Hello J Byt, thanks for responding.
You said:
"Sorry, with due respect your beliefs twist logic to satisfy your desires or indoctrination."
If this was true, then I wouldn't be able to make logical arguments for the existence of God. I'd have to rely on indoctrination and brainwashing, instead.
But it is easy to make logical arguments for the existence of God. You don't need to appeal to traditions or doctrine at all.
You can appeal simply to the universe we observe. Let science tell you that our universe is finite. Then extrapolate logically.
You arrive at the necessary existence of an eternal Creator, without ever appealing to a holy book.
You said:
"Religion has adapted as science exposes the flaws in the early writings."
Some religions may have.
Christianity hasn't needed to.
The first verse of the Bible speaks of an eternal Creator making everything exist out of nothing. Which is precisely what science and logic tell us happen.
It also tells us that before life appeared on Earth, it was a formless ball of rock, but warm enough such that liquid existed on its surface.
It also tells us that plants, fish, birds, and mammals appeared as life on earth before humans.
It's either a massive coincidence that Genesis 1 gets the order of creation right -- or a clue.
You said:
"Secondly if some super intelligent spieces, God created this vast universe, who created God?"
God isn't an advanced species.
We're talking of the necessary existence of an eternal Creator -- a Being who has no beginning and no ending.
Logically, such a being is necessary to explain the existence of a finite universe.
Finite universes are not boundless with regard to time. They are finite -- limited, bounded, restricted. Every facet of our universe is finite, including its relentless march through time, moment by finite moment.
Finite things don't appear on their own. They begin.
That requires that something exists before them, such that it can cause them to begin.
However far back you think the chain of finite things goes, at its beginning, you find a necessarily infinite/eternal source.
There is no logical way around it. You cannot have finite turtles extending infinitely without violating everything we know from logic.
You said:
"We humans, this Earth our home is a mere speck in space and time. We are nothing to nature. If nature through random events, destroyed this Earth, the universe would not even blink an eyelid. Time and events would continue to unfold, as to the natural laws of Nature."
On most of this, we agree.
The universe is vast.
We are not.
But then you appeal to blind faith.
You said:
"In all probability, there are untold life forms scattered throughout the Cosmos. In various stages of development. Some only in infant stages of life before complete destruction. Or others advancing to intelligent conscious before being destroyed by a meteorite or planet activity. Or self destroy, as could happen with humans."
You appeal to "probability," yet probability is merely "blind faith" dressed up in a mathematical word.
You have no evidence for such life. Nor is its existence certain.
Our calculations determining its probability continue to shift as we understand more and more about our universe. It continues to shift down, away from the probability of life being widespread, as we realize how much is required for life to exist.
You appeal to blind faith -- a faith that other life exists at various stages, with no evidence or proof whatsoever of it.
Welcome to faith, my friend.
You've left science completely behind.
You said:
"We are a creation of the universe, nothing more, nothing less."
This is another blind faith assertion you make, a piece of doctrine you want me to accept without taking the time to prove it.
You want me to accept this on your own authority -- to simply believe your doctrine because you tell me to.
What does that sound like, my friend?
If this proposition is true, let's see you argue for it. Let's see your evidence for it.
You said:
"The laws of the all powerful Nature. The unconscious real so called God, Nature itself."
Here you continue to make blind-faith doctrinal assertions, stating your blind-faith belief that Nature is God.
Again, I'm going to need to see some evidence or argument for all of your doctrine.
I won't accept your beliefs on blind faith.
You said:
"We come from Starlight, the building blocks of life. We are children of the Stars. I was born from this Earth, and when I die, I will return. It's that simple."
Where the building blocks of life come from is interesting, but it's not really part of either argument. No one is saying that human bodies aren't composed of the building blocks of the universe.
Yet the existence of the building blocks themselves doesn't account for their order or purpose.
A pile of Lego bricks is a pile of building blocks.
But an elaborate castle composed of Lego blocks speaks to intelligence, to design, to purpose -- to a creator.
And you are far more elaborate than a castle, my friend.
You said:
"Anyhow, it's an interesting subject. All the best. And may Nature bless you!"
Do you see how much you appeal to Nature as your God? Your blind-faith doctrine has taken over completely.
You aren't appealing to science or logic in this, my friend. You've gone full faith, building a system of belief around Nature as your God, even to the point of blessing people in the name of your God.
You are quite adept at creating your own religion.
