...life is too complex to have arisen on its own... the complexity of life is a compelling argument for a Creator.
I can reasonably infer this because you have demanded that I explain the creation of life, as if any failure to provide such an explanation implies the existence of God.
Okay. So now answer me this:
You believe that God must exist, because life and man are too complex to have arisen on their own.
So tell me... God is (by definition) more than man. He is more powerful and necessarily more complex.
If life is too complex to have arisen on its own, without a Creator, then the same is even more true of God.
Therefore, by your reasoning, God must also have had a Creator.
And that Creator, whoever he is, must also have had an even greater Creator. And so on, ad infinitum.
So your prize argument for the existence of God turns out to be an absurdity.
Let's take your second prize argument:
...how do you explain away Billions of individuals personally witnessing God for many millennium?
How do you explain away the many Billions of individuals personally witnessing to the truth of the glorious Islam for these many centuries? To this day, the witnesses for Islam bear witness with their very lives. They long for death for the truth of the glorious Islam!
Or, how do you explain away the many Billions of individuals personally witnessing to the obvious truth of Hindism? (O Ganesha, god of knowledge, wisdom and wealth!) Do you not know that Hinduism is so old that nobody knows, nobody can know exactly how long people have worshipped in this faith?
Your second prize argument for the existence of God is as invalid as your first.
By the way, you've as much as admitted that you don't even know who the hell Michael Martin is, or at least didn't when this conversation began.
Also note: In nothing I've said have I claimed that God doesn't exist. Frankly, I much prefer to believe in God's existence. I was merely stating that many of those who argue for God's existence are far out of their league. They imagine themselves so wise when they don't understand even the first and most basic things about what their argument.
Rather than approach the argument with any shred of openness and intellectual honesty, they take the simplest and most easily refutable arguments and then honestly claim in their arrogance that others who don't buy their simplistic arguments are "idiots." It's akin to an arrogant fifth-grader standing up and loudly proclaiming how very much smarter he is than 45-year-old Uncle Henry who has a family of his own and runs a manufacturing plant.
You yourself have proven both the arrogance and the lack of substance I speak of, staring with your smart-ass reply to my pointing out that many who argue for God's existence are out of their depth:
"That is true, but we can ramp down to the atheist level for short time periods to explain how absolutely idiotic their positions are..."
If you want to have a serious discussion, go read, digest and honestly answer the points raised by Michael Martin and others. There are at least some good interlocutors on the side of belief in God as well. Not as many as one might wish for, and I can tell that none of them are people you've heard of. But you'll find them if you dig deep enough.
Sorry, that should've been they don't understand even the first and most basic things about the argument.
Just happened to check in, in the middle of the night. I'm on my way back to bed now.
Man?? The point which Behe and others have made is that even simple one-celled life-forms are vastly too complex to have arisen on their own. Evolution is not compatible with the emerging science of cell biology.
You made an assumption that shows nothing other than you are acting like an ass. What relevance is the complexity of life to what I am asking you? You still cannot answer that fundamental question of how was life created (without God) when there was no life.
Let me explain so perhaps you will begin to get a kernel of understanding from where I am coming from. atheists believe that life began out of some concoction they dreamed up called “primordial soup”. Now, scientists (serious ones) understand that this is not in any way a fact, it is based upon faith that this is what happened. A random act or series of acts and interactions of some electrical/chemical combinations produced basic “life”. Again, this is not a fact...it is conjecture and a matter of faith for those who believe in this nonsense. No serious scientist claims that he/she has proof of life’s creation...the initial creation.
So, upon this assumption (matter of faith) people like you develop other theories and then seek out ways to prove it is true. Oftentimes ignoring some information and in reality only have a small, small piece of the pie in terms of knowledge but pretending to have all the answers. You call life complex...and it is, but if you really thought it through I think you would realize that science has not even uncovered more than the tip of the iceberg in terms of knowledge of life. So, pretending to understand it is really idiotic isn’t it? It is like a babies understanding of a rocket ship...it see it, knows it can fly, but that is about it. I don’t think any person of contemplation would think that the baby is an expert in rocket science...
Now, knowledge of God...I have personal knowledge of God...you do to, if you open your mind and your heart to him. I have been “touched” by God’s hand a few times.
No one can properly define God with absolute certainty, but my definition (shared by many) is that God is Good, Love, Compassion, Wisdom, etc. I believe that Good is a force, and consequently have also come to understand that Evil is a force. I had an experience, where I died for a short time period and was in God’s grace. I don’t need any other proof and no...you will not convince me or anyone else who has experienced this wonderfully beautiful event that it was just my brain. That is impossible, when it happens to you you will understand.
Muslims...you may not be aware, but Muslims and Christians, and Jews, all believe in the same god. Indeed, all share the Old Testament. In regards to the other religions...Hindi, Buddhist, etc. We all worship God, we worship in our own way that is influenced by our culture and how God has communicated with us. I have not thought it out totally, these matters take a lifetime to scratch the surface. So, perhaps I am wrong about all religions worshiping the same God, just in their own way.
I like your attempt at “God had a creator” also...I used to have that myself. But, there is no reason for God to have had a creator...if you get into that line very far you realize that a time line is required to continue that theory. God, is not on the same plane as us...time is not a dimension for him. Indeed, he created time. But, using the same thinking you show there-consider creation without God and go back. What created matter? What created time? Don’t burn your brains out on that...but it deserves consideration, especially if you believe that there was creation without God. You will at some point realize that the truly ridiculous position is creation without God. Think about it from a fresh perspective without the assumptions you placed on your thinking previously on the matter.
I have not read Micheal Martin...don’t really need to...if he is atheist he is wrong anyway. I don’t like when people try to make believe that someone can not fully contemplate an issue (especially as big as this) without reading something by one or a group of people. Hell John, you really want to get an understanding on the subject read the bible...really, there is more knowledge and information about God and creation in that than in all the science combined. Indeed, when one thinks about it science...when it happens by luck to be right...is at best a description of a very very very minutely small part of God’s creation.
So, if you are selling Michael Martin books...go away little one. If you are interested in having an intelligent discussion, quit dodging, assuming and put forth some thoughts that you actually believe in not just parrot from someone else.
You think religious argument is simple? I prefer to think that the so called “scientific” argument is flawed, not thought out, and really truthfully idiotic for thinking people. But, hey forget about the fact that most scientists believe in God...
It seems you are wasting the other poster's time. Earlier, you were saying something about the atheist "position". However, it now turns out (as we knew it would) that there is no position, merely the absence of a position on the existence of God. A cabbage is also an atheist in this sense. No need then for anyone to "argue against the athesit position" as you put it, since there is no such thing.