Originally Posted by My First Timbs
His point was, even if we assume that the big bang and
all of that did occurr... and that evolution did indeed occur etc etc,,
there still has to be some "force" that governs or is in control of the
natural laws of our universe.
Why must there? Even if this claim was granted, you'd still have the job of explaining what this "force" is.
This argument is a very poor one and commits the "Argumentum ad ignorantiam" or "Argument from ignorance" logical fallacy.
From what I can understand, your argument is such:
1. Geometry exists
2. We can't explain/don't know why geometry exists
3. therefore, god exists
The error in reasoning lies in between the 2nd premise and the conclusion.