The Devil’s in the Details

I’ve just had an atheist tell me that because people were wrong about Thor pulling the sun across the sky, and Zeus beating the drums of thunder, or the other way around, I’m not sure, that people have been “100% wrong” about God being involved in the workings of nature.

It’s a bit like someone who denies that auto makers exist saying, “Because we’ve shown that there isn’t an army of ants turning cranks in the engine compartment (like people once thought) and because we've shown that there isn’t an army of moles pressing leavers to squirt oil (like people once thought), therefore we know that vehicles are not manufactured, they just happen.

Ok, bad example but time is short and the principle is the same.

This atheist has stated, “It's interesting to point out that throughout the entire history of scientific investigation, not one supernatural explanation has ever been confirmed as true.” Besides Zeus and Thor, he doesn’t give any examples, but let’s give him the benefit of doubt. I’ll be the first to admit that Christians have said some pretty stupid things - things admittedly said in ignorance.

What this atheist (atheists are those who believe that our's was the first intelligence to arise) doesn’t understand is that while the details (Greek mythologies) have been wrong, that in no way takes away from the Christian doctrine of Creator God. This doctrine states that the universe with its exquisitely finely tuned constants and qualities could not and did not come into being from nothing apart from the willed initiation and design of Creator God.

Because the evidence so strongly supports a supernatural explanation for the universe, people like this atheist and better known atheists like Ricky Gervais (very funny man) and Richard Dawkins have been reduced to positing an infinite number of universes to explain the why and how of our universe.

Why have they done that?

Because according to current evidence, the only way to explain the why and how of this universe is a supernatural cause; a cause that operated outside of nature.

That of course is not allowed in the narrow atheist world.

Because atheism does not allow anything outside of the material to exist, atheists have been forced to come up with the idea of an infinite number of universes. The theory being that with an infinite number of universes, one such as ours could come into existence -
. without a natural cause (current evidence says nothing natural existed)
.NOR a cause from outside of nature -

No nature.

No super nature.

It Just Happened! Ta Da!

With an infinite number of universes, even the impossible becomes possible.

In atheist world, that's how things work. So far atheists have been 100% wrong in their suppositions as to how this took place but that doesn't stop them from trying. Even though atheists have been ONE HUNDRED PERCENT WRONG to date, they expect us to believe their next guess will be the right one.

So I asked this atheist if he was perhaps leaning pretty heavily on atheism of the gaps but he wouldn't answer. I asked him quite a few questions actually but he wouldn't answer, so I’ll ask them again here and perhaps someone else would be brave enough to take a shot.

I said:
"we (meaning you and other materialists) don't know "yet" the material cause of the universe"

THAT is a gap in your knowledge. Yes?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.

===============

I said:
You do not have evidence that the cause of the universe is material BUT you are confident, so confident that a material answer will be found that you toss aside the current lack of evidence and simply claim, "Nature did it."

As far as you're concerned an answer that will probably come in the future is as good as having an answer now - Yes?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.

============

I said:
“The evidence is that nothing natural existed at the singularity.”

Are you saying that there WAS something material in existence at the singularity?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.

============

I said:
“The evidence is that NOTHING comes into being without an external cause.”

Are you saying that there ARE things that DO come into being without an external cause?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.
==================

I said:
“The evidence is that the external cause for the beginning of the universe could not have been natural.”

Are you saying that there IS evidence for a natural cause in existence at the singularity?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.
=================

I said:
"The evidence is that if the cause was not natural then it must have been outside of nature, or super natural."

Are you saying that everything CAN come from nothing by nothing?
Or that the universe brought itself into existence;
Or that matter created itself;
Or that matter preexisted itself?

Or are you relying on one of the dozen or more atheist origin of the universe mythologies being tossed around by those desperate to avoid the metaphysical implications of Big Bang Cosmology?

Atheist: [No Answer] Just - They were wrong about Thor, so you’re wrong too.
=================

Even though atheists have been 100% wrong in their ideas of how this universe came into existence without the presence of anything natural / material in existence at the singularity, they continue to press for new and more bizarre scenarios, all in an attempt to avoid the metaphysical implications of Big Bang Cosmology.