This thread sure degenerated, as it is likely such threads do, from what would be discussed from the original posted topic for it. I agree with atheists on one specific thing anyway, it is wasted effort on arguing for belief in what the Bible says to them, it will be dismissed in any case, certainly while they are atheists. Their position, arguing for natural processes explaining everything, should be challenged, and the fine-tuned universe that is showing as the original topic was addressing is basis for such challenge. As it cannot be justly dismissed with enough basis, those honest enough to see that can then be given the evidence of the resurrection of Jesus to consider.
It is as I had said. Either way you have to have faith, whichever position in the argument you take. If it is that there can't be the Creator to explain everything, you who are atheist lack what should deal with necessary existence that must be there, and you have to have faith that there are huge numbers in a multitude of alternate universes, with what is known of the exactness of physical constants in our universe being needed with a big bang to explain it as it is, while there is zero evidence of any one alternate universe.
To say that the odds are too far against those constants being just right for it without it planned and brought about does not have need for there to be knowledge of other universes, as there certainly isn't among any of us, and there is no evidence at all of such. So it is, the universe coming from the presumed big bang with universal constants being only slightly different would not have us or any kind of life possible, this we can know, as scientists do. With our one universe, there isn't such probability for it to be expected at all. If the constants are not in any way parameters that are set, no other universes from their big bangs could have the possibility either. But with no connection to anything including our existence to be permitted with our universe those parameters would be too unlikely to just be exactly what they are to correspond to this being permitted, with slight differences not permitting such. But if they are possibly arranged differently, there is evidence of God, and only seeking explanation without necessary existence finds this need for many other universes to explain ours, while there still is absolutely no evidence for such, and it would be inadequate with no explanation for anything ultimately, with dismissing necessary existence.
There must be the necessary existence behind the universal constants which are needed to be just as they are with the universe coming from the big bang.
I think all the complexity that works so well in many cases that are not from any human origin of design is good evidence, and there are so many testimonies supporting the perspective of God's involvement. And the universe itself, with what I see must be with fine-tuning of parameters to explain it coming from a big bang, isn't with a good explanation other than there being necessary existence behind it all with intelligence and power for all the design, with there being evidence for God that is mentioned, and theorizing multiple universes so that this one working, and with us in it, is possible to explain it is without any evidence at all.
The unlikelihood of the parameters of our universe being just as they are to permit us according to the big bang is with it so improbable, without knowledge of such other universes, that is why there is a faith that there are such without any of the evidence for that. So with this I don't have to provide further basis showing that it is only faith without evidence that there are so many other universes and from that we are of the universe that works out. If it were otherwise, than it is for any of you of that position to show there really is the evidence, and with even that still to show there isn't the Creator explaining all. This can't be done, can it? And in all this nothing is explaining the necessary existence.
My position calls for any who claim there are multitudes of other universes to show any evidence of any others. There isn't any evidence and this I can say. And showing anything of any other things were being discovered doesn't do anything of showing there is such evidence for this.
To not consider this still is taking faith, it is just faith that this can be dismissed, so as not to consider more with it.
The constants that there are actually considered with understanding what they are with their effects with everything of the universe being explained with the big bang, just the one for gravitation alone being different will have every bit of matter dissipating so there wouldn't be any kind of life from that, or all of the universe with everything in it quickly collapsing very shortly after the big bang, and there being no life with that. So what I showed is a good argument. If what I posted is really looked at it may be seen that I do not say that this proves the Bible right apart from it having agreement that all things came about from the Creator. There are other evidences apart from this showing great reliability of the Bible over any other work that would in any way be considered such revelation from the Creator with the Creator understood to be personal, for which I can also make great argument separate from this, and evidence for the resurrection of Jesus is overwhelming but being a discussion apart from this it is useless to use such to share to those with their denial not dealing realistically with these points showing our universe is designed and not from random arrangement and processes occurring only naturally from that.
