The world is the best address (bible, Satan, Christians, believers)

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

Please define the definition of "non-existing" in your understanding. Say, 1000 years ago when Uranium was not discovered, did it exist? "Absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence". Isn't that possible?

I never once indicated it was not "possible" so your reply is somewhat talking past me. All I said was the action of your god (if it exists) appear entirely indistinguishable from there being no god at all.

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

Universe without a God? The first and simple question that basic human logic tends to ask is, "Who created the Universe then?"

And your bias is entirely clear when you ask it. You put in "who". Automatically that places an assumption on the explanation for our existence. Keep your assumptions and biases to yourself. I have no requirement for them.

My own position assumes much less. We appear to exist in this universe and we do not know how this has come to be. I assume no more than this.

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

Again, you demand "evidence" without even knowing what will constitute as an evidence?

I did not demand "evidence" I asked for "arguments, evidence, data OR reasoning". Do not quote half of what I actually asked for thanks. Taking words OUT of my mouth is as dishonest as shoving words INTO it.

I many times explained to you what constitutes "evidence" for me. So do not lie otherwise. I am happy to repeat it for you however. "Evidence" is a process, not a thing, and it is a simple process as follows:

1) State CLEARLY what your actual claim is.
2) List CLEARLY the things you think support that claim.
3) Explain CLEARLY how the things listed in 2 support the claim made in 1.

It is up to you to tell me what evidence YOU think you have. It is NOT up to me to tell you what evidence you have, should have, or could have.

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

How conveniently you ignored the two facts below

Except I ignored nothing. I was just not fooled by the presence of words like "if" into thinking you were not presenting the same scare mongering narrative that our species has been subjected to for too many centuries. Bring up the notion of a possible hell at all serves no purpose other than to use fear and doubt to cover up a lack of ANY substantiation for your narratives. And while I do not feel remotely scared or threatened by your crass little tactics, cop outs and dodges...... there are people in this world who are.

[bulmabriefs144]

What would constitute evidence? Surely not the sun, the rain, the Earth, the air we breathe.

But but, these are ordinary things. Yes, ordinary things that should not even exist. Common soil is millions and millions of grains of about 8 or nine atomic compounds in less than a square mm. Air is not just O2 either, its a mix. Sunlight is a plasma fusion reaction that is somehow rendered safe for human exposure and for plants. Water has lots of minerals. These are everyday things. That in a world without creation, would not be created.

[Nozzferrahhtoo]

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

What would constitute evidence? Surely not the sun, the rain, the Earth, the air we breathe.

No, I consider them to be part of the QUESTION. Not part of the answer.

We exist in this universe, WITH the sun, rain, earth and air we breath, and the open question is how this came to be.

Saying that some "X" is the answer and the elements of the question are actually evidence of that answer........ is at best circular.... and at worst the rampant canard of confirmation bias run riot.

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

But but, these are ordinary things. Yes, ordinary things that should not even exist.

Now in your ongoing list of outright and unsubstantiated assertions, this is quite near the top for being ludicrous. What evidence or arguments have you that they "should not even exist" exactly? Why should they not? Where did you pull this one from exactly?

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by GoCardinals

God does not come face to face and introduce himself by saying "Hi, I am God. And here you go, BOOM !! I turned this boulder into a goat. Is that enough of a proof of my existence?"

...and why not. Let's have him do something more useful. Let's see him write in the sky that he will end poverty and suffering around the world within 24 hours of the time of this posting.

God has signs, and those who search for God, look for his sings, ponder upon them (just like you did in the OP) and form a faith, and stay firm on it.

Yes. People who believe in Oberon do exactly the same thing.

And those who think they do not need/want God, will not take ANYTHING to ponder upon the possibility of God's existence. No matter what proof you put in front them, they will ALWAYS find an excuse to dismiss it.

Even if God comes face to face to them and make the sun rise from the west at their demand, they will STILL not believe in God. They may say, "OHHH... you know may be we are in a dream and or may be our eyes are deceiving us. This cannot be God".

LOL! That old chestnut!! If an alien life form landed here tomorrow and said that they had created Earth and everything on it, would you believe them?

But I tell you what, IF there is God, and if there is Heaven and hell, then the non-believers will not waste a nano-second to believe in the existence God when they see that fire on the judgement day, and they are worried that this is where they may end up being.

What if there is a god and it is Zeus rather than Yahweh? How are we any worse off than you? In fact, we may actually be better off than you. Zeus may well say....'Well non-believers! You didn't actually worship me because you didn't believe in the existence of gods but you believers; you did believe in the existence of gods... and you worshipped a god other than me. Bend over!'

But I guess that will be too late to believe in God. I hope it doesn't happen to anyone.

Pffft! Pascal's Wager. Even Pascal admitted it was rubbish.

They won't be able to do anything when their time is up, the bell will ring and curtain will fall on their eyes.

See above

Originally Posted by Marakorpa

In so far as using evolution as a reason for existence of life, I cannot see how it could possibly work, as the complexity that would be needed to start life is far too great a "thought" to accept.

Perhaps you should study it more and then you might be able to grasp it. Find out more about it from a reputable scientific site rather than Answers in Genesis or Creation Research Institute.

I do not even have any faith in the 'scientific' periods of time you take of actually happening. They are only the "Talk" of man and I feel sure that there are many different versions on the same theme. But that is my opinion.

So apart from 'scientific' periods of time and the Theory of Evolution, what other finding of science do you think science have got wrong? How about the Theory of Electromagnetism? Is that wrong. How about the Theory of Gravity? Did scientists get that wrong? Quantum Theory? Germ Theory? Thermodynamics? Photosynthesis? Periodic Table of the Elements? Theory of Relativity? Acoustics Theory? Chaos Theory? Number Theory? Cell Theory? Circuit Theory? Which of the above 'theories' do you think science got wrong?

How about the scientists that designed the computer you are now writing on or the internet that we are using to communicate? Were they wrong? The scientists that designed the car you drive every day; the planes that you get into and go thousands of feet into the air? The microwave oven that you heat your meals with...do you distrust those scientists that gave you the above things like you distrust those that gave you the modern dating methods we use today or those scientist who, working on what we observe through the evolution of germs, give you the antibiotics you willingly take to cure your illness? Or do you only distrust those aspects of science that expose the flaws in your god-belief?

I really am interested to know which aspects of science you distrust apart from dating and evolution.

Originally Posted by Marakorpa

The fact that all these things that make earth the perfect place for human habitation are all in sync with each other, all interacting in perfect harmony for the conditions to happen.

Have you forgotten the puddle of water?

And if one should not preform as it is now, the whole system would self destruct, does this not make you have a suspicion that there just maybe a superior intelligence making it work?

No. As you have already been told. That wouldn't necessarily mean NO life...just DIFFERENT life.

Originally Posted by Marakorpa

AS I said with the earth situation, all the system is in sync and you cannot take one away and it will continue to work, that is more than a 1 in a 100 million chance, it is more than by chance as well. Even if by chance was finite it still couldn't happen as during the process of getting it together, and the errors of each try, the system would destroy itself.

How do you know? If we took oxygen away overnight we would all die but lets say we removed a mincule part of the oxygen every day over the next 5 million years? Do you think we would evolve to not need oxygen?

"Absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence". Isn't that possible?

Depends what the parameters are. If I claim that there is an elephant living in your bedroom yet, when you enter your bedroom there is not a single scrap of verifiable evidence that there is an elephant there, would you not conclude that there is no elephant living in your bedroom...or would you think that there was an elephant there... but you were just not seeing the evidence for it?

Universe without a God? The first and simple question that basic human logic tends to ask is, "Who created the Universe then?"

No. The first question is 'Was the universe created'. So then. Are you able to provide evidence that the universe was 'created' by supplying verifiable evidence that there was once a time when the universe didn't exist? Are you able to supply verifiable evidence that the universe hasn't always existed in some form or other?

The next counter question is, "who created God?" The answer is, God is the creator and not the creation, and that what makes him God. If God is an entity that was "created" then it does not qualify to be a God.

So you claim 'Special Pleading'.

If I vaguely remember, once you asked a valid question, which was along the lines of "one has to define God" before defining what will constitute as an evidence of it's existence. So here is the first characteristic of God. Uncreated.

Why can't the universe have been 'uncreated'?

As I stated previously, faith in the existence of God is formed by looking at the "signs of God" and not the evidence.
A faith is not a faith anymore if it's based on evidence.

Faith is what you use when the evidence tells you what you don't want to be true. Faith is the last refuge of those who have had their arguments defeated by logic and reason. Faith is simply the practice of ignoring the supportable in favour of a desired belief.

Again, you demand "evidence" without even knowing what will constitute as an evidence? Do you want God to meet you in person and introduce himself by showing a miracle?

Why not?

[bulmabriefs144]

...and why not. Let's have him do something more useful. Let's see him write in the sky that he will end poverty and suffering around the world within 24 hours of the time of this posting.

Billy Graham lived through the time of the Nazis. His own best friend became an atheist because he saw "bones" from the cruelty of the world around him. It made him deeply question his faith. But he realized as do other people, that if we suddenly took all evil out of the world, this world would be boring. Not only that, you are blaming the wrong person.

Suppose we even voted for someone who offered to bring peace to the world, and was actually willing to keep his promise? You know the first thing people would do? Try to protest him out of office. That's right. If Jesus came back to this Earth as a presidential candidate, human beings would try to vote against him. If he won, due to fed up citizens, people would demand a recount.

This is because it is human nature to rebel. But we don't rebel against oppression. The thing we humans hate the most is peace. It is anticlimactic to our sensibilities, so we invent drama.

God did not come to this world to rule, but to govern. These are different things.

If this is your wish, you have to be part of the solution.

No. The first question is 'Was the universe created'. So then. Are you able to provide evidence that the universe was 'created' by supplying verifiable evidence that there was once a time when the universe didn't exist? Are you able to supply verifiable evidence that the universe hasn't always existed in some form or other?

Yes. Everything that exists is proof of a created universe.

Why can't the universe have been 'uncreated'?

How cause and effect works:

1. An action happens (say, I strike a match against a wall)
2. A reaction results (the match burns, provided it is the good kind)
3. This reaction can in turn be a cause of another effect (the lit match is set against paper)
4. All the way up to final effect (we have a fire, and you are warm)

This is like 1st grade science. Why can't things be uncreated and still exist? Because it is in violation of a basic law of nature. Because in order to be so requires something so alien to the universe, that you have essentially created God yourself (I am not saying God violates cause and effect; I am say anything that you have declared was not created is basically even more improbable to your mindset than an actual God). Good luck with that.

Why not?

Uhhhh... possibly because you wouldn't probably not recognize God or a miracle if you saw it.

God? Looks like another person.

Miracle? Just a coincidence.

I could show you miracles that happen all day, and you won't believe a thing.

[Clintone]

Originally Posted by Marakorpa

The way the world is "in place" is an amazing thing to contemplate:

The core of the earth is molten ironstone and a few other minerals. Why hasn't it cooled down since creation? Well there is friction and movement that keeps the core bubbling. The importance of this is the magnetic field the emanates from the core of the earth into space to hold off radiation, not all radiation or one would not have a suntan. There is no known reason why the earths core would cool down, clever hey?

The earth is on a tilt, surely this is just pure luck that the tilt gives us the four seasons. It is on a tilt that is just perfect for the sun's radiation, which is placed at a spot that gives heat that is not too hot, nor too far away to create constant cold. The earth turns at the exact revolutions to hold a steady climate, any faster and gale force winds would be permanent. Any slower and the surface of the planet would burn beyond human tolerance Clever that hey?

The moon, at one third the size of the earth is just something to create lovey dovey nights for the young...right? Wrong, it is the reason for the tides, which move about the earth's oceans and seas to stir up the waters to stop any from of stagnation, but that's nothing, if the moon did not impress its gravitation on the earth it would spin like a child's top when it is about to stop. The earth would wobble and toss and turn and disintegrate. Clever that Hey?

There is a covering of atmosphere around the earth, it is very thin, but it still protects all earth life from radiation from outer space. Next time you fly around the world in a jet lane, at high altitudes you may be getting as much radiation as you would with five chest Xrays, whilst us stay-at-homes are safe...Clever that Hey?

When the lightening strikes and the thunder frightens the living daylights out of the family dog, remember that the lightening, at its massive voltage, creates nitrogen, nitrogen enters dead matter, animal and vegetation and that recycling process, invented at the beginning of the earth as a livable place for humans, enters the earth and fertilizes the plants, which in turn give off Oxygen as we and other matter and life gives of carbon dioxide consumed by the vegetation in a swap for a life preserving process that we cannot do without. Clever that Hey?

I am always amazed at Jehovah's creation, aren't you?

Whelp, let's see what the astronomers have to say about this "luck.":

Astronomers using NASA data have calculated for the first time that in our galaxy alone, there are at least 8.8 billion stars with Earth-size planets in the habitable temperature zone.
8.8 billion habitable Earth-size planets exist in Milky Way alone - NBC News

and

And that was the working estimate for the next two decades, until this week. Astronomers at the University of Nottingham now say the number of galaxies in the observable Universe is 2 trillion, more than 10 times as many as previously thought.
How Many Galaxies Are There? - The Atlantic


So, what's 8.8 billion multiplied by 2 trillion? It's a lot. That's what that is.

But it is neat though. We also have Jupiter to keep asteroids hitting it rather than us.

[Marakorpa]

Originally Posted by Rafius

...and why not. Let's have him do something more useful. Let's see him write in the sky that he will end poverty and suffering around the world within 24 hours of the time of this posting.

Yes. People who believe in Oberon do exactly the same thing.

LOL! That old chestnut!! If an alien life form landed here tomorrow and said that they had created Earth and everything on it, would you believe them?

What if there is a god and it is Zeus rather than Yahweh? How are we any worse off than you? In fact, we may actually be better off than you. Zeus may well say....'Well non-believers! You didn't actually worship me because you didn't believe in the existence of gods but you believers; you did believe in the existence of gods... and you worshipped a god other than me. Bend over!'

Pffft! Pascal's Wager. Even Pascal admitted it was rubbish.

See above

Perhaps you should study it more and then you might be able to grasp it. Find out more about it from a reputable scientific site rather than Answers in Genesis or Creation Research Institute.

So apart from 'scientific' periods of time and the Theory of Evolution, what other finding of science do you think science have got wrong? How about the Theory of Electromagnetism? Is that wrong. How about the Theory of Gravity? Did scientists get that wrong? Quantum Theory? Germ Theory? Thermodynamics? Photosynthesis? Periodic Table of the Elements? Theory of Relativity? Acoustics Theory? Chaos Theory? Number Theory? Cell Theory? Circuit Theory? Which of the above 'theories' do you think science got wrong?

How about the scientists that designed the computer you are now writing on or the internet that we are using to communicate? Were they wrong? The scientists that designed the car you drive every day; the planes that you get into and go thousands of feet into the air? The microwave oven that you heat your meals with...do you distrust those scientists that gave you the above things like you distrust those that gave you the modern dating methods we use today or those scientist who, working on what we observe through the evolution of germs, give you the antibiotics you willingly take to cure your illness? Or do you only distrust those aspects of science that expose the flaws in your god-belief?

I really am interested to know which aspects of science you distrust apart from dating and evolution.

Have you forgotten the puddle of water?

No. As you have already been told. That wouldn't necessarily mean NO life...just DIFFERENT life.

How do you know? If we took oxygen away overnight we would all die but lets say we removed a mincule part of the oxygen every day over the next 5 million years? Do you think we would evolve to not need oxygen?

Depends what the parameters are. If I claim that there is an elephant living in your bedroom yet, when you enter your bedroom there is not a single scrap of verifiable evidence that there is an elephant there, would you not conclude that there is no elephant living in your bedroom...or would you think that there was an elephant there... but you were just not seeing the evidence for it?

No. The first question is 'Was the universe created'. So then. Are you able to provide evidence that the universe was 'created' by supplying verifiable evidence that there was once a time when the universe didn't exist? Are you able to supply verifiable evidence that the universe hasn't always existed in some form or other?

So you claim 'Special Pleading'.

Why can't the universe have been 'uncreated'?

Faith is what you use when the evidence tells you what you don't want to be true. Faith is the last refuge of those who have had their arguments defeated by logic and reason. Faith is simply the practice of ignoring the supportable in favour of a desired belief.

Why not?

I will answer the questions that make sense to me, Don't get upset, they might make sense to others.

Perhaps you should study it more and then you might be able to grasp it. Find out more about it from a reputable scientific site rather than Answers in Genesis or Creation Research Institute.

What version of evolution do your suggest, it can be quite confusing trying to find out the flavor of the month theory from amongst the scientists of the different disciplines of science that do not disagree with each other, but also do not agree lest some other theory comes up closer to their way of thinking.

Don't think I haven't looked at the theories, I do to reinforce my own belief in creation and I could put questions to you that you would not answer accurately. Try: The functions of DNA and RNA are very complex and important parts of living organisms including mankind. One can not function without the other, and without each other neither would exist, and yet they are different in make up and procedure Do you understand, and can you explain why and how these too functions came about, given your Just by Chance doctrine?

For a scientist, or someone that suggests that another should read up on your doctrine, which gives an indication that you have read up and know it all, my little simple question should be a breeze.

So apart from 'scientific' periods of time and the Theory of Evolution, what other finding of science do you think science have got wrong.

"Science" has been a great boon to mankind, and in the same token is has been a menace, it has been a part of the killing by nuclear blasts. The Nobel Peace Prize promoter, Alfred Nobel the inventor of dynamite, which had its industrial uses but led the way to larger and more destructive explosives that were used against mankind in war.

The list you give is extensive and covers many things that I do not know about, in detail, But I guess you know it all.

How many world rulers were there and are there? Are they all good honest men with a true heart and compassion for the folk they rule? Are all scientists ethical men and women who would never think of working for money alone, and falsifying facts to appease those that pay them?

Have you forgotten the puddle of water?

No. As you have already been told. That wouldn't necessarily mean NO life...just DIFFERENT life.

So lets presume that the perfect, fully coordinated system for the ideal conditions of man failed on creation, we would then be waiting for another Just by Chance activity, and applying logic, if the first one was perfect the second one would be other than perfect and a whole new set of theories would abound as to why it happened. It didn't happen, so your comment is pure supposition, or, heaven forbid, an assumption that you don't make except when you say you do like above.


evolution of germs, give you the antibiotics you willingly take to cure your illness? Or do you only distrust those aspects of science that expose the flaws in your god-belief?

One of the worst scientific waste's of time that ever happened, and it was funded by shareholders of large chemical companies for profit only, is the mass production of antibiotics. It was not properly thought out, and now we have super-germs that are antibiotic resistant that if not checked will plague the world en masse. In fact it is already happening...A wonderful advertisement of Science.

There is no scientific data that could possibly destroy, or even put suspicion on my God belief. What would destroy your Evolution doctrine belief?

I think I have given you enough Truth to think about.

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144

Billy Graham lived through the time of the Nazis. His own best friend became an atheist because he saw "bones" from the cruelty of the world around him. It made him deeply question his faith. But he realized as do other people, that if we suddenly took all evil out of the world, this world would be boring.

Glad to see that the existence of 'evil' in the world entertains you.

Not only that, you are blaming the wrong person.

Suppose we even voted for someone who offered to bring peace to the world, and was actually willing to keep his promise? You know the first thing people would do? Try to protest him out of office. That's right. If Jesus came back to this Earth as a presidential candidate, human beings would try to vote against him. If he won, due to fed up citizens, people would demand a recount.

Why do you believers ALWAYS do this? We are not talking about humans. We are asking why an omnimax deity doesn't do it. Humans have restrictions. Omnimax deities do not. As for it being 'boring' without evil in the world. How are you going to manage in this 'heaven' that you think you are going to? Is there going to be evil there too...so that you don't get bored.

This is because it is human nature to rebel.

That would be the nature that your god allegedly gave us when he 'created' us then?

Yes. Everything that exists is proof of a created universe.

No it is not...and I didn't ask for your opinion, I asked if you were able to provide evidence that the universe was 'created' by supplying verifiable evidence that there was once a time when the universe didn't exist? Are you able to supply verifiable evidence that the universe hasn't always existed in some form or other. Do you have such evidence? Saying that it was simply because that is what you want to have happened is not verifiable evidence.

This is like 1st grade science. Why can't things be uncreated and still exist? Because it is in violation of a basic law of nature.

Perhaps a little examination of 1st grade science would help you.

I could show you miracles that happen all day, and you won't believe a thing.

Really! So let's have some, along with verifiable evidence to support them. I'm really not interested in the ...'I prayed to god to find my keys and glory be, there they were right before me' type 'miracles' or tales of some dude being cured of some deadly disease in Nigeria (unless you have the medical evidence to support it). Give me something like an amputee desperately praying to have his leg back and waking up in the morning with two legs (supported by evidence from peer reviewed medical journals).

[Rafius]

Originally Posted by Marakorpa

I will answer the questions that make sense to me, Don't get upset, they might make sense to others.

Why don't you answer them all?

What version of evolution do your suggest, it can be quite confusing trying to find out the flavor of the month theory from amongst the scientists of the different disciplines of science that do not disagree with each other, but also do not agree lest some other theory comes up closer to their way of thinking.

Let's try something simple. Explain how micro-evolution (which I'm assuming that you you buy) can't lead to macro-evolution.

Don't think I haven't looked at the theories, I do to reinforce my own belief in creation and I could put questions to you that you would not answer accurately. Try: The functions of DNA and RNA are very complex and important parts of living organisms including mankind. One can not function without the other, and without each other neither would exist, and yet they are different in make up and procedure

So your way of answering questions is to ask questions in order to deflect? Before we go any further with this, let's see if you actually know what you are talking about.

1. Would you please explain to us the general idea of DNA genome mapping and how it is used to track the genotypic background of a modern species?
2. Explain three types of tRNA or DNA transcription errors in mitosis.

"Science" has been a great boon to mankind, and in the same token is has been a menace, it has been a part of the killing by nuclear blasts. The Nobel Peace Prize promoter, Alfred Nobel the inventor of dynamite, which had its industrial uses but led the way to larger and more destructive explosives that were used against mankind in war.

Nothing to do with what I asked you. I didn't ask you about things that were developed for one thing but are now used for something else. I would like you to tell me (apart from evolution and time-dating) what aspect of science scientists have got wrong.

The list you give is extensive and covers many things that I do not know about, in detail, But I guess you know it all.

No...far from it. I simply know more about it than you. So then, from the list I gave you, can you please tell me which you think are wrong?

How many world rulers were there and are there? Are they all good honest men with a true heart and compassion for the folk they rule? Are all scientists ethical men and women who would never think of working for money alone, and falsifying facts to appease those that pay them?

...and religious people don't do that??? As for science 'falsifying' things, yes, it has occurred but the good thing is that, those that do falsify the evidence are very quickly exposed...by other scientists. Compare that to religion where things that are demonstrably false are propagated by those that come behind.

Have you forgotten the puddle of water?

No. As you have already been told. That wouldn't necessarily mean NO life...just DIFFERENT life.

That was nothing to do with the puddle of water. The puddle of water was to to with the size/shape of the water being formed by the conditions of the puddle. The 'different life' comes from your claim that if even one thing was different there would be no life on this planet.

So lets presume that the perfect, fully coordinated system for the ideal conditions of man failed on creation, we would then be waiting for another Just by Chance activity,...

Yes we would. I don't like the word 'chance' but for the layman it will suffice.

evolution of germs, give you the antibiotics you willingly take to cure your illness? Or do you only distrust those aspects of science that expose the flaws in your god-belief?

One of the worst scientific waste's of time that ever happened,...

Tell that to the millions of people that have had their lives saved by them...but tell me. When you (or a member of your immediate family) are seriously ill, do you go to hospital and take advantage of the wonderful things that science has given us to cure us...or do you stay home and pray?

In fact it is already happening...A wonderful advertisement of Science.

So you have nothing to do with medical science when you are ill huh?

There is no scientific data that could possibly destroy, or even put suspicion on my God belief.

...and you accuse me of not accepting evidence for miracles??

What would destroy your Evolution doctrine belief?

Something that proves the theory to be false. Quite simple really. Since the time of Darwin, people have tried to falsify the theory. So far all have failed.

I think I have given you enough Truth to think about.

Are yes...there it is. Truth with a capital 'T' for added effect. No. You haven't given me truth. You have given me what you think is true.

[bulmabriefs144]

Originally Posted by Rafius

Glad to see that the existence of 'evil' in the world entertains you.

Why do you believers ALWAYS do this? We are not talking about humans. We are asking why an omnimax deity doesn't do it. Humans have restrictions. Omnimax deities do not. As for it being 'boring' without evil in the world. How are you going to manage in this 'heaven' that you think you are going to? Is there going to be evil there too...so that you don't get bored.

That would be the nature that your god allegedly gave us when he 'created' us then?

No it is not...and I didn't ask for your opinion, I asked if you were able to provide evidence that the universe was 'created' by supplying verifiable evidence that there was once a time when the universe didn't exist? Are you able to supply verifiable evidence that the universe hasn't always existed in some form or other. Do you have such evidence? Saying that it was simply because that is what you want to have happened is not verifiable evidence.

Perhaps a little examination of 1st grade science would help you.

Really! So let's have some, along with verifiable evidence to support them. I'm really not interested in the ...'I prayed to god to find my keys and glory be, there they were right before me' type 'miracles' or tales of some dude being cured of some deadly disease in Nigeria (unless you have the medical evidence to support it). Give me something like an amputee desperately praying to have his leg back and waking up in the morning with two legs (supported by evidence from peer reviewed medical journals).

By boring I mean... human nature requires conflict. If there is none, we elect it.

Don't believe me? Okay, I'll tell you a fairy tale.

Once upon a time the was a warrior. And a princess. And a dragon. The dragon kidnapped the princess. The knight prayed to God, "please save the princess for me..." And so the dragon was slain, and they knight and princess lived happily ever after.

Uhhhh...?

Versus this one.

Once upon a time, same deal. The prince prayed "God please do this for me." And God said "this is your quest, I shall not do it for you. But if you desire it, I will protect you from the fires of the dragon." It was a fierce battle, but ultimately, the knight triumphed. And in his princess's eyes he saw the face of God. They kissed, or something.

Fundamentally even if you take issue with the trippy religious overtones, a story with no conflict just seems off somehow.

Why do believers always do this? Because they are hinting at a glaring contradiction.

Believe in God, believe/don't in human responsibility. Don't believe God, believe instead in human responsibility. No contradiction.

Don't believe in God, blame God when things go wrong. Whopper contradiction.

If you want to be an atheist, you must let go of God blame, or you are not believing honestly.