Okay, Let's Cut To The Chase!

[POI]

Dear Christians of all flavor(s),

I trust it is no surprise there exists a populous here, which lay claim to 'atheism', 'deism', or maybe other... In a nutshell, for me, this ultimately means I do not believe any such claimed Christian God exists - trying though as I might.... Which-is-to-mean, I was raised in a Christian house hold. However, after much study, I cannot get myself to belief such a claimed agent actually exists. Chalk it up, ultimately, to the topic of 'divine hiddenness' I guess...?

It is also evident there exists devout 'Christians' in this arena, of all flavors, who may feel they are 'fighting the good fight'; by defending their belief(s)/faith/rationale in the assertion of the existence to the "Christian God".

That being said, I am laying down the gauntlet, so-to-speak... Some here, as well as outside of here, are as sure as anything, that not only does God exist, but the Christian God! Well, I politely disagree. Meaning, I don't believe the "Christian based" assertion/claim.

I can't imagine this request will be anything new. Nor, can I imagine that I will encounter any new sort of enlightenment. But, being this is a rather large and important topic; I will continue to search, optimistically, that there exists some sort of 'concrete evidence(s)' to demonstrate that not only a God exists ---> but also the Christian God.

For Debate:

Please demonstrate the mere existence of the Christian God?

[AquinasForGod]

I think different people come to believe or return to belief for different reasons. It is usually a set of many things that add up. Sometimes it is one big event like crashing your motorcycle, and the doctors are surprised you survived. While being out, Mary visits you and tells you amazing things, then guides you to the priesthood, like Father Stu.

It might be the person as a God experience and that brings them to God in general, then upon trying to find who is God, for many different reasons they come to Christianity.

They might come back to Christianity because they were raised that way. So when they find God again, they just return to their core faith.

In the case of Lee Stroble he says he found Jesus by trying to disprove the resurrection.

Have you ever considered the argument from the best explanation for why there is anything at all? There are two possible answers, something eternal or spontaneous existence, which is something came to exist for no reason.

An infinite regress would not be a third option because the whole infinite chain either came to be or is always.

In case you are anyone is interested in that argument - https://www.freelymeditate.com/single-p ... ing-at-all

Ed Feser was an unbeliever for many years as he was teaching Philosophy. He is a Ph.D philosopher. He was asked to teach Aristotle and I think Aquinas or some others. In doing so, he challenged himself to take it seriously for his students. To present their ideas in the best possible light, but that required him to look deeper into their ideas. In doing so he was slowly convinced of Aristotle's metaphysics and his argument for God and then of Aquinas. This took time. He wasn't trying to find faith. He just wanted to present the philosophy as best as he could. He is not a Thomistic Catholic.

Some came to the faith by reading Ed Feser's book, "Five Proofs for the Existence of God."

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

[POI]

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

I have just created a new topic ""Bringing Atheists to God". Please enlighten all of us.

[AquinasForGod]

[Replying to POI in post #412]

I shared it in the post above your own.

[POI]

[Replying to POI in post #412]

I shared it in the post above your own.

Then by all means, please respond to the new topic and present your argument.

TY

[TRANSPONDER]

I think different people come to believe or return to belief for different reasons. It is usually a set of many things that add up. Sometimes it is one big event like crashing your motorcycle, and the doctors are surprised you survived. While being out, Mary visits you and tells you amazing things, then guides you to the priesthood, like Father Stu.

It might be the person as a God experience and that brings them to God in general, then upon trying to find who is God, for many different reasons they come to Christianity.

They might come back to Christianity because they were raised that way. So when they find God again, they just return to their core faith.

In the case of Lee Stroble he says he found Jesus by trying to disprove the resurrection.

Have you ever considered the argument from the best explanation for why there is anything at all? There are two possible answers, something eternal or spontaneous existence, which is something came to exist for no reason.

An infinite regress would not be a third option because the whole infinite chain either came to be or is always.

In case you are anyone is interested in that argument - https://www.freelymeditate.com/single-p ... ing-at-all

Ed Feser was an unbeliever for many years as he was teaching Philosophy. He is a Ph.D philosopher. He was asked to teach Aristotle and I think Aquinas or some others. In doing so, he challenged himself to take it seriously for his students. To present their ideas in the best possible light, but that required him to look deeper into their ideas. In doing so he was slowly convinced of Aristotle's metaphysics and his argument for God and then of Aquinas. This took time. He wasn't trying to find faith. He just wanted to present the philosophy as best as he could. He is not a Thomistic Catholic.

Some came to the faith by reading Ed Feser's book, "Five Proofs for the Existence of God."

Someone that recently read my argument for God, emailed me and thanked me for bringing him to God.

Someone may have been bamboozled into Theism (if not Biblegod -belief) by the First Cause argument but that won't work on those who actually understand the argument and know that is misinterpreting the logical agnostic position into a Gnostic one, which is obviously illogical. Dressing up illogic in impressive verbiage, whether scientific or philosophical, is still illogic. It is the same pointless posting we get wanting to discuss the internal logic of theological dogmas and doctrines. That is not the 'Chase'; why we should believe any of it is.

The fall out of the First cause argument is of course 'Which god?'. And that is one of the long list of questions that get dodged. The only answer I ever got (as I recall) was 'There is only one God', and to 'And which one is that?' I got no response.We know what it will come down to - appeal to the Bible which is what 'The Chase' really is and not First Cause, or even evolution - denial. And not jut the Bible because (under pressure) the OT will be abandoned and 'Jesus made everything new', will be the reason why Christianity rather than Judaism (never mind the case for Islam) is the 'Chase', and that comes down to the gospels and specifically the truth of the resurrection. That is the real Chase and the only meaningful one, and 'Cosmic Origins is a rhetorical swindle to use their best gap for God as a springboard for the leap of Faith to Jesus. I have even seen it done with a Genesis - denial animation film with a supposed atheist being turned with some evolution - denial (with thanks for bringing him to God, no doubt) and asking 'what do I do now?' "Repent and take Jesus as your Lord and Savior". There's the leap of Faith and the swindle of the Kalam apologetic right there. Friends, don't fall for it.

[DaveD49]

Dear Christians of all flavor(s),

I trust it is no surprise there exists a populous here, which lay claim to 'atheism', 'deism', or maybe other... In a nutshell, for me, this ultimately means I do not believe any such claimed Christian God exists - trying though as I might.... Which-is-to-mean, I was raised in a Christian house hold. However, after much study, I cannot get myself to belief such a claimed agent actually exists. Chalk it up, ultimately, to the topic of 'divine hiddenness' I guess...?

It is also evident there exists devout 'Christians' in this arena, of all flavors, who may feel they are 'fighting the good fight'; by defending their belief(s)/faith/rationale in the assertion of the existence to the "Christian God".

That being said, I am laying down the gauntlet, so-to-speak... Some here, as well as outside of here, are as sure as anything, that not only does God exist, but the Christian God! Well, I politely disagree. Meaning, I don't believe the "Christian based" assertion/claim.

I can't imagine this request will be anything new. Nor, can I imagine that I will encounter any new sort of enlightenment. But, being this is a rather large and important topic; I will continue to search, optimistically, that there exists some sort of 'concrete evidence(s)' to demonstrate that not only a God exists ---> but also the Christian God.

For Debate:

Please demonstrate the mere existence of the Christian God?

Wow.... where to begin? First off, there is no such thing as a "Christian" God. There is only one, and He is the God of all, no matter whatever faith or lack thereof. Nor does He expect that everyone should follow the Christian faith. Nor does He condemn anyone who does not follow that faith. Christ Himself said that to follow Him was the "straight" path to Him. He did NOT say that to do so was the ONLY path. And yes, the Bible does say that to TRULY follow Christ (meaning to follow His teachings of love and forgiveness) then, yes they will be saved. But that is open to everyone no matter if they accept Christ or not. The Bible talks about the so-called "unforgiveable sin" which is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I was always a bit confused by that because the Bible also says that blasphemy of the Father and the Son ARE forgivable sins. Why could blasphemy against two members of the Trinity, the Father or the Son, be forgiven but not blasphemy against the the third member, the Holy Spirit? What finally dawned on me was why blasphemy of the Holy Spirit could not be forgiven. To believe in God and then go even further and believe in Christ both take a huge "leap of faith" where you accept as true something which cannot be proven. ( (For that matter it is totally illogical to ask for "proof" of God as proof can only exist for things within the physical realm. We cannot "prove" anything about the supernatural because we have no direct access to it in the physical realm.) But getting back to my point, not everyone will make that leap of faith but still live moral and upright lives. Hence the reason why blaspheme or disbelief could be forgiven. However the Spirit speaks to all of us through our consciences; no belief is necessary. We all know what is good and what is bad. This is a tremendous gift for to live a moral and upright life is to find you way to God, even if you do not believe in Him. As John said in his epistle "God is love. He who abides in love abides in God, and God in Him." So the selfless love even of a stranger is to love God, even if you do not believe in Him. In my mind to "blaspheme the Spirit" is to take that incredible gift and to throw it in the garbage. It is to so blacken your soul with evil that you no longer even hear the call of your conscience. It is unforgiveable because a person in that state would never ask for forgiveness.

But as for the evidence of God's existence, that exists in abundance. There are many more in every category I mention, but here are just a few:

EVIDENCE FROM LOGIC:

The necessity for the existence of a "Supreme Being"

This one is rather weak because it says nothing about what the traits of the Supreme Being must be. I just thought of this a second ago, but I suppose it must stem from St. Anslem's "Ontological Argument" for the existence of God. He defined God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought”. All God-centered religions I am familiar with refer to God as the “Supreme Being”. That one and only one Supreme Being MUST exist is a logical necessity. I think that it is obvious that there can be one and only one “tallest tree in the universe”, and that this tallest tree MUST exist even if no one knows where it is. In the same way there can be one and only one strongest being, smartest being, or most logical being in the universe. However even science speculates that there is so far up to 26 different dimensions rather that just our 4, and that each of these dimensions potentially have life forms about which we can know nothing. But it logically follows that just as there can only be one "tallest tree", there can be one and only one being inside or outside of the universe who is utmost or "supreme" being. And He MUST exist even if we know little about Him. The only way we could know ANYTHING about Him is if He chose to reveal Himself to us in some way.

The necessity for a “First Cause” that relies on nothing else for its own existence.

This one is extremely strong. All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence. This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself. The things which perhaps caused the universe to exist such as the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence. No matter how far back you go, whether you speak of other universes in a cycle, other dimensions with universes of their own, membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence. Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness. Nor can you say that the universe has always existed because that notion has already be disproven by science not only by the Big Bang but by the existence of radioactive materials. These materials have a half-life where over time they throw off an electron and become a different material eventually resulting into lead. The fact that they exist is positive proof that the universe had to have a beginning. Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe.

What can we logically deduce about the traits of this first cause? Because of the fine-tuning and other exactitudes we can see the existence of a mega-intelligence; this means that the cause is a “Being”. Because all physical things need a cause we can deduce that this Being must be non-physical or spiritual and thus does not need one. The birth of our universe marks the beginning of our space and time. He does not require either of these. He is beyond both but can contain both. Because of the existence of things we can see purpose for acting, as well the ability and the willingness to act. Because of the enormity of the universe we can see the implication of omnipotence. He is the source of all the energy in the universe. As this Being would not be a part of the universe He caused to exist He would not be bound by our universe’s time-line nor be a physical being. He would therefore be both time-less and omnipresent. Likewise it is obvious that this Being had a reason for setting in motion the creation of physical life forms with intelligence. (We can speculate as to why this Being created intelligent physical life but that is speculation and belief and not something that can not be logically deduced merely by His existence which can be logically deduced. I have my own ideas as to why. If you have insight on this let me know.)

EVIDENCE FROM MATHEMATICS:

The existence of scientific laws

Everything about mathematics involves intelligence. One cannot add 1+1 without the intelligence to do so. Randomness cannot produce intelligence. No matter how many monkeys you have banging away on typewriters for whatever length of time, it is highly unlikely that any of them will ever produce the complete works of Shakespeare. They won’t produce even one of his sonnets. But even if they did that would be a semblance of intelligence, not the real thing. Intelligence would only be shown if the task could be repeated many times.

The very existence of scientific LAWS is firm proof of an intelligent being who is in some way responsible for the existence of everything. In our society are human laws just random words on a piece of paper? No. They show purpose and meaning which positively proves an intelligence behind them. While scientific laws are nothing like civil laws the exact same thing holds true of scientific laws because they ALL show a purpose without which the universe could never exist. There is no reason why a universe created by randomness should be compelled to obey ANY laws, let alone display complex mathematics. Intelligence is absolutely necessary.

The Fibonacci Sequence.

I have mentioned this one somewhere before. The Fibonacci Sequence if a pattern of numbers where the next number in the sequence is the sum of the two previous ones: 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377,610,987… This sequence has been found virtually everywhere including flowers, trees, our eyes, ears, the pattern of sea shells, and even the shape of spiral galaxies. If seen once the Fibonacci Sequence would be seen as a mathematical oddity. If seen a few times it would be perhaps seen as a curiosity about the concept of randomness on which atheism depends could still remain intact. The fact is though this sequence is seen EVERYWHERE in the universe. This defies randomness and indicates intelligence.
(https://gofiguremath.org/natures-favori ... in-nature/ )

The Mandelbrot Set

A number is a CONCEPT of quantity. It does not exist anywhere. The concept of numeration is not an invention of man. Long before man discovered the mathematical equations by which he could explain the orbit of the Earth, the Earth still orbited the sun. Man discovered the equations; he did not invent them. This is a simple mathematical equation that produces infinite complexity.
While not delving into the math involved, the Mandelbrot Set is a series of numbers selected because when used with a simple calculation it produces a product number which does not grow into larger numbers in future iterations. Numbers which do not grow are part of the set. If the number used does grow into a large number then it is not part of the set. When used with imaginary numbers which would create fractals and then graphed it produces a shape which repeats itself in smaller and smaller sizes but in doing so creates incredible, beautiful shapes infinitely.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelbro ... ce_new.gif}

ALL of these extend infinitely in every direction. One could never determine the true circumference of the starting shape. It is interesting that with this set can also be found over and over the Fibonacci sequence.
Again this is not a man-made equation but rather a DISCOVERED one. The equation has existed since the beginning of time.

This however exists only in the abstract world of math. You will not find it fully in nature because nature is the physical world, not the abstract. You are not going to find physical infinites in the physical universe. What you will find easily in nature is approximate fractals. They are referred to as “approximate” because of the restraints of the physical there will be a limited number of reiterations. Among others Mandelbrot sets are found in snowflakes, frost, ferns, broccoli, coastlines, mountain chains, clouds, lightning and spiral galaxies. Why should a bolt of lightning conform to this abstract equation?

There is absolutely no reason that the set must be found in nature. There is no reason why it should tie into another chance equation of the Fibonacci sequence. Randomness or chance certainly would never be able to produce it once, let alone all of the examples where it can be found. The fact that abstract mathematical equations can be found also in nature is an obvious proof of an intelligence behind it. That intelligence can be none other than God.

EVIDENCE FROM SCIENCE:

In Astrophysics: the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants

Acknowledged by virtually all scientists, even those who are atheists, is the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants. Until about 1980 only 6 of these constants identified. Today there are over 80 with as many as 167 as identified by astrophysicist Hugh Ross. These universal constants, such as the force of gravity, the strong force, the weak force, all have strength settings which could have been virtually anywhere on a vast scale. But if the scale were the size of the width of the entire universe, had had they varied as little as ½” from where they are set then either the universe would have collapsed in on itself nanoseconds after the Big Bang or would have flown so far apart so quickly that the formation of the universe never would have occurred. The exact same holds true for all of the 80+ constants. Even agnostic Steven Hawking acknowledged this when he wrote “… the universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Austin American-Statesman, October 19, 1997.) He wrote this in 1997. Only 40 were known at that time.

This indicates a precise fine-tuning on a massive scale and again shows an intelligence responsible for the formation of the universe.

In Physics: the proposal of additional dimensions and universes

In order to make various theories “work”, as well as to try to explain away the fine-tuning explained above, it has been proposed that as many as 26 different dimensions exist. These extra proposed dimensions are additional dimensions of both space and time beyond the 3 physical and 1 time dimensions of our own existence. Some of these theories, such as the “M-Theory”, were created specifically to attempt to dismiss the fine-tuning of our universe which is such strong evidence for the existence of God. If there were an endless number of universes then ours might just be the one that got all of the values right. But it is ironic that in doing so they are actually providing more evidence of His existence.

Scientists have stated that if the extra-dimension proposition is true then it is possible that each of these other dimensions could have universes of their own complete with intelligent life that would be completely different than our own. They likewise have said that they could be occupying the same physical space as we are but if they possessed our exact four dimensions they could interact within our universe while we would have no knowledge of their presence. If a 5-dimensional being from a different universe existed who had as part of his existence all of our dimensions, and if this species of being have discovered a way to enter the rift between our universe and his, then he might even be able to present himself in our 4-dimensional world. Most likely we would only see him as a wisp or what we might call a “ghost”. If this isn’t the definition of “supernatural” then I don’t know what is.

None of this of course has been proved, but if but if eventually it was proved to be correct, it would become valid evidence of God. This is impossible as it is speaking about that which is beyond our universe and outside of the realm of science. It is incorrect to call any of these proposals “theories” (including the “M-Theory”) as it is impossible to test them. As such they are referred to as pseudo-science by most scientists. Until that time when they can be tested and proven they remain suggestions rather than theories.

In Biology: “Simple” life forms are incredibly complex

Darwin and others of his time did not have the technical abilities which we have today. They saw single cell life as no more than a bit of protoplasm. As such he saw little difficulty with cell division and diversification. With today’s instruments we are able to study the insides of cells precisely had have found in this an incredible complexity. For example of complexity found in single-cell live is found in bacteria. Bacteria were an early life-form, and it has remained largely unchanged since its beginnings. For bacteria to survive it needs a means of movement and that movement is produced by its flagellum, which is in and of itself incredibly complex. It is a biological “motor” that consists of over 40 separate parts that the bacterium must produce and assemble in one specific order. When compared to body-length, the flagellum makes the bacteria the fastest animal on Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellum ... ram_en.svg

In any other context looking at this “device” and being unaware or its origins, and looking at its complexity most people would say that it is “man-made”. That it is produced by a single-cell life-form is mind-boggling.

EVIDENCE FROM HISTORY AND THE MIRACULOUS

There have been numerous unexplainable events with unmistakable supernatural overtones. There are a number which can be confirmed to this day. Even now miraculous events take place with one thing in common: people prayed. Many have been confirmed and documented. Among them are included incorruptible bodies, miraculous healings, apparitions of Mary in numerous places, liquefying blood of saints after centuries and Eucharistic miracles. Of those there are some that are on-going to this day and can be confirmed by anyone.

The Miracle of the Sun

Few miracles have stirred the world as much as the Miracle of the Sun which took place in Fatima, Portugal on October 17, 1918. It began six months earlier in May of 1917 when three small children reported seeing a apparition of Mary who had spoken to them. As they were told to do they reported the event but were at first not believed. However every month the apparition reappeared and a growing number of people flocked to the sight at each of the monthly events. About 50 were present in June, about 5,000 in July and as many as 20,000 people in September. While only the children could see or hear the apparition, other witnesses reported seeing an unexplainable ball of light and hearing an indistinct murmur. Newspapers reported these events mockingly. In September the apparition told the children that a miracle was going to occur at that place and time one month from then.

In each of these apparitions the message of Mary was clear. That the end times were approaching, that Russia would fall and to pray for its conversion (the Bolshevik Revolution began in November and the Tsar and family killed in July 1918), that the present war would end soon but another greater one was to occur, and that Christ was extremely disappointed in the sins of man and everyone should pray the rosary.

On October 17th a huge crowd gathered including scientists, newspaper reporters, atheists, and Communists and other skeptics. The crowd was estimated at between 40,000 to 100,000 people. It rained heavily all morning. At the appointed time the rain suddenly stopped and the dark clouds parted as if it were a curtain. The sun, though bright did not harm the eyes of those who were looking on it. The witnesses reported that it seemed to spin rapidly on its axis displaying all sorts of colors. It began to zigzag across the sky and appeared to come so close to the Earth that it frightened the people. People’s soaking wet clothing and the ground were suddenly dry and yet no one was burned. Hundreds of people, including hardened skeptics were converted then and there.

It is interesting that while modern-day skeptics may talk about the crowd being hypnotized, that it was a magic trick, that it was a result of sun-blindness or other such excuses, no one has given any sort of scientific explanation of the events. Nor has anyone been able to explain how the event could have been predicted to the date and time a month earlier. It is also interesting that while skeptics try to explain the event away NONE of them have ever said that it did not happen because it was reported in newspapers around the globe.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... fatima.jpg

Since that time there have been numerous on-going miracles which have taken place at Fatima among devout believers.
This obviously offers incredible evidence of the existence of the supernatural, of Mary, of Jesus and of God.

I am tired, so I will call it here, but there are many, many more in the miracle category.

[brunumb]

[Replying to DaveD49 in post #416]

It's a shame you spent so much time and tired yourself out writing down all that so-called evidence because none of it actually requires there to be a god.

[POI]

Dear Christians of all flavor(s),

I trust it is no surprise there exists a populous here, which lay claim to 'atheism', 'deism', or maybe other... In a nutshell, for me, this ultimately means I do not believe any such claimed Christian God exists - trying though as I might.... Which-is-to-mean, I was raised in a Christian house hold. However, after much study, I cannot get myself to belief such a claimed agent actually exists. Chalk it up, ultimately, to the topic of 'divine hiddenness' I guess...?

It is also evident there exists devout 'Christians' in this arena, of all flavors, who may feel they are 'fighting the good fight'; by defending their belief(s)/faith/rationale in the assertion of the existence to the "Christian God".

That being said, I am laying down the gauntlet, so-to-speak... Some here, as well as outside of here, are as sure as anything, that not only does God exist, but the Christian God! Well, I politely disagree. Meaning, I don't believe the "Christian based" assertion/claim.

I can't imagine this request will be anything new. Nor, can I imagine that I will encounter any new sort of enlightenment. But, being this is a rather large and important topic; I will continue to search, optimistically, that there exists some sort of 'concrete evidence(s)' to demonstrate that not only a God exists ---> but also the Christian God.

For Debate:

Please demonstrate the mere existence of the Christian God?

Wow.... where to begin? First off, there is no such thing as a "Christian" God. There is only one, and He is the God of all, no matter whatever faith or lack thereof. Nor does He expect that everyone should follow the Christian faith. Nor does He condemn anyone who does not follow that faith. Christ Himself said that to follow Him was the "straight" path to Him. He did NOT say that to do so was the ONLY path. And yes, the Bible does say that to TRULY follow Christ (meaning to follow His teachings of love and forgiveness) then, yes they will be saved. But that is open to everyone no matter if they accept Christ or not. The Bible talks about the so-called "unforgiveable sin" which is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I was always a bit confused by that because the Bible also says that blasphemy of the Father and the Son ARE forgivable sins. Why could blasphemy against two members of the Trinity, the Father or the Son, be forgiven but not blasphemy against the the third member, the Holy Spirit? What finally dawned on me was why blasphemy of the Holy Spirit could not be forgiven. To believe in God and then go even further and believe in Christ both take a huge "leap of faith" where you accept as true something which cannot be proven. ( (For that matter it is totally illogical to ask for "proof" of God as proof can only exist for things within the physical realm. We cannot "prove" anything about the supernatural because we have no direct access to it in the physical realm.) But getting back to my point, not everyone will make that leap of faith but still live moral and upright lives. Hence the reason why blaspheme or disbelief could be forgiven. However the Spirit speaks to all of us through our consciences; no belief is necessary. We all know what is good and what is bad. This is a tremendous gift for to live a moral and upright life is to find you way to God, even if you do not believe in Him. As John said in his epistle "God is love. He who abides in love abides in God, and God in Him." So the selfless love even of a stranger is to love God, even if you do not believe in Him. In my mind to "blaspheme the Spirit" is to take that incredible gift and to throw it in the garbage. It is to so blacken your soul with evil that you no longer even hear the call of your conscience. It is unforgiveable because a person in that state would never ask for forgiveness.

But as for the evidence of God's existence, that exists in abundance. There are many more in every category I mention, but here are just a few:

EVIDENCE FROM LOGIC:

The necessity for the existence of a "Supreme Being"

This one is rather weak because it says nothing about what the traits of the Supreme Being must be. I just thought of this a second ago, but I suppose it must stem from St. Anslem's "Ontological Argument" for the existence of God. He defined God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought”. All God-centered religions I am familiar with refer to God as the “Supreme Being”. That one and only one Supreme Being MUST exist is a logical necessity. I think that it is obvious that there can be one and only one “tallest tree in the universe”, and that this tallest tree MUST exist even if no one knows where it is. In the same way there can be one and only one strongest being, smartest being, or most logical being in the universe. However even science speculates that there is so far up to 26 different dimensions rather that just our 4, and that each of these dimensions potentially have life forms about which we can know nothing. But it logically follows that just as there can only be one "tallest tree", there can be one and only one being inside or outside of the universe who is utmost or "supreme" being. And He MUST exist even if we know little about Him. The only way we could know ANYTHING about Him is if He chose to reveal Himself to us in some way.

The necessity for a “First Cause” that relies on nothing else for its own existence.

This one is extremely strong. All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence. This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself. The things which perhaps caused the universe to exist such as the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence. No matter how far back you go, whether you speak of other universes in a cycle, other dimensions with universes of their own, membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence. Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness. Nor can you say that the universe has always existed because that notion has already be disproven by science not only by the Big Bang but by the existence of radioactive materials. These materials have a half-life where over time they throw off an electron and become a different material eventually resulting into lead. The fact that they exist is positive proof that the universe had to have a beginning. Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe.

What can we logically deduce about the traits of this first cause? Because of the fine-tuning and other exactitudes we can see the existence of a mega-intelligence; this means that the cause is a “Being”. Because all physical things need a cause we can deduce that this Being must be non-physical or spiritual and thus does not need one. The birth of our universe marks the beginning of our space and time. He does not require either of these. He is beyond both but can contain both. Because of the existence of things we can see purpose for acting, as well the ability and the willingness to act. Because of the enormity of the universe we can see the implication of omnipotence. He is the source of all the energy in the universe. As this Being would not be a part of the universe He caused to exist He would not be bound by our universe’s time-line nor be a physical being. He would therefore be both time-less and omnipresent. Likewise it is obvious that this Being had a reason for setting in motion the creation of physical life forms with intelligence. (We can speculate as to why this Being created intelligent physical life but that is speculation and belief and not something that can not be logically deduced merely by His existence which can be logically deduced. I have my own ideas as to why. If you have insight on this let me know.)

EVIDENCE FROM MATHEMATICS:

The existence of scientific laws

Everything about mathematics involves intelligence. One cannot add 1+1 without the intelligence to do so. Randomness cannot produce intelligence. No matter how many monkeys you have banging away on typewriters for whatever length of time, it is highly unlikely that any of them will ever produce the complete works of Shakespeare. They won’t produce even one of his sonnets. But even if they did that would be a semblance of intelligence, not the real thing. Intelligence would only be shown if the task could be repeated many times.

The very existence of scientific LAWS is firm proof of an intelligent being who is in some way responsible for the existence of everything. In our society are human laws just random words on a piece of paper? No. They show purpose and meaning which positively proves an intelligence behind them. While scientific laws are nothing like civil laws the exact same thing holds true of scientific laws because they ALL show a purpose without which the universe could never exist. There is no reason why a universe created by randomness should be compelled to obey ANY laws, let alone display complex mathematics. Intelligence is absolutely necessary.

The Fibonacci Sequence.

I have mentioned this one somewhere before. The Fibonacci Sequence if a pattern of numbers where the next number in the sequence is the sum of the two previous ones: 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377,610,987… This sequence has been found virtually everywhere including flowers, trees, our eyes, ears, the pattern of sea shells, and even the shape of spiral galaxies. If seen once the Fibonacci Sequence would be seen as a mathematical oddity. If seen a few times it would be perhaps seen as a curiosity about the concept of randomness on which atheism depends could still remain intact. The fact is though this sequence is seen EVERYWHERE in the universe. This defies randomness and indicates intelligence.
(https://gofiguremath.org/natures-favori ... in-nature/ )

The Mandelbrot Set

A number is a CONCEPT of quantity. It does not exist anywhere. The concept of numeration is not an invention of man. Long before man discovered the mathematical equations by which he could explain the orbit of the Earth, the Earth still orbited the sun. Man discovered the equations; he did not invent them. This is a simple mathematical equation that produces infinite complexity.
While not delving into the math involved, the Mandelbrot Set is a series of numbers selected because when used with a simple calculation it produces a product number which does not grow into larger numbers in future iterations. Numbers which do not grow are part of the set. If the number used does grow into a large number then it is not part of the set. When used with imaginary numbers which would create fractals and then graphed it produces a shape which repeats itself in smaller and smaller sizes but in doing so creates incredible, beautiful shapes infinitely.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelbro ... ce_new.gif}

ALL of these extend infinitely in every direction. One could never determine the true circumference of the starting shape. It is interesting that with this set can also be found over and over the Fibonacci sequence.
Again this is not a man-made equation but rather a DISCOVERED one. The equation has existed since the beginning of time.

This however exists only in the abstract world of math. You will not find it fully in nature because nature is the physical world, not the abstract. You are not going to find physical infinites in the physical universe. What you will find easily in nature is approximate fractals. They are referred to as “approximate” because of the restraints of the physical there will be a limited number of reiterations. Among others Mandelbrot sets are found in snowflakes, frost, ferns, broccoli, coastlines, mountain chains, clouds, lightning and spiral galaxies. Why should a bolt of lightning conform to this abstract equation?

There is absolutely no reason that the set must be found in nature. There is no reason why it should tie into another chance equation of the Fibonacci sequence. Randomness or chance certainly would never be able to produce it once, let alone all of the examples where it can be found. The fact that abstract mathematical equations can be found also in nature is an obvious proof of an intelligence behind it. That intelligence can be none other than God.

EVIDENCE FROM SCIENCE:

In Astrophysics: the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants

Acknowledged by virtually all scientists, even those who are atheists, is the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants. Until about 1980 only 6 of these constants identified. Today there are over 80 with as many as 167 as identified by astrophysicist Hugh Ross. These universal constants, such as the force of gravity, the strong force, the weak force, all have strength settings which could have been virtually anywhere on a vast scale. But if the scale were the size of the width of the entire universe, had had they varied as little as ½” from where they are set then either the universe would have collapsed in on itself nanoseconds after the Big Bang or would have flown so far apart so quickly that the formation of the universe never would have occurred. The exact same holds true for all of the 80+ constants. Even agnostic Steven Hawking acknowledged this when he wrote “… the universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Austin American-Statesman, October 19, 1997.) He wrote this in 1997. Only 40 were known at that time.

This indicates a precise fine-tuning on a massive scale and again shows an intelligence responsible for the formation of the universe.

In Physics: the proposal of additional dimensions and universes

In order to make various theories “work”, as well as to try to explain away the fine-tuning explained above, it has been proposed that as many as 26 different dimensions exist. These extra proposed dimensions are additional dimensions of both space and time beyond the 3 physical and 1 time dimensions of our own existence. Some of these theories, such as the “M-Theory”, were created specifically to attempt to dismiss the fine-tuning of our universe which is such strong evidence for the existence of God. If there were an endless number of universes then ours might just be the one that got all of the values right. But it is ironic that in doing so they are actually providing more evidence of His existence.

Scientists have stated that if the extra-dimension proposition is true then it is possible that each of these other dimensions could have universes of their own complete with intelligent life that would be completely different than our own. They likewise have said that they could be occupying the same physical space as we are but if they possessed our exact four dimensions they could interact within our universe while we would have no knowledge of their presence. If a 5-dimensional being from a different universe existed who had as part of his existence all of our dimensions, and if this species of being have discovered a way to enter the rift between our universe and his, then he might even be able to present himself in our 4-dimensional world. Most likely we would only see him as a wisp or what we might call a “ghost”. If this isn’t the definition of “supernatural” then I don’t know what is.

None of this of course has been proved, but if but if eventually it was proved to be correct, it would become valid evidence of God. This is impossible as it is speaking about that which is beyond our universe and outside of the realm of science. It is incorrect to call any of these proposals “theories” (including the “M-Theory”) as it is impossible to test them. As such they are referred to as pseudo-science by most scientists. Until that time when they can be tested and proven they remain suggestions rather than theories.

In Biology: “Simple” life forms are incredibly complex

Darwin and others of his time did not have the technical abilities which we have today. They saw single cell life as no more than a bit of protoplasm. As such he saw little difficulty with cell division and diversification. With today’s instruments we are able to study the insides of cells precisely had have found in this an incredible complexity. For example of complexity found in single-cell live is found in bacteria. Bacteria were an early life-form, and it has remained largely unchanged since its beginnings. For bacteria to survive it needs a means of movement and that movement is produced by its flagellum, which is in and of itself incredibly complex. It is a biological “motor” that consists of over 40 separate parts that the bacterium must produce and assemble in one specific order. When compared to body-length, the flagellum makes the bacteria the fastest animal on Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellum ... ram_en.svg

In any other context looking at this “device” and being unaware or its origins, and looking at its complexity most people would say that it is “man-made”. That it is produced by a single-cell life-form is mind-boggling.

EVIDENCE FROM HISTORY AND THE MIRACULOUS

There have been numerous unexplainable events with unmistakable supernatural overtones. There are a number which can be confirmed to this day. Even now miraculous events take place with one thing in common: people prayed. Many have been confirmed and documented. Among them are included incorruptible bodies, miraculous healings, apparitions of Mary in numerous places, liquefying blood of saints after centuries and Eucharistic miracles. Of those there are some that are on-going to this day and can be confirmed by anyone.

The Miracle of the Sun

Few miracles have stirred the world as much as the Miracle of the Sun which took place in Fatima, Portugal on October 17, 1918. It began six months earlier in May of 1917 when three small children reported seeing a apparition of Mary who had spoken to them. As they were told to do they reported the event but were at first not believed. However every month the apparition reappeared and a growing number of people flocked to the sight at each of the monthly events. About 50 were present in June, about 5,000 in July and as many as 20,000 people in September. While only the children could see or hear the apparition, other witnesses reported seeing an unexplainable ball of light and hearing an indistinct murmur. Newspapers reported these events mockingly. In September the apparition told the children that a miracle was going to occur at that place and time one month from then.

In each of these apparitions the message of Mary was clear. That the end times were approaching, that Russia would fall and to pray for its conversion (the Bolshevik Revolution began in November and the Tsar and family killed in July 1918), that the present war would end soon but another greater one was to occur, and that Christ was extremely disappointed in the sins of man and everyone should pray the rosary.

On October 17th a huge crowd gathered including scientists, newspaper reporters, atheists, and Communists and other skeptics. The crowd was estimated at between 40,000 to 100,000 people. It rained heavily all morning. At the appointed time the rain suddenly stopped and the dark clouds parted as if it were a curtain. The sun, though bright did not harm the eyes of those who were looking on it. The witnesses reported that it seemed to spin rapidly on its axis displaying all sorts of colors. It began to zigzag across the sky and appeared to come so close to the Earth that it frightened the people. People’s soaking wet clothing and the ground were suddenly dry and yet no one was burned. Hundreds of people, including hardened skeptics were converted then and there.

It is interesting that while modern-day skeptics may talk about the crowd being hypnotized, that it was a magic trick, that it was a result of sun-blindness or other such excuses, no one has given any sort of scientific explanation of the events. Nor has anyone been able to explain how the event could have been predicted to the date and time a month earlier. It is also interesting that while skeptics try to explain the event away NONE of them have ever said that it did not happen because it was reported in newspapers around the globe.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... fatima.jpg

Since that time there have been numerous on-going miracles which have taken place at Fatima among devout believers.
This obviously offers incredible evidence of the existence of the supernatural, of Mary, of Jesus and of God.

I am tired, so I will call it here, but there are many, many more in the miracle category.

Please pick, what you consider, one of the strongest arguments. We can start with that one...

[DaveD49]

Dear Christians of all flavor(s),

I trust it is no surprise there exists a populous here, which lay claim to 'atheism', 'deism', or maybe other... In a nutshell, for me, this ultimately means I do not believe any such claimed Christian God exists - trying though as I might.... Which-is-to-mean, I was raised in a Christian house hold. However, after much study, I cannot get myself to belief such a claimed agent actually exists. Chalk it up, ultimately, to the topic of 'divine hiddenness' I guess...?

It is also evident there exists devout 'Christians' in this arena, of all flavors, who may feel they are 'fighting the good fight'; by defending their belief(s)/faith/rationale in the assertion of the existence to the "Christian God".

That being said, I am laying down the gauntlet, so-to-speak... Some here, as well as outside of here, are as sure as anything, that not only does God exist, but the Christian God! Well, I politely disagree. Meaning, I don't believe the "Christian based" assertion/claim.

I can't imagine this request will be anything new. Nor, can I imagine that I will encounter any new sort of enlightenment. But, being this is a rather large and important topic; I will continue to search, optimistically, that there exists some sort of 'concrete evidence(s)' to demonstrate that not only a God exists ---> but also the Christian God.

For Debate:

Please demonstrate the mere existence of the Christian God?

Wow.... where to begin? First off, there is no such thing as a "Christian" God. There is only one, and He is the God of all, no matter whatever faith or lack thereof. Nor does He expect that everyone should follow the Christian faith. Nor does He condemn anyone who does not follow that faith. Christ Himself said that to follow Him was the "straight" path to Him. He did NOT say that to do so was the ONLY path. And yes, the Bible does say that to TRULY follow Christ (meaning to follow His teachings of love and forgiveness) then, yes they will be saved. But that is open to everyone no matter if they accept Christ or not. The Bible talks about the so-called "unforgiveable sin" which is blasphemy of the Holy Spirit. I was always a bit confused by that because the Bible also says that blasphemy of the Father and the Son ARE forgivable sins. Why could blasphemy against two members of the Trinity, the Father or the Son, be forgiven but not blasphemy against the the third member, the Holy Spirit? What finally dawned on me was why blasphemy of the Holy Spirit could not be forgiven. To believe in God and then go even further and believe in Christ both take a huge "leap of faith" where you accept as true something which cannot be proven. ( (For that matter it is totally illogical to ask for "proof" of God as proof can only exist for things within the physical realm. We cannot "prove" anything about the supernatural because we have no direct access to it in the physical realm.) But getting back to my point, not everyone will make that leap of faith but still live moral and upright lives. Hence the reason why blaspheme or disbelief could be forgiven. However the Spirit speaks to all of us through our consciences; no belief is necessary. We all know what is good and what is bad. This is a tremendous gift for to live a moral and upright life is to find you way to God, even if you do not believe in Him. As John said in his epistle "God is love. He who abides in love abides in God, and God in Him." So the selfless love even of a stranger is to love God, even if you do not believe in Him. In my mind to "blaspheme the Spirit" is to take that incredible gift and to throw it in the garbage. It is to so blacken your soul with evil that you no longer even hear the call of your conscience. It is unforgiveable because a person in that state would never ask for forgiveness.

But as for the evidence of God's existence, that exists in abundance. There are many more in every category I mention, but here are just a few:

EVIDENCE FROM LOGIC:

The necessity for the existence of a "Supreme Being"

This one is rather weak because it says nothing about what the traits of the Supreme Being must be. I just thought of this a second ago, but I suppose it must stem from St. Anslem's "Ontological Argument" for the existence of God. He defined God as “that than which nothing greater can be thought”. All God-centered religions I am familiar with refer to God as the “Supreme Being”. That one and only one Supreme Being MUST exist is a logical necessity. I think that it is obvious that there can be one and only one “tallest tree in the universe”, and that this tallest tree MUST exist even if no one knows where it is. In the same way there can be one and only one strongest being, smartest being, or most logical being in the universe. However even science speculates that there is so far up to 26 different dimensions rather that just our 4, and that each of these dimensions potentially have life forms about which we can know nothing. But it logically follows that just as there can only be one "tallest tree", there can be one and only one being inside or outside of the universe who is utmost or "supreme" being. And He MUST exist even if we know little about Him. The only way we could know ANYTHING about Him is if He chose to reveal Himself to us in some way.

The necessity for a “First Cause” that relies on nothing else for its own existence.

This one is extremely strong. All physical and gaseous things need a cause for their existence. This would include the largest known physical & gaseous thing which is the universe itself. The things which perhaps caused the universe to exist such as the Big Bang likewise also need a cause for its existence. No matter how far back you go, whether you speak of other universes in a cycle, other dimensions with universes of their own, membranes producing countless universes they ALL need a cause for their existence. Saying that there is an infinite number of causes and effects or an infinite cycle of universes is illogical because without an ultimate starting place for the existence of the physical there would be infinite nothingness. Nor can you say that the universe has always existed because that notion has already be disproven by science not only by the Big Bang but by the existence of radioactive materials. These materials have a half-life where over time they throw off an electron and become a different material eventually resulting into lead. The fact that they exist is positive proof that the universe had to have a beginning. Logic therefore demands that there MUST be an ultimate first cause which depended on nothing else for its own existence which created or set in motion the cause or causes of the universe.

What can we logically deduce about the traits of this first cause? Because of the fine-tuning and other exactitudes we can see the existence of a mega-intelligence; this means that the cause is a “Being”. Because all physical things need a cause we can deduce that this Being must be non-physical or spiritual and thus does not need one. The birth of our universe marks the beginning of our space and time. He does not require either of these. He is beyond both but can contain both. Because of the existence of things we can see purpose for acting, as well the ability and the willingness to act. Because of the enormity of the universe we can see the implication of omnipotence. He is the source of all the energy in the universe. As this Being would not be a part of the universe He caused to exist He would not be bound by our universe’s time-line nor be a physical being. He would therefore be both time-less and omnipresent. Likewise it is obvious that this Being had a reason for setting in motion the creation of physical life forms with intelligence. (We can speculate as to why this Being created intelligent physical life but that is speculation and belief and not something that can not be logically deduced merely by His existence which can be logically deduced. I have my own ideas as to why. If you have insight on this let me know.)

EVIDENCE FROM MATHEMATICS:

The existence of scientific laws

Everything about mathematics involves intelligence. One cannot add 1+1 without the intelligence to do so. Randomness cannot produce intelligence. No matter how many monkeys you have banging away on typewriters for whatever length of time, it is highly unlikely that any of them will ever produce the complete works of Shakespeare. They won’t produce even one of his sonnets. But even if they did that would be a semblance of intelligence, not the real thing. Intelligence would only be shown if the task could be repeated many times.

The very existence of scientific LAWS is firm proof of an intelligent being who is in some way responsible for the existence of everything. In our society are human laws just random words on a piece of paper? No. They show purpose and meaning which positively proves an intelligence behind them. While scientific laws are nothing like civil laws the exact same thing holds true of scientific laws because they ALL show a purpose without which the universe could never exist. There is no reason why a universe created by randomness should be compelled to obey ANY laws, let alone display complex mathematics. Intelligence is absolutely necessary.

The Fibonacci Sequence.

I have mentioned this one somewhere before. The Fibonacci Sequence if a pattern of numbers where the next number in the sequence is the sum of the two previous ones: 0,1,1,2,3,5,8,13,21,34,55,89,144,233,377,610,987… This sequence has been found virtually everywhere including flowers, trees, our eyes, ears, the pattern of sea shells, and even the shape of spiral galaxies. If seen once the Fibonacci Sequence would be seen as a mathematical oddity. If seen a few times it would be perhaps seen as a curiosity about the concept of randomness on which atheism depends could still remain intact. The fact is though this sequence is seen EVERYWHERE in the universe. This defies randomness and indicates intelligence.
(https://gofiguremath.org/natures-favori ... in-nature/ )

The Mandelbrot Set

A number is a CONCEPT of quantity. It does not exist anywhere. The concept of numeration is not an invention of man. Long before man discovered the mathematical equations by which he could explain the orbit of the Earth, the Earth still orbited the sun. Man discovered the equations; he did not invent them. This is a simple mathematical equation that produces infinite complexity.
While not delving into the math involved, the Mandelbrot Set is a series of numbers selected because when used with a simple calculation it produces a product number which does not grow into larger numbers in future iterations. Numbers which do not grow are part of the set. If the number used does grow into a large number then it is not part of the set. When used with imaginary numbers which would create fractals and then graphed it produces a shape which repeats itself in smaller and smaller sizes but in doing so creates incredible, beautiful shapes infinitely.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandelbro ... ce_new.gif}

ALL of these extend infinitely in every direction. One could never determine the true circumference of the starting shape. It is interesting that with this set can also be found over and over the Fibonacci sequence.
Again this is not a man-made equation but rather a DISCOVERED one. The equation has existed since the beginning of time.

This however exists only in the abstract world of math. You will not find it fully in nature because nature is the physical world, not the abstract. You are not going to find physical infinites in the physical universe. What you will find easily in nature is approximate fractals. They are referred to as “approximate” because of the restraints of the physical there will be a limited number of reiterations. Among others Mandelbrot sets are found in snowflakes, frost, ferns, broccoli, coastlines, mountain chains, clouds, lightning and spiral galaxies. Why should a bolt of lightning conform to this abstract equation?

There is absolutely no reason that the set must be found in nature. There is no reason why it should tie into another chance equation of the Fibonacci sequence. Randomness or chance certainly would never be able to produce it once, let alone all of the examples where it can be found. The fact that abstract mathematical equations can be found also in nature is an obvious proof of an intelligence behind it. That intelligence can be none other than God.

EVIDENCE FROM SCIENCE:

In Astrophysics: the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants

Acknowledged by virtually all scientists, even those who are atheists, is the exact fine-tuning of all the various universal constants. Until about 1980 only 6 of these constants identified. Today there are over 80 with as many as 167 as identified by astrophysicist Hugh Ross. These universal constants, such as the force of gravity, the strong force, the weak force, all have strength settings which could have been virtually anywhere on a vast scale. But if the scale were the size of the width of the entire universe, had had they varied as little as ½” from where they are set then either the universe would have collapsed in on itself nanoseconds after the Big Bang or would have flown so far apart so quickly that the formation of the universe never would have occurred. The exact same holds true for all of the 80+ constants. Even agnostic Steven Hawking acknowledged this when he wrote “… the universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or they wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Austin American-Statesman, October 19, 1997.) He wrote this in 1997. Only 40 were known at that time.

This indicates a precise fine-tuning on a massive scale and again shows an intelligence responsible for the formation of the universe.

In Physics: the proposal of additional dimensions and universes

In order to make various theories “work”, as well as to try to explain away the fine-tuning explained above, it has been proposed that as many as 26 different dimensions exist. These extra proposed dimensions are additional dimensions of both space and time beyond the 3 physical and 1 time dimensions of our own existence. Some of these theories, such as the “M-Theory”, were created specifically to attempt to dismiss the fine-tuning of our universe which is such strong evidence for the existence of God. If there were an endless number of universes then ours might just be the one that got all of the values right. But it is ironic that in doing so they are actually providing more evidence of His existence.

Scientists have stated that if the extra-dimension proposition is true then it is possible that each of these other dimensions could have universes of their own complete with intelligent life that would be completely different than our own. They likewise have said that they could be occupying the same physical space as we are but if they possessed our exact four dimensions they could interact within our universe while we would have no knowledge of their presence. If a 5-dimensional being from a different universe existed who had as part of his existence all of our dimensions, and if this species of being have discovered a way to enter the rift between our universe and his, then he might even be able to present himself in our 4-dimensional world. Most likely we would only see him as a wisp or what we might call a “ghost”. If this isn’t the definition of “supernatural” then I don’t know what is.

None of this of course has been proved, but if but if eventually it was proved to be correct, it would become valid evidence of God. This is impossible as it is speaking about that which is beyond our universe and outside of the realm of science. It is incorrect to call any of these proposals “theories” (including the “M-Theory”) as it is impossible to test them. As such they are referred to as pseudo-science by most scientists. Until that time when they can be tested and proven they remain suggestions rather than theories.

In Biology: “Simple” life forms are incredibly complex

Darwin and others of his time did not have the technical abilities which we have today. They saw single cell life as no more than a bit of protoplasm. As such he saw little difficulty with cell division and diversification. With today’s instruments we are able to study the insides of cells precisely had have found in this an incredible complexity. For example of complexity found in single-cell live is found in bacteria. Bacteria were an early life-form, and it has remained largely unchanged since its beginnings. For bacteria to survive it needs a means of movement and that movement is produced by its flagellum, which is in and of itself incredibly complex. It is a biological “motor” that consists of over 40 separate parts that the bacterium must produce and assemble in one specific order. When compared to body-length, the flagellum makes the bacteria the fastest animal on Earth.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellum ... ram_en.svg

In any other context looking at this “device” and being unaware or its origins, and looking at its complexity most people would say that it is “man-made”. That it is produced by a single-cell life-form is mind-boggling.

EVIDENCE FROM HISTORY AND THE MIRACULOUS

There have been numerous unexplainable events with unmistakable supernatural overtones. There are a number which can be confirmed to this day. Even now miraculous events take place with one thing in common: people prayed. Many have been confirmed and documented. Among them are included incorruptible bodies, miraculous healings, apparitions of Mary in numerous places, liquefying blood of saints after centuries and Eucharistic miracles. Of those there are some that are on-going to this day and can be confirmed by anyone.

The Miracle of the Sun

Few miracles have stirred the world as much as the Miracle of the Sun which took place in Fatima, Portugal on October 17, 1918. It began six months earlier in May of 1917 when three small children reported seeing a apparition of Mary who had spoken to them. As they were told to do they reported the event but were at first not believed. However every month the apparition reappeared and a growing number of people flocked to the sight at each of the monthly events. About 50 were present in June, about 5,000 in July and as many as 20,000 people in September. While only the children could see or hear the apparition, other witnesses reported seeing an unexplainable ball of light and hearing an indistinct murmur. Newspapers reported these events mockingly. In September the apparition told the children that a miracle was going to occur at that place and time one month from then.

In each of these apparitions the message of Mary was clear. That the end times were approaching, that Russia would fall and to pray for its conversion (the Bolshevik Revolution began in November and the Tsar and family killed in July 1918), that the present war would end soon but another greater one was to occur, and that Christ was extremely disappointed in the sins of man and everyone should pray the rosary.

On October 17th a huge crowd gathered including scientists, newspaper reporters, atheists, and Communists and other skeptics. The crowd was estimated at between 40,000 to 100,000 people. It rained heavily all morning. At the appointed time the rain suddenly stopped and the dark clouds parted as if it were a curtain. The sun, though bright did not harm the eyes of those who were looking on it. The witnesses reported that it seemed to spin rapidly on its axis displaying all sorts of colors. It began to zigzag across the sky and appeared to come so close to the Earth that it frightened the people. People’s soaking wet clothing and the ground were suddenly dry and yet no one was burned. Hundreds of people, including hardened skeptics were converted then and there.

It is interesting that while modern-day skeptics may talk about the crowd being hypnotized, that it was a magic trick, that it was a result of sun-blindness or other such excuses, no one has given any sort of scientific explanation of the events. Nor has anyone been able to explain how the event could have been predicted to the date and time a month earlier. It is also interesting that while skeptics try to explain the event away NONE of them have ever said that it did not happen because it was reported in newspapers around the globe.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... fatima.jpg

Since that time there have been numerous on-going miracles which have taken place at Fatima among devout believers.
This obviously offers incredible evidence of the existence of the supernatural, of Mary, of Jesus and of God.

I am tired, so I will call it here, but there are many, many more in the miracle category.

Please pick, what you consider, one of the strongest arguments. We can start with that one...

Note that I did not say that these were the ONLY ones in each category; there are far, far more. All of the ones I did include do show major evidence for the existence of God. Perhaps the three biggest are the argument of the necessity of a first cause, also referred to as the "Cosmological Argument" which actually dates back to Aristotle, and the scientific argument of the exact fine-tuning of the universal constants to not only allow for a universe to exist but also to allow for life to exist. This is something which is acknowledged by virtually every acknowledged scientist no matter what their faith or lack thereof. There is also no getting around the "Miracle of the Sun" which was witnessed by approximately 70,000+ people and was reported in newspapers around the world. Both scientists and atheists witnessed this event. Approximately 500 atheists who were witnesses became Christians or came back to Christianity.

[POI]

Note that I did not say that these were the ONLY ones in each category; there are far, far more. All of the ones I did include do show major evidence for the existence of God. Perhaps the two biggest are the argument of the necessity of a first cause, also referred to as the "Cosmological Argument" which actually dates back to Aristotle, and the scientific argument of the exact fine-tuning of the universal constants to not only allow for a universe to exist but also to allow for life to exist. This is something which is acknowledged by virtually every acknowledged scientist no matter what their faith or lack thereof. There is also no getting around the "Miracle of the Sun" which was witnessed by approximately 70,000+ people and was reported in newspapers around the world.

I politely ask again. Which one do you want to address the most? This is not my first rodeo. I'm aware there exists many 'arguments'