Guess who has the burden of proof!

[Ringtone]

Turek has come to the same realization I came to some years ago.

 

[rightwinger]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

 

[LittleNipper]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

 

[Moonglow]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

From nothing comes everything.

 

[LittleNipper]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

From nothing comes everything.

From nothing comes nothing. Nothing in, nothing out.

 

[Ringtone]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

 

[Hollie]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

i don’t see any case to be made for biological life requiring a supernatural creator. There is vastly more evidence for biological life resulting from the process of natural phenomenon than from your gods / competing gods using supernaturalism as the process. For the argument proposing supernaturalism, you will, of course, default to the supernatural creator(s) that commonly associated with western culture. The argument for supernaturalism is similarly made for competing gods associated with differentl cultures / geographic regions. What do you propose makes your gods more likely as the supernatural agents vs. competing gods?

 

[Hollie]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

Nonsense. Nothing about the existence of the universe is in any way evidence of your partisan version of supernatural gods.

There is nothing logical about supernatural entities.

 

[night_son]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

i don’t see any case to be made for biological life requiring a supernatural creator. There is vastly more evidence for biological life resulting from the process of natural phenomenon than from your gods / competing gods using supernaturalism as the process. For the argument proposing supernaturalism, you will, of course, default to the supernatural creator(s) that commonly associated with western culture. The argument for supernaturalism is similarly made for competing gods associated with differentl cultures / geographic regions. What do you propose makes your gods more likely as the supernatural agents vs. competing gods?

You keep slapping down the word supernatural as if it is your only pacifier. In your own words, why do YOU think God must be supernatural? Evidence exists systemically in nature for the engineering of all biological matter. We humans ourselves have based much of our science, machinery and computing systems in particular, on the form and function and design of living terrestrial creatures. A key problem with atheist/anti-God intelligentsia is their sudden and repeated malfunction when pressed to explain exactly what the word, definition and concept of supernatural means and/or entails. Further, and it is all the spare time I've got left to spend on this thread, it has been my experience that most all atheists are religiously driven to disprove . . . religion. Most atheists are more driven by the concept of God to disprove him than even the most devout Christian. As an atheist or whatever you consider yourself you very likely spend more time considering God than the average faithful. That in and of itself is incredibly telling. I am a Christian, however, I will never be the atheist's pacifier. You must find your own path to God. So stop obsessing over Him and get busy.

 

[BreezeWood]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

.

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

.
is the water bottle created by the universe, therefore whatever created the water bottle is god ...

 

[justinacolmena]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

Bible Gateway passage: Romans 1:21-28 - King James Version

Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to...

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Orangecat]

There was a big explosion and then cells started multiplying and forming vastly complicated interdependent specialized systems with an innate desire to reproduce. Yeah, that sounds logical.

 

[Hollie]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

i don’t see any case to be made for biological life requiring a supernatural creator. There is vastly more evidence for biological life resulting from the process of natural phenomenon than from your gods / competing gods using supernaturalism as the process. For the argument proposing supernaturalism, you will, of course, default to the supernatural creator(s) that commonly associated with western culture. The argument for supernaturalism is similarly made for competing gods associated with differentl cultures / geographic regions. What do you propose makes your gods more likely as the supernatural agents vs. competing gods?

You keep slapping down the word supernatural as if it is your only pacifier. In your own words, why do YOU think God must be supernatural? Evidence exists systemically in nature for the engineering of all biological matter. We humans ourselves have based much of our science, machinery and computing systems in particular, on the form and function and design of living terrestrial creatures. A key problem with atheist/anti-God intelligentsia is their sudden and repeated malfunction when pressed to explain exactly what the word, definition and concept of supernatural means and/or entails. Further, and it is all the spare time I've got left to spend on this thread, it has been my experience that most all atheists are religiously driven to disprove . . . religion. Most atheists are more driven by the concept of God to disprove him than even the most devout Christian. As an atheist or whatever you consider yourself you very likely spend more time considering God than the average faithful. That in and of itself is incredibly telling. I am a Christian, however, I will never be the atheist's pacifier. You must find your own path to God. So stop obsessing over Him and get busy.

Which gods do you recommend;?

 

[Hollie]

There was a big explosion and then cells started multiplying and forming vastly complicated interdependent specialized systems with an innate desire to reproduce. Yeah, that sounds logical.

There was an explosion?

 

[Blues Man]

The fact of life is proof of a Creator. Scientifically, there is absolutely no proof of spontaneous generation. One must come to terms with either one or the other possibility. There is certainly much more evidence for GOD than for spontaneous generation.

What you fail to grasp is that just because we might not know exactly how the universe or life came to be is not proof that some invisible all powerful supernatural being is responsible for it.

I'm of the mind that we might be incapable of understanding the processes of the origin of the universe much like my dog will never understand algebra because out brains are physically incapable of that type of thought process

 

[alang1216]

Turek has come to the same realization I came to some years ago.

I'm usually fine with saying 'I don't know'. If you say you know then the burden is on you.

 

[Hollie]

Turek has come to the same realization I came to some years ago.

Are you a high priest of the crossexamined cult?

 

[Bezukhov]

It's one thing to argue for the existence of a First Cause. Quite another thing to prove that it was your version of this First Cause that was responsible for everything.

 

[LittleNipper]

The existence of God is the Theory

There is no proof of that Theory

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

.

The existence of the universe in and of itself is the evidence for God's existence, and logic proves that God necessarily exists.

.
is the water bottle created by the universe, therefore whatever created the water bottle is god ...

Humans invented the bottle; however, GOD created the water and all the elements that went into the fabrication of the bottle.

 

[norwegen]

A detective is not a good detective because he doesn't think suspect X is the murderer? What a ridiculous analogy. Detectives rule out suspects all the time without knowing who the culprit is.