So, you are going with the god of the gaps? Anything that cannot yet be explained is evidence of your god? Even when the gaps keep being closed?
This is pretty poor stuff since the fact that something is not understood just now is not evidence that it will never be understood. Even if something can never be understood, that is still not evidence for anything supernatural.
Do you have any positive evidence for your god. or are gods just stuff that has been made up to cope with lack of knowledge?
"Cosmologists use the term Big Bang to refer to the idea that the universe was originally extremely hot and dense at some finite time in the past" - Wikipedia.org...
But where did that hot, dense stuff come from? Did it come from nothing? From something? Is is eternal?...Sounds like a great, purely natural explanation for the origin of our universe, doesn't it? So I disagree quite strongly with your premise that there is good evidence for a natural universe, so the concluding question is irrelevant.
"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead,..." [emphasis added] (Romans 1:18)
Though the order and complexity we see in nature is quite a testament to God's existence, this is not what Paul is talking about; note that he said "invisible". These invisible attributes are clearly seen, not by our eyes, but by our heart, mind, and soul. We can even come to the point of understanding (at least to a small extent) His eternal power and Godhead. These are the invisible attributes that Paul spoke of.
You are making that silly claim that if science has not yet clarified something, then religion can. That has not been shown.
Why should anyone suppose that a book written thousands of years ago by a bunch of ignorant savages could be of any help in understanding the universe? Your last two paragraphs are just gibberish. Impressive gibberish, but still gibberish.
By the way, the heart is just a pump for blood. Why do you perpetuate these ancient errors?
It is common for atheists to cry "religion!" when they feel that "religion" has trumped science.
Firstly, what is the error in "religion" trumping science?
The error is that there is no way to verify the accuracy of religious so-called explanations. Remember, the metaphysicist has no laboratory.
Secondly, "religion" does not clarify that which science has failed at; "religion" makes it possible for science to clarify anything! (by the way, that was a very lengthy argument compacted into one sentence, so I can give more details if you wish)
Please do so: that sounds like poppycock to me.
God is the immaterial, infinite, eternal, holy, just, merciful, loving being who is the focal point of this universe, and upon whom, and by whom, the universe is based and created.
Evidence, please? Impressive gobbledygook is still gobbledygook.
My use of the word "heart" was not meant to be equated with the muscle in my body. Just like if you told your spouse that you "love them from the bottom of your heart", you would not expect them to actually think you meant the blood-pumping muscle in your body...
I would not use the phrase. I dislike ancient errors. Why not just say what you mean? Preaching is offensive to those of us who are not religious.
Also, a laboratory could not exist were it not for the metaphysicist. This is because for any epistemological beliefs to be put in place (as in science), metaphysical beliefs must be put in place first. As an example, if a scientist wishes to determine what the nature of a ladybug is, and he thus determines the best way he should go about doing that (epistemology), he must first have a number of metaphysical beliefs in place, e.g., he can determine the nature of a ladybug, and other such things.
Yet more gibberish.
Experience shows that science works. No handwaving woo-woo is needed.
So having established where epistemological reality stems from (it stems from metaphysical reality), the question remains; from where does metaphysical reality stem from? "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen 1:1); "For in six days the LORD made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day." (Exodus 20:11); "For by Him all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. All things were created through Him and for Him. And He is before all things, and in Him all things consist." (Col. 1:16-17).
How is it that you do not see the absurdity of quoting the bible to someone who does not accord it any authority at all? You are demonstrating the deleterious effects of religion upon the human intellect.