Mike,

>>Ahh, but the problem here is that an "outside force" (to use John's terms) created the situation.
>>IOW, who made the box?
>
>Ahh, but the problem here is that an "outside force" (to use John's terms) created the creator of the box.

No, the creator of the box is where it stops.

>
>Simply bringing everything back to the cyclical argument "God created everything" always leaves you asking "how was God created" and therefore you are no farther off than where you started. In fact, you're probably worse off.

You demonstrate a lack of theological knowledge. Let me explain again.. The God who is revealed in the Bible self declares Himself as being the "I AM". That is, He is self-existent and has no need whatsoever to rely upon anything for His existence. IOW< the problem you are having here comes from a too-small picture of the nature of God.

Sure, if you define God down you can find al kinds of problems but the logical error you make is in the defining down. The minute you do that you are limiting God to your ability to understabd Him and that's not logical. How in the world can you or I really define a concept, oh, like 'eternity'? Just because you cannot does not mean that it isn't real.

>
>Is there a reason you keep bringing this amazlingly incomplete conslusion up? How many times does it take someone to ask "Who created the universe where God exists" for you to realize that you do not have the final answer? Of yeah, the book says that noone created God. My bad.

And how many times will you persist in not accepting the plain words I type? God has always existed. What arrogance you demonstrate to insist that the universe bend to your understanding of it.

>
>Doug, try to think outside of the book once and a while.

LOL..

Sure.. If you'd just try and think at all. <g>

>
>>When their (the atoms) natural desire is to fly apart, how did they get forced together?
>
>Natural desire? Do you really understand what you're talking about? True, there is energy that holds atoms together, and when the atom is no longer held together, that energy can be released. But how can particals have a "natural desire"? Thats ridiculous.

Really? Ok, substitute 'behavior' then. The fact remains that a greater force is (perfect present tense) holding the atoms that comprise you and I and the entire universe together.

What is that force Mike?

>
>>And, given that all observations regarding order v non-order demonstrate that the universe is going only in one direction (order ---> non-order)
>
>Cite?

So, you assert thatyou are unable to see the order in nature? That the laws of physics always operate in the same manner? That a corn seed produceds a corn plant? That DNA controls results?

>
>>Therefore, this force, must have existed before (speaking in time-based terms) atoms and I suppose we can conclude safely, will continue to exist after (time-based) all the material universe ceases to exist, at whatever point that might be
>
>Lol. You go from "before atoms" to "after all material". If you can prove that atoms aren't made of material, I suppose you have a point. But you can't.

Ok, I'll take a pound of that material then please. It's energy, you knucklehead. <g> Where does that come from? How does it hold together?

>
>>So.. This 'force' created the atoms by forcing them together, is a greater power than all the atoms in the universe,
>
>What? How can you conclude this? Better question, how can you measure "which force is a greater 'power'". What do you mean by "power"? Are you assuming facts that are not in evidnce?

Not at all. I simply point out the fact that a greater power is holding the atoms together otherwise they would fly apart. Do you dispute this?


>
>Here's a question, whats a greater power, a muscle, or the tissue that holds it together? I don't think there is an objective answer to this. I believe you've moved the discussion into the realm of subjectivity.

No, you're attempting toso do with this silly question.

In one sense the greater power is the mind that controls both but that's beyond you I suppose.

What holds the atom together Mike?