Ok, so how did God come into existence.

There is that question again! I already mentioned - we will find out when God decides to tell us. You are trying to compute complex mathematical calculations with a antique cash register. All that old cash register can do - is to calculate sales (add and subtract).
Hit that old cash register with a hammer and see if it can solve some Calculus, Geometry or Algebra problems for you. Your brain and the tools available to you - has limitations!

Because you are claiming a God exists, and that it is the creator.

Just as I predicted - you couldn't explain what you claimed. You said "infinite regress" pretty much obliterate any creator existing as the first cause!
You did not provide any explanation for making that claim!
Show how it obliterating any creator existing??

What a terrible analogy. Books and people actually exist. There are no gods known to exist

I guess you don't know how analogies work! If analogies were between completely equal things then there won't be a need to compare!
Analogies are given to make you think from another prospective!
I guess analogies don't work on you because you can only think in one way!

Remember, atheists are seekers of truth

Wrong! Maybe agnostics are seeker of truth. Atheists have a solid and closed minded position when it comes to God/creator.

From the net:
Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.

It is obvious - you belong to the narrowest group. IMO

False. I use the normal standard used in law, in science, and logic.

Developing arrogance I see!
Billions of people will disagree with your logics and thus your standards. So, your position is not the norm!

You have a heavy religious bias and you want there to be a God despite the lack of evidence....

Evidence is everywhere. You are unable to see it. You are blind! Even if more evidence pours on you like heavy rain and you get drenched in it - you will still say - "no evidence" - "no evidence"!

So since you are pushing all this so hard, explain to me why God created cancers, some of which kill children. Surely you don't think your God makes mistakes, or is a sociopathic murderer, yes? So give us the reason why God created cancer, and why it's good.

POE?
The only reason humans have a problem with babies dying with cancer is because people think from their own prospective. They think this world is everything!
If you think from God's prospective then no damage is done to any babies or any undeserving individuals.
God can erase memory and restore any baby or anyone not deserving of any pain - back into their original form and put them in heaven (an ultimate destination). If a baby dies of cancer and finds himself in heaven without the memory of any suffering - would the baby complain?

Why are you complaining?

When a car manufacturer do crash tests on a car - do we call it injustice? The manufacturer can restore that car back into a brand new one - God can do trillions of time better than that!
So suffering erased - baby is restored and baby is playing in paradise!

What is the problem?

God has reasons behind everything (it is obviously not to teach the baby a lesson)- but at the end of the day - no innocents getting everlasting harm! So, no damage at all! The damage is only in your head!

I also noted you make up bad analogies instead of proving facts, and that's because you have none.

I don't need to provide any empirical evidence. I tried to show you your limitations. You didn't get it. You think you are ready to learn everything about God; you haven't even learnt much about earth yet! Yes! We are exploring the space - we can't even reach the bottom of all of our oceans yet!
You need to believe with what proof you have for your own salvation.

Why can't you cite any facts that a God actually exists?

The same request over and over?
I told you to lower your standards. Chances are you are not getting any empirical evidence while on earth. That is the name of the game. I told you - your CEO (ultimate boss) is watching you to see if your immediate department boss (who is evil) can manipulate you and make you work against the company guidelines. You are tested to see if you do anything wrong that you are not supposed to do. So far you are under the spell of your evil (immediate) boss. Chances are - your immediate evil boss will take you down with him on judgment day!

 

[Nakosis]

Just because there are evidences of natural process and natural selection - it doesn't negate the reality that processes of this magnitude can not initiate on its own. Something cannot come out of nothing! Even energy cannot be created out of nothing!

Yes, I can't imagine something coming from nothing. Until someone can show this is can happen. I don't see a reason to accept this as an answer.

Ok. I get it - you are a 100% believer of the "natural process" (as you call it) - but the question is - why an intelligent designer is not needed to complete the equation? Your answer would be because the proof is missing... Right?

I'm just saying here that "random" doesn't really exist. It is just a word use when we don't have knowledge of the underlying processes.

Do you realize that - in order for complex life to form on earth by evaluation process - billions of things have to be just in the right order to make it happen? Before billions of things have to be in the right order - our earth has to be created - before that out solar system, our universe and so on. Whatever way the universe came into existence - it requires a beginning. A few steps forward our galaxy (the Milky Way) has to come about then - our Solar system, Sun and when finally gravity came into play that pulled swirling gas and dust to form our planet earth - it had to be precise distance from the Sun where the temperature is just about right to have a habitable environment. Then in a very complex setting - the first cell developed and to do that - so many things have to be right and then complex micro organisms and finally through the evolution process Fish to Great Ape and finally Humans came into existence. But why some Apes (chimpanzee, gorilla etc.) decided they don't need to evolve and so they remained Apes? We can also ask why humans didn't feel the need to grow wings? That remains a mystery! After all - all species should want the best abilities when they are evolving - right? Why not? But they didn't! I mean if you can grow legs and arms then why not wings? With wings you could conquer the world - find food easily by flying around. Oh yeah - a super power nose could be very useful too; you could smell the danger before it arrived! So why didn't humans want to develop nose like dogs? We developed nose but just not the best and more efficient ones. Why?
Electric eel decided they need an ability to discharge electricity - while fireflies decided they need to generate light with very little heat. All this out of availability and necessity? If we can grow a nose - if we can grow an ear - we could surely grow more efficient ones.
Oh yeah - whales decided they need to develop telepathy from the get-go but humans decided - it is not necessary - we could just invent cell phones!
So, that's the bottom-line - we adopted into whatever available. But a Sheep decided to be a Sheep and not a Lion! Isn't it - the survival of the fittest? Why there was no rush for a Goat to be a bit more fitter so that it could tackle the tiger?
Hyenas and wolves figured out that they can attack in packs more efficiently but buffalos decided they don't need to help each other out when one is attacked by a pack of hyenas or lions! Why the nature didn't make the buffalos figure that out? They are too many - so it doesn't matter if a few of them die to feed the hyenas?
What about motherly instincts? Why mother animal protects but once their kids grow up - the mother stop protecting? Where that instinct come from? Who taught the birds to build their nests in different but identical ways? All the same birds got the same memo? And all the bees around the world got the same memo!
I think it is crazy to believe - all of it is due to natural process and no one programed any of it!

What I think is that we see where we are, and see where we came from and can't imagine a possibility of it turning out any other way. IOW, everything had to happen exactly right for us to be here. Change one little thing and what would be here wouldn't be us. Since we are here as we are, against all odds, it feels natural to feel there has got to be someone, something to thank for that.

There is that question again! I already mentioned - we will find out when God decides to tell us.

Well we agree here, you don't know, I don't know. Maybe best to leave it at that.