“If you will honestly consider the evidence you will discover Darwinism is “chance” theory, it is not testable it is not falsifiable in the lab! Additionally its main predictions, the fossil record, the tree of life and new species created every 1000 generations are completely refuted“

[emphasis mine]

That is the single best example of a willful lie I’ve ever seen. Darwinian evolution is absolutely NOT about chance, and if you knew the first thing about it, you wouldn’t come out with such absolute bollocks. Secondly, the fossil record strongly supports the Theory of Evolution. You can deny that and lie about it to suit your fantasy beliefs until you’re blue in the face, but do not think you can come here and bare-faced lie about the evidence in the way you just did. As for the part of your reply that I’ve put in bold, you (or some other ignorant theist) has pulled that out of their arse. The Theory of Evolution makes no such prediction. You’re full of shit and arguing against something that you very clearly know nothing about. Fuck off, educate yourself, then come back and we’ll talk.

“To Custador: Scientific evidence tells us that matter has not always existed.To Custador: Scientific evidence tells us that matter has not always existed.”

I call complete bullshit, but do feel free to SHOW ME THE EVIDENCE YOU HAVE JUST CLAIMED EXISTS. My bet is that you won’t. Regardless, it still wouldn’t point to a creator if it was true, much less the Judeo-Christian God.

Word games. Your whole attitude relies on playing silly buggers with semantics. But what it boils down to is this:

You cannot philosophise God into existing. He exists, or He does not. If He exists, there must be evidence that He exists. But there is NONE. Zero. Nada. Zip. Bupkiss. Therefore, it is entirely reasonable to conclude that He does not.

To Custador: Scientific evidence tells us that matter has not always existed. This is a reality that materialists simply refuse to accept because of the implication. Einstein’s relativity theory is the most tested and most verified theory in modern physics. Put whatever spin you wish on the multiverse, oscillating universes, “egg” boundaries et’ al’, at one point, no matter, no energy, no space and no time existed, (no quantum vacuum of fluctuating particle waves) there must be an uncaused cause, there must be a prime mover, something caused this amazing universe we live in to exist?

To the “theory of I says”: what an interesting “handle” after all that is the real question is it not? Who or what has the authority to say “I say” and “in the beginning there was light”? What an amazing God who creates a single species on earth with the capacity to communicate and have a relationship with Him, who gives this species the choice to accept or reject that invitation of love and relationship. He even gave us the free-will to shit in our own nest, or to deny His existence, after all, does that hurt Him or us?

You also say that “we can all conceive what perfection in every respect represents” by what standard do we accomplish this conception? How is it that you can conceive “how the universe ‘ought’ to be” who’s measuring stick are you using? Would you agree to the standards set by Stalin or Hitler, I’m guessing not, but why not? On material naturalism all things are undirected, random occurrences, the universe just is the way it is, right? If so, then why do you spend your time attacking the way some things are? What a futile effort in circular reasoning. But deep inside, you know there is more to what you see and feel and know the way things “ought” to be rather than the way they are! Stop looking at the material creation for answers and seek to understand the purposes of the Creator. He has the answers.

Finally to trj: Thanks for the comments. Which species displays free-will, self-sacrifice, creates artwork, music for entertainment purposes only, writes books, poetry, music, which among the species is philanthropic? We are utterly unique as creatures on this earth, yes animals exhibit communication and social traits, but might that be because they were created for our benefit? A single Creator with a single purpose has that prerogative does He not? Based upon material naturalism how do you explain the mind, consciousness, mathematics, and information, none of this is “material”?

Why do you assume God is “an infinitely complex god that defies physics and logic?” God is not “material”, so therefore He has no moving parts, no chemistry, no anatomy, He is mind, He is intellect alone, and that is the simplest of all entities in our material universe. Richard Dawkins doesn’t have all the answers; God is not a “complex” idea. Now, take as Richard does that perhaps aliens deposited DNA on earth, now that’s real science and a simple answer, isn’t it? Theism complies with the principle of Ockham’s’ Razor. God is the creator of Physics and Logic, how can He therefore defy them?

To each of you, the universe is not eternal, material cannot create itself, therefore something must be the uncaused cause, that uncaused cause cannot be material, therefore science cannot answer the question of what and who God is? If you want to know, ask Him, He’ll answer, He’s listening to you, He knows your heart, your mind, and your need.