Originally posted by @divegeester
Sorry, I miss wrote my question.

Why DO you write God as "G-D" I.e. with a dash?

I understood you miss wrote your question, you have ask me the same thing in the past. My answer is the one I offered you earlier.
😵

Originally posted by @black-beetle
I understood you miss wrote your question, you have ask me the same thing in the past. My answer is the one I offered you earlier.
😵

Your answer is incomplete and incoherent; you state and claim to respect these religions and yet these religions use the word "God" not the non-word "G-d". It is not an important distinction to me personally other than my suspicion is that you are not being entirely, shall I say, forthright.

Originally posted by @divegeester
Your answer is incomplete and incoherent; you state and claim to respect these religions and yet these religions use the word "God" not the non-word "G-d". It is not an important distinction to me personally other than my suspicion is that you are not being entirely, shall I say, forthright.

It is neither incomplete nor incoherent. It is an old Jewish tradition to write not G‑d's name in a place where it could be discarded or erased. Although I reject all the religions, I write not G-d's name out of respect for the people whose religion is centered on the belief that G-d is the creator😵

Originally posted by @black-beetle
What do you mean? Hindus believe that all the gods of their pantheon are different manifestations of the very same supernatural entity😵

From the perspective of one who rejects them all, they are all the same. That is not the
case with God who created the universe. God has done several things that set Him apart,
from creation, the flood, choosing Abraham then promising him a child in his old age,
having Isaac, having Jacob over the his brother, gave promises to their children brought
into and out of Egypt, gave them the promised land, gave them king David, promised that
from David's seed Jesus would come. Then Jesus did come to save us from our sins, no
other God has done the things the Almighty has done.

There is no god besides the Most High, who was, is, and is to come.

Originally posted by @xyyz
How is proof of amino acids (natural), proof of God (supernatural)? Life is not proof of God, because life does not need a God to exist. Doesn't need a 'Creator' to transform from simple organic compounds by way of chemical reactions to single celled organisms.

You are picking and choosing what is proof of God and is not.
So tell me, where did all of this "natural" come from?
Your suggesting that part of the creation is proof of God isn't real, but ignoring the whole.

Originally posted by @xyyz
How is proof of amino acids (natural), proof of God (supernatural)? Life is not proof of God, because life does not need a God to exist. Doesn't need a 'Creator' to transform from simple organic compounds by way of chemical reactions to single celled organisms.

Life comes from life.

Life from non life is not natural. We have never seen it. We can't recreate it.

This means the moment at which life entered this universe does not fit our understanding of how nature works.

Given the situation, God as the source of life is on equal footing with natural sourced abiogenesis.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
You are picking and choosing what is proof of God and is not.
So tell me, where did all of this "natural" come from?
Your suggesting that part of the creation is proof of God isn't real, but ignoring the whole.

OK, how's this: NOTHING in this universe is definite proof of God. Did I cover all the bases? And all this 'natural' (amino acids) came from the elements carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. So many phenomenons we saw or felt were explained away with, "Came from God". That is not an explanation, an answer OR truth. That is an 'opinion'. If 'blind faith' works for you, great. But don't preach it as fact.

Originally posted by @xyyz
OK, how's this: NOTHING in this universe is definite proof of God. Did I cover all the bases? And all this 'natural' (amino acids) came from the elements carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. So many phenomenons we saw or felt were explained away with, "Came from God". That is not an explanation, an answer OR truth. That is an 'opinion'. If 'blind faith' works for you, great. But don't preach it as fact.

Where did everything come from? Why does the universe work like clock work, from the
way life is designed to the universe itself. Just looking at a tiny piece and declaring there
is no God is a bit near sighted, and turns you blind to the whole.

Originally posted by @xyyz
OK, how's this: NOTHING in this universe is definite proof of God. Did I cover all the bases? And all this 'natural' (amino acids) came from the elements carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. So many phenomenons we saw or felt were explained away with, "Came from God". That is not an explanation, an answer OR truth. That is an 'opinion'. If 'blind faith' works for you, great. But don't preach it as fact.

Blind faith, I'd say that has more to your point of view than mine.

Originally posted by @xyyz
OK, how's this: NOTHING in this universe is definite proof of God. Did I cover all the bases? And all this 'natural' (amino acids) came from the elements carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen. So many phenomenons we saw or felt were explained away with, "Came from God". That is not an explanation, an answer OR truth. That is an 'opinion'. If 'blind faith' works for you, great. But don't preach it as fact.

Blind faith.

What do you call believing in something that has never actually been observed or tested with positive results?

Why do those who reject God need abiogenesis? Because without it, they are stuck with an undefendable position.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Where did everything come from? Why does the universe work like clock work, from the
way life is designed to the universe itself. Just looking at a tiny piece and declaring there
is no God is a bit near sighted, and turns you blind to the whole.

I understand what you're saying with these rebuttals but I think you're missing my point. Everything in the universe from the moment of the big bang to this moment in time, did not require a God to happen. Science has shown this with experiments in the LHC. So it can correctly be said as fact. It's doesn't disprove a God, but notes that one was not needed for these events to happen. Your proof of God has no confirmation, it is opinion, and should not be treated as fact.

Originally posted by @xyyz
I understand what you're saying with these rebuttals but I think you're missing my point. Everything in the universe from the moment of the big bang to this moment in time, did not require a God to happen. Science has shown this with experiments in the LHC. So it can correctly be said as fact. It's doesn't disprove a God, but notes that one was not needed for ...[text shortened]... happen. Your proof of God has no confirmation, it is opinion, and should not be treated as fact.

Funny how can gets translated to was by true believers.

Did they witness abiogenesis in the LHC?

Originally posted by @xyyz
I understand what you're saying with these rebuttals but I think you're missing my point. Everything in the universe from the moment of the big bang to this moment in time, did not require a God to happen. Science has shown this with experiments in the LHC. So it can correctly be said as fact. It's doesn't disprove a God, but notes that one was not needed for ...[text shortened]... happen. Your proof of God has no confirmation, it is opinion, and should not be treated as fact.

Big Bang... you talked about blind faith correct, or did you witness the Big Bang? You still have not answered where did everything come from? The Big Bang wasn't the beginning of everything, something had to go BANG! What was that and where was it sitting, what was going on before the BANG, there is also the fact that the BIG BANG is not a fact.

Originally posted by @kellyjay
Big Bang... you talked about blind faith correct, or did you witness the Big Bang? You still have not answered where did everything come from? The Big Bang wasn't the beginning of everything, something had to go BANG! What was that and where was it sitting, what was going on before the BANG, there is also the fact that the BIG BANG is not a fact.

When you have a complete model, the universe today, you can do the math and calculate that since the universe is expanding, it must have expanded from something much smaller. And the equation showed it started from a singularity. As far as what happened at any time before that doesn't matter because the laws of physics breaks down at that point so the answer is unattainable.
I can turn it around on you and ask the same type of question to which you cannot answer as fact; who made God? Saying He always was and always will be doesn't answer with a factual response.

Originally posted by @xyyz
How is proof of amino acids (natural), proof of God (supernatural)? Life is not proof of God, because life does not need a God to exist. Doesn't need a 'Creator' to transform from simple organic compounds by way of chemical reactions to single celled organisms.

How do you know that life doesn't need God to exist?