Ok, this one should be easier to manage now.

Quote:

This is the first time I've heard this definition of superstition. However it's really not that different from JCL's quoted definition.



There is an important distinction, but its going to be harder for a materialist to see (no offense, everyone has a bias ). By its definition, the belief in a creator is not superstitious. In fact, its the opposite of. It would be superstitious to believe that matter can create itself, because this goes against the laws of nature.

Quote:

It's not really that surprising ... 'cause' is something semi-artificial, a bit like 'time' is.



This is the sort of confusion that secular humanism/materialism allows. Time exists, I can assure you. If not, then I'll just jump back to a few days ago when I lost my wallet and stop myself from losing it.

Except I never would have been able to lose it in the first place.

The quote you're referring to admits that they can't prove 'cause.' However, that doesn't really mean anything to a rational person, which is the sort of logic I've seen you use time and again. For instance, I can't really prove gravity, but I can prove its effects. Our experience always confirms it, just like Horner said.

In fact, to say that something can exist without cause is completely irrational. Unless you can point me to an example of something on the scale of our universe existing without cause? Even a fraction of the scale?

Quote:

Anyways, this is where the fun starts, because creationism seems to me pretty much like 'things popping out of nowhere'.



So cause can't be proved, but since creationism (according to you) doesn't have a cause, you say its ridiculous. This just proves my point.

Furthermore, this statement says more about you than creationism. You've rejected God so thoroughly that you can't even consider him within the safety of rhetoric. God is the cause. Things in our universe didn't pop up out of nowhere, that would be atheistic creation.

Quote:

It seems more likely to me that something comes from something else, be it smaller things, larger things or whatever.



Yup, everything has a cause.

Quote:

Creationism does [postulate that things come from nowhere] however.



No it does not.

Quote:

Because; how can a God create matter?



You've got a bigger problem than me here. How can NOTHING create matter?

Quote:

Magic or some kind of powers? Energy?



I admit that I don't know how God did it. That would make me a god in some ways, because my knowledge would be supernatural.

These are all physical constructs. I imagine God's power lies in something completely indescribable by any language we could invent in the physical universe. Nor could it be comprehended. We can't comprehend His power, but we can comprehend the effect of His power.

Quote:

Magical powers don't exist just like witchcraft, so that would be superstition.



That's a strawman, since no one seriously thinks that God used physical means to create the universe in which physical means exist.

Quote:

Sounds pretty unlikely to me, since nothing we know of in this world is created or 'came into existance' from nothing. And you are talking about our socalled 'assumptions'...?!



Ok, and your solution to this 'problem' is that instead of an all-powerful God, the all-powerful Nothing created matter. Sounds likely.

Quote:

When we know enough about the building blocks used in the process of how life came to existance, then we come closer to where life's origin lies.



No. If you've been keeping tabs on origin of life research you'll notice they aren't trying to figure out the physical properties of matter, they're trying to find a certain combination of matter that could act as a bridge between non-living matter and living matter.

Quote:

The author isn't talking about infinity anymore the moment he sticks a number on those books and substracts.



Yeah, that's kind of the point. But I won't get into that just yet.

Quote:

(Besides that, it's not unimaginable that there could still be an infinite amount of numbers before number 4.)



Ok, then imagine that he subtracted all books labelled 4 or more, and then subtracted all books labelled 0 or less.

Quote:

And his green book "proof" of the impossibility of infinity was already made fun of by Galileo Galilei in his fictional dialogue with the dimwit "Simplicio", in the 16th century.



I would agree if it was even referring to the same thing, but you missed one of the points horner made. In mathematics, it works. In reality, it does not. I can't be applied to the physical realm.

His point was to say that infinity works in math, just like Galileo pointed out. However, in reality, it fails miserably.

Quote:

Some people seem to assume that "Big Bang" means the universe sort of exploded from a point.



If by 'assume' you mean, 'extrapolated it from various quotes by materialists' then yes. Its in textbooks.

Quote:


We don't need to grasp any of those things when there's no shred of evidence such things actually happened at all. So why not look at it in a more realistic way?



There's no 'evidence' of the big bang either, but I'm sure you don't find it that hard to believe. We know the universe is expanding (probably) and has a general pattern of background radiation. Beyond that you can insert anything you want, big bang, flying sphagetti monster, etc.

Quote:

Seeing is believing.



Quite. In that case you won't mind if I don't believe macro evolution or the big bang. But then you'll excuse me for believing in God. I can see the universe, I can see the laws that reveal its inability to create itself. Therefore, seeing is believing and I believe in God.

Quote:

Doesn't the bible say that 'when you believe, be prepared because then the world will become a more hostile environment' or something along those lines? That would mean I'll be fine.



Its funny watching the way atheists view the bible. Playing the 'devil's advocate' as you do in a sense here, you're admitting that you'll trade your soul because people will go as far as despising, persecuting, making fun of, and even killing you. Interesting.

"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."