Hare Krishna

[Reforged]

Yes, because God is a question mark, so is heaven and so is the supernatural. Thats not idiotic at all. Well done.
Oh and admitting you don't know everything and only claiming what you do know based on evidence requires faith now does it?
Think you'll find the big bang and the singularity are simply the most backed scientific theories, maybe you should look up the definition of theory.
I'll give you a hint, it doesn't mean the inexorable part of a belief system.
You've already disappointed me and lowered my opinion of you intellectually.
I think thats a new record. I saw "hare krishna" and thought;
"Hm, well I've never met someone of that religion... maybe they will be intelligent, philosophical and insightful."
All evidence to the contrary so far.

You stating Atheism is the belief that we all come from nothing was one of my personal favourites. Did you actually do one bit of research into what Atheism actually is before you joined an Atheist forum?
No, of course you didn't. People like you never do.
You just automatically think you know better.

The idea that life comes from chemicals, that life can be reduced to chemistry and physics, requires faith. Why does it require faith? Because there is no scientific evidence to prove it. There are hardcore antitheist biologists ready to say that.

If you're ready to say "I don't know where life comes" that doesn't require any faith. If you're an atheist with that position, fine. My comment wasn't for you.

My comments didn't challenge the singularity or the big bang in any way. I only commented on the question marks before them in the other poster's comment.

Again. *theory*. Scientists develop *theories* then test their truth value through various experiments. If evidence is found during this process that increases the truth value of that theory then it is further studied and tested until they have enough evidence to reach a certainty level of sigma 7.
Certainty is only gained in degrees. For example we can be 99.9999981% sure the theory of gravity is legitimate. That is one of the most backed theories there is.
There is no theory in science that is given 100% certainty because that would remove possibility of error, further enquiry or new evidence coming to light.

You are quoting a theory that there is no adequate means to test yet. As such it should be treated solely as a theory without evidence. An interesting avenue for exploration that holds theoretical value. Nothing more and nothing less.
No faith required.
If you had done the tiniest bit of research before making these claims you would know this.
You have not and I'm sorry but it really shows.