Hi, require assistance in argueing for my position. Any help much appreciate. Cheers.

[JamesT]

Hey I need help to answer against this argument from the creation side. Any help greatly appreciated. Cheers
__________________________________________________ _____________

That's great you've managed to created more gaps for God to fill. The truth is that I'm not one the spoon fed by religion, I asked questions which makes more sense when intelligence is applied to bridge gaps than to assume the universe is based on chaos and disorder. God exists before time and makes His preexistence illogical for He's the source of all energy, time,space and matter. Tell me, are your thoughts products of randomness or consciousness? this consciousness is it a product of disorder? Because religion cannot base its argument on physical evidence doesn't make its claims invalid otherwise rather it superimposes science in its entirety. The problem is that nowadays people misuse religion for their selfish requests and make God distant them the non religious POV becomes warped about the truth throwing the baby out with the bath water, discrediting every ties to the Creator. We all know this but some people just choose apply the same principles of man to God. They think God is a finite entity that dwells in the Sky, that's limited because unfavourable things happen and fail to see they are part of a grand design.
All scientific facts still change to meet up with God's word. Today, the prophecies of the Bible are unravelling : internet, cashless transactions, space exploration, cloning and Modern Warfare are all documented. If we disregard the Bible as the truth because of the God you despise, then only those who pay attention will tap into the knowledge and be able to preemptively avert dangers by calling unto the Savior

Have ever wonder why there are miracles and faith healing that defy medical reports and diagnosis?
Have you asked what happens to consciousness when the body dies? The universe is vast and unexplored dimensions are merely touched and observed and man on his little blue rock doubt the existence of a Supreme Being ,the creator of the universe? Definitely science is taking the common sense out of people and philosophy is doing more harm of twisting faith with facts

One more thing, God is not "god of the gaps" as He's the source of all creation

“Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It’s like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can’t trust my own thinking, of course I can’t trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.” —C.S. Lewis
__________________________________________________ _____________

That is what he said.. I have come across a site that completely obliterates this quote: https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueAtheism/com..._joke_and/

My overall view on the topic is this, which is a point within itself:

It seems like he's not advancing his own position by trying to trash another. It's called the argument from ignorance and incredulity. He's setting up a false dichotomy where either the current scientific theory explains everything, or else "whatever his explanation is" wins by default. Not the case at all. If he did manage to debunk current theory (not likely) then we would simply have no good explanation. We would then investigate to find a new one. We wouldn't fill the gap of knowledge with magical fairy tales. He's really just displaying his ignorance.

In short: "This is complicated and I think it would make more sense if someone did it deliberately" is not evidence. It is the argument from personal incredulity fallacy.

But saying that I would want to try and counter the argument with what was said above and more, be it actually answering the questions or something else that science has taught us.

But the rest of it I would appreciate any assistance. I am doing this more for myself than debating but would like to do both.
Thanks