arian wrote:
I present undeniable and scientific evidence of THE Creator.
I await the evidence.
Question for debate: Is the evidence undeniable and scientific (and compelling / convincing) or is it just more of the same stuff that has been presented ad nausea?
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
I'd be interested in seeing if this evidence is evidence of a SPECIFIC God or is it evidence of simply A God. It will be interesting to see how it would support the existence of say the God of the bible rather than Allah, Zeus or any of the other thousands of Gods that have been worshiped by humans.
Society and its morals evolve and will continue to evolve. The bible however remains the same and just requires more and more apologetics and claims of "metaphors" and "symbolism" to justify it.
Prayer is like rubbing an old bottle and hoping that a genie will pop out and grant you three wishes.
There is much about this world that is mind boggling and impressive, but I see no need whatsoever to put it down to magical super powered beings.
Like most of us atheists that debate online I also have asked for scientific evidence for a creator many many times.
I can now say there is no scientific evidence for a creator whatsoever because if there were then someone out there in the big wide world would have presented it to me by now.
If blind faith was good scientific evidence then all us atheists would be……….. fill in the blank with your own chosen F word!
Well, I have absolutely no scientific background...your average run of the mill schmuk really...but since we all observe that life only comes from life, which is proven through repeatable demonstration, someone might take that information and develope a hypothesis that life must somehow have always existed...which is exactly what the Bible says. Of course, people are free to ignore this evidence which is all around them in favor of no evidence and develope a hypothesis that life came into being from lifeless matter.
Thruit wrote:
Of course, people are free to ignore this evidence which is all around them in favor of no evidence and develope a hypothesis that life came into being from lifeless matter.
A very rational response when one does not know the origin of something is "I don't know"
Those who study such things are likely to propose and check theories and identify them as such
Those who worship "gods" often feel compelled to "explain" origins by crediting their favorite god but can offer only conjecture, opinion, hearsay, testimonials, etc -- no verifiable evidence
Take your choice -- which is more rational?
.
Non-Theist
ANY of the thousands of "gods" proposed, imagined, worshiped, loved, feared, and/or fought over by humans MAY exist -- awaiting verifiable evidence
Here's the rub, and the main reason I question how much time I spend in this particular thought experiment: If there was undeniable scientific evidence, there wouldn't be any authentic atheists. You might have willfully ignorant atheists, but "THE CREATOR" would be known by everyone. Otherwise it wouldn't be...undeniable..scientific..evidence..
This site and every word in favor of the Christian god exists based on varying degrees of faith and belief. None, aside from Arian-types, will say they are 100% certain and offer undeniable proof.
Thruit wrote:
Well, I have absolutely no scientific background...your average run of the mill schmuk really...but since we all observe that life only comes from life, which is proven through repeatable demonstration, someone might take that information and develope a hypothesis that life must somehow have always existed....
Developing a hypothesis is one thing. Proving the hypothesis is true is another thing entirely.
The problem with any hypothesis that suggests that life always existed is that it then has to deal with the bottleneck that the earth itself has not always existed.
So already the hypothesis that life had not always existed has a clear advantage of being more likely to be true.
[center] Spiritual Growth - A person's continual assessment
of how well they believe they are doing
relative to what they believe a personal God expects of them.
[/center]
Question for debate: Is the evidence undeniable and scientific (and compelling / convincing) or is it just more of the same stuff that has been presented ad nausea?
Any truth can be denied.
But that doesn't make it not true.
The fact that there is a creation is probable cause for a "Creator" of some sort. (AKA "THE Creator")
There is no excuse for a person who cannot accept that. (Rom:1:20:)