Leo Lane: Then someone observes that God cannot be seen, heard, touched smelt, or tasted, and questions the existence of God.

Fair enough, which leads me to...

Leo Lane: Then we are told that he must exist, because he made the world in which we live, and if he did not, then who did?

I question “Who,” does there have to be a “Who?” Is it Logical to have a “Who?” Why is the “Who” a “he?” If the “Who” cannot be seen, heard, touched smelt or tasted, & we assign “He” to Humans as they exist at present then the “Who” is a non-entity, or “It” which is called a God.

If a God exists & has Form (“let us make man in our own likeness.”) then a God “Must” have limits of some type, of. given size, shape, texture, gender (one of three or more, nowadays) In order to go from one place to another, taking into account these things then, “Time” must also be a factor. Time is lineal & only moves forward even for an” It” or a “God.”

Leo Lane: It is ridiculous for highly intelligent fools like Richard Dawkins to make the puerile pronouncement that there is no god,

I could be said also that highly intelligent fools such as Creationists & other Religious Fanatics make puerile announcements that there is a God.

Yutsie: The only worthwhile miracle, is when by the grace of God we are able to transcend our identification and attachment to this human body and its innate desires.

& be “Born Again” as a Cow & live on the streets of Calcutta. Wonderful.

Yuyutsu:

Why do you see life and mortality as problems to be solved? What is wrong with them that needs to be fixed? Why do you see them as things which you need to be lifted out of?

Some people have more problems than others but life and mortality are no one’s problem. All our problems are simply practical ones. You have to look at real problems and not some kind of mental creations. Life is there to be lived – it is not a problem to be solved. Mortality just exists as part of life like the Sun exists or gravity exists.

Don’s views are not representative of modern Christians, at least in Australia.

I do wish Don had read some of Peter Sellick’s carefully crafted repudiations of this kind of supernaturalism on this site. Or perhaps watched one of Brian Cox’s popular science programs on the origins of the universe (which address point 2 rather well). As it is, he must torture both science and theology to try to support his arguments.

Even if Don’s five “miracles” were valid arguments – and they are not – they would tell us precisely nothing about the nature of the Creator God and how we can choose between the different religions’ apparently contradictory claims about creation (or indeed the two apparently contradictory creation stories in the first two books of Genesis). As JBSH pithily points out, there is no basis in this kind of creationism to choose between Yahweh and the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Adian: the Flying Spaghetti Monster

Now we should leave the Flying Spaghetti Monster alone. It's not his Flailing Noodle Arms you have to worry about it's his Great Meat Balls & the Sauce.

Oh dear, what a strange article.
I read somewhere above that we mere humans can neither prove nor disprove the existence of any God, and indeed I doubt that anyone will ever find out what happened at the beginning of the creation of this world.

So it all comes down to faith really, and if you have faith in a book written 2000 years ago by mere men who want you to believe what they say about creation etc, then good luck to you. But please don't knock my 'faith' in not believing the old book and it's authors as complete fiction.

One wonders how on earth mankind managed to get on and move forward before ever the fictitious bible was foisted upon human kind? It is humans that have brought about change in our world, not any fictitious being...

Yuyutsu,
To some extent I would agree with you, but I suspect Don may as well. Arguments examining physical or material observations can only be signs pointing in a certain direction. Ultimately faith is based on trust in the words and the communication of the one in whom you have believed.

So some say Christians should be proclaiming the 'Rock of Ages' rather than discussing the age of rocks. But I would add that God's Word should be consistent with his world, or how or why would any logical or reasonable person have faith in it?

Madmick,
Please have another look at your logic. You put forward:
'The inability to disprove X, does not lend weight to the proposition X.'
Well, I would suggest it does.

Let's say X='Barack was born in Hawaii'.
The inability to disprove Barack was born in Hawaii does not lend weight to him being born there. Rather, I would suggest it does. He was either born there or he wasn't. It's that simple.

And I don't think you've caught the thrust of Don's article. It's not about 'things we can't explain'. He does plenty of explaining.

Jayb,
Asking questions is good. I'm not sure how closely related your questions are to this article. But there are thousands of articles included in the website Don oversees. You could look it up. He's not averse to answering questions relating to the validity of the biblical Scriptures.