Quote Originally Posted by Chickfangen View Post
Convincing.. How many meters is one smallness? Maybe you should invent other units like bigness. Write me a PM so i know the conversions. But that's irrelevant. And you usually see small things with microscopes not telescopes, just so you know.
Stars don't look small to you? We are discussing factors from the normal viewing eye. This doesn't come from me, but already accepted scientific findings.

If you say "god" created time and space within itself, a multiverse can cause time(s) and space(s) within itself. The problem is that you have double standards there. Again no need for a god here.
You have a doublestandard, because you change your mind from a universe with space time to one without. You keep invoking these new rules you have no evidence for. A universe has time and space. Your fantasy universe is a mindless one, but a mind is needed to create a mind. The lesser can't create the greater.

Cells of bacteria and we are made out of atoms, just like everything else that breathes (as far as we know). The cells themselves are nothing special. We know what are in those cells. Proteins, water and other non living stuff. Everything living is made out of non living matter.
We know we are not just physical beings but also soulical and spiritual. We know that matter alone can't produce self-consciousness and God-consciousness. They are just bouncing atoms.

And you are again wrong, The smallest protein consists out of 20 amino acids. You can combine those molecules in many different ways. According to its environment, protein cells are just the most efficient way of staying alive. Can you imagine how much energy that would cost for human equipment to create cells? But it is possible. Don't you think so?
200 amino acids is the minimum average possible for a protein, and 1000 proteins for the very simplest life possible. Since nobody has ever been able to create a cell from the elements, the evidence suggests you are wrong.

Again those self replicating molecules have formed more complex and complex. This proves that in the right environment can result in bigger and bigger molecules from where it all started.
Yet none can combine to produce replicating life without God's intervention and without a mind.

You think the infinite regress problem applies to the multiple universe. Wrong. A multiple universe is the description of the existence of everything. It does not change so it does not have an infinite regress problem. All the universes are already there, if you could take a look at them from the multiverse.
Everything in a universe is subject to the law of cause and effect, so you would have happened already having had an eternity to do so, and you should never have existed, because a past eternity would still be going on, never to reach this point.

Because from this perspective it is being static, it is more logical than a god, because you say your god can make decisions and what not. Before you can provide a scientific proof for god you need to explain free will and how god operates. Else no scientist will take you serious. You will also have to proof that we are in its image and it cares about us.
The scientific evidence for God was already given by showing nature can't always have existed, so nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space, being uncreated. You do not need to know how free will works or anything else about God to know He is uncreated. That sole fact remains. You don't even have to worry about if we are made in His image. We can figure that out later. First acknowledge the uncreated Creator.

About the bible its like saying ufos exist because so many people have witnessed them and you can not find a naturalistic explanation for them. The bible is not to be taken authentic. Its written by humans and they make faults and there is no proof that they were communicating with a real god or something like that. Do you believe in the big dragons the chinese witnessed? You can not find a naturalistic explanation for this.
While people witness many things they can be explained away. And they are not up close and personal as Jesus was with His Apostles He spent 3 years with after which they testified to seeing Jesus alive from dead in various group settings, personally interacting with Him, even touching His side. They never changed their minds and were martyred for this testimony.

The Bible is taken as authentic. The burden remains on you to show otherwise.

"Every document apparently ancient coming from the proper repository or custody and bearing on its face no evident marks of forgery, the law presumes to be genuine and devolves on the opposing party the burden of proving it to be otherwise."

"This ancient document, the Scripture, has come from the proper repository, that is, it is has been in the hands of the persons of the Church for 2000 years almost and it bears on its face no evident marks of forgery, and therefore the law presumes it to be genuine, and those who would presume otherwise upon them devolves the responsibility of proving it to be false. We don't have to prove it to be true. They have to prove it to be false. That's what the law says."

(Simon Greenleaf, The Testimony of the Evangelists: The Gospels Examined for the Rules of Evidence)

The word of God has no faults. That's why you can't show any. You know this is God's word because you can't find a naturalistic explanation for the original of the disciples' eyewitness testimony in various group settings.

I find no group attestation of a big dragon documented like we have the for the testimony of the Apostles in multiple group settings. Silly boy.