You're not the only theist to do this, and I'm always curious if they are looking for attention in this way from people they don't otherwise have contact with in life.
Good point. I've also wondered why the theists want to engage with unbelievers in these threads. The obvious answer would be to convert unbelievers, but they don't really seem to be trying to do that, and don't seem to be concerned that they have the opposite effect. So what then is the appeal for them? They don't seem to be interested in what the critical thinkers know or how they know it. But there is a sense that the faithful are drawn to them for something if not to learn or teach? I also like to construct and refine arguments, identify and name fallacies, and to practice writing skills, but I don't see any of those as draws for the believers.
That's dodging the question. We are talking about the universe, the sum total of all we know. You can't explain things outside of time and space because we can't comprehend such existence.
Asking why there is a god is not dodging the question of why nature exists if one is giving that god as their answer. The question identifies the special pleading fallacy, which excludes gods from such analysis. Why? The answers are legion. One poster simply tells me that is "false equivalence" to do so with no supporting argument. Two of you have objected to the question being asked at all as if it weren't relevant to the discussion of origins.
This is a natural event - the earth forming when the sun emerges. Happens all the time, literally.... every day I suppose. This is something far weirder - something hitting the earth to form our seasons and give us a double planet system to stablize the earth's orbit.
What's weird about any of that? Theia impacted the earth, tilted its axis, and ejected matter into orbit that coalesced into a single, large moon. But I agree that an awful lot of things had to be the case for us to be having this discussion.
The word "debate" has always implied to me trying to win an argument. It's not about winning to have a discussion where you disagree.
In academia, debate (dialectic, rebuttal) is how differences in opinion are resolved. It is a cooperative effort, not a fight as you see it. Argument is one of those words that has a neutral and another meaning. Argument does not mean fight or contention in critical analysis, just as critical doesn't mean picking at somebody or something in this context.
if atheists don't like the way that God communicated it is tough luck for them.
I consider it exceptionally good fortune to have learned how to know that such claims are empty and to be ignored. I wish I could share that with you, since your beliefs seem to trouble rather than comfort you, but your defenses are impenetrable. My only ammunition is reason applied to evidence. You claim that that was your path to belief, but then show what you consider evidence of a god and how you reason. You didn't get to your present position by that path, which is why you can't leave it by that path, either.
I did, which is why I say that I count it a gift that I never lost that ability all of the time I agreed to suspend disbelief as a Christian to test out its claims. If I had, there would be no way out of that mental cocoon. I've told you what my evidence was. My evidence for God was the euphoric feeling my first pastor could generate in a church service, which I was told was the Holy Spirit. That seemed plausible. But then I was discharged from the military, went home, and found that the experience was never repeated again in about a half dozen new congregations, and became clear that I had left this "Holy Spirit" behind when I left my charismatic preacher. Evidence. Reason: that was not the Holy Spirit, which would have followed me. That was a mental state conjured up by a talented speaker. That was also evidence, and reason led me to understand that when others claim to be experiencing a god that they are experiencing a mental state and misunderstanding it.
Reason saved me from a religious life, which had no value to me if there was no actual god involved. It saved me from uncounted hours of Bible reading, praying, and attending churches, as well as untold numbers of dollars that would have gone to promoting religion. Those hours and dollars were spent exploring the world of useful books, music, and travel, such was my "tough luck" as you call it.
I don't really think God cares about the whiny babies who think that are so important that they deserve a personal message from God
I believe that as well.
