For the atheists who believe man created God...?

Nature is too complex for there not to be a supreme being that is in charge. I look at the plant world and have to believe in God. The plant world is what fascinates me. The flowers alone spell God. I use to have a plant called a Century plant. One year everyone that had a Century plant in my neighborhood saw their plant bloom and die. This happened within the same week. No one knows the mystery to that. Bloom and die. The first time any of those plants had bloomed.

Is there something here you are trying to tell us God?

In the animal kingdom you find certain animals that know when a Tsunami is coming. God could call upon nature to exterminate every person on earth if he wanted to.

The earth has to keep on it's axises to exist.

Now God has told man what he has to do to have a happy ending. This is to accept his Son he sent to redeem us to him.

God has given us free will to choose our course of action on this earth. This way God can find out what spirit we let live within us. A clean or corrupt spirit. He is looking for spirits that love righteousness to live with him forever. The rest he will trash.

Do i personally have a better answer....no. but i'm not in the business of finding the beginning of all existence. Logically is there something that must have done it if we don't know....not really. Logically there are things we still don't know yet that could help us understand the how and why. We still need to study further.

So just because we don't have the answer right now that means we should just give up and say god did it? That isn't logical at all. Not one bit, and i'm sure the other side had made this argument since the first argument began.

Just because we don't have the answer in our lifetime doesn't mean we won't get it. Look at how long it took to get the answers we have now and ask yourself where the world would be if we never questioned. Atheists don't run in fear from the concept of god, they wonder where the concept gained credibility.

The current belief according to physicists is that the universe is a four dimensional manifold. The easiest way to explain a four dimensional manifold in regards to this question is like me handing you a spherical object and asking you where did this sphere begin and where does it end? It had to be started somewhere and it had to connect with the rest of the sphere to finish it's shape, but where did it actually begin or where did it actually end? The truth is that we may never know or never really be able to prove one way or the other. This also begs to ask if in the case of the universe (this is where my sphere analogy breaks down) if it HAD to really start anywhere? It may just be the human brain demanding that there is a beginning and an end and demanding we contribute it to something. That's the strange part of a manifold, it doesn't really have a beginning or an end so there may not have been a point of "creation" if you will but a parabolic "point" of generation that doesn't have a beginning and may not have an end.

There very easily might be a God, a supreme, original creator, but obviously--VERY obviously, the Holy Bible got it wrong. The Bible makes it totally clear the world was created in 6 days, if you want a literal reading, its 6 DAYS, and if you want to "interpret" 6 days to millions or billions of years you might as well "interpret" everything else too, making the whole thing ridiculous and meaningless. The "god" we worship was created about 6000 years ago, he was called El Shaddai, he lived in a mountain, that is who the ancient Hebrews worshiped and when the Egyptians kicked them out they had to make "god" universal because they didn't have that mountain any more. Maybe some tribe in the Amazon has the right god, maybe some tribe in Indonesia, or maybe the Romans were right, or maybe the right god hasn't even been discovered yet, but you can absolutely bet for sure that the god depicted in the Holy Bible is wrong because the whole Bible is ridiculous as a fact source.

I'm sorry but I don't see the point in discussing evolution or the big bang or the origin of life (3 distinct events) with someone who doesn't understand them and who is using that gap in their knowledge to justify their belief in the existence in God.

Actually, when it comes right down to it that's a perfect metaphor for how and why man created religion. It was to fill gaps in his knowledge.

"Obviously, in all the time scientists have been on Earth, none have been able to come up with the answer as to how all things came to exist, yet here we are."-You act as if scientists had the big bang theory for centuries and that science hasn't found answers that were previously unknown.

Even if science doesn't yet have all the answers it has the potential to create new information, new answers. Reading the same old book over and over for two thousand years generates nothing new, which was exactly the intention of those who wrote it. They knew that new ideas were dangerous.

"There is a theory that states that if the meaning of the universe is ever discovered the universe would collapse upon its self and expand into an even more complex and confusing universe." "There is another theory that states that this has already happened." There there is your answer this is not the first universe the answer is in another state off time unreachable to anyone

The god of the gaps is so weak it barely falls into the category of an argument.

Please try not to use the word "logically" when coming out with this sort of rubbish.

Premise: scientists do not have the answers

Conclusion: goddidit

Fallacy employed: argumentum ad ignorantium

Edit: God does not have to be given any consideration as a possibility whatsoever. Neither does bigfoot, the Loch Ness moster, Toucan Sam, Rudolf the red-nosed reindeer, the king of the Morlocks, nor the wicked witch of the West.