Evidence Against God

[Abishalom]

Well, then, I guess you should be an atheist once you study up on big-bang cosmology, according to which, time and space exist only within the context of this universe and therefore the term "beginning of the universe" makes no sense.

Right because scientist cannot understand it, therefore it does not exist.

You said this and later on you said that natural evidence points to god. This is the change in your position I'm talking about.

Yes in that there is a beginning to everything that exist. If in fact there was no God and nothing in the beginning and nature popped into existence. How then do we get all this diversity and complexity? These are the kind of questions scientist rationalize with naturalism to explain away God (but they don't do very good job at it).

I don't have to ask myself - I already know the answer. The biblical account is a lie.

I know you do.

---

So... you don't have any "supernatural evidence"? Is that what you're saying? It seems suspiciously close to that.
Look, its a very simple question. Did I sound like I was claiming anything? The burden of proof is on the person trying to prove something exists and before you say you aren't, you are. You're going on about how natural evidence doesn't cut it for the supernatural, well fine.
Do you have any supernatural evidence or not.

Wipe away the tears, sweat and shame and try again. Honestly, its fine. I'll wait. :-)

Exactly. What is supernatural evidence? The proof for God is in nature. God is not in nature, but the proof of His existence is in His creation. Think of it like a signature. The burden of proof is on the prosecutor. I am making no claims. I believe that God exists, and that He created everything. I gave my reason (or proof) for this belief. The only claims being made is by the prosecutors(God does not exist or the evidence concludes nonexistence).

Oh ho ho ho. *Bad* choice of words. You said there was no natural evidence and now you're saying proof of his existence is in nature! Do I sense bullshit? I think I do! I also think you'll find thats a claim in itself without any justification. Can you back that claim up? No? Could you point out the claims I've made in this thread? No!?

When did I ever say there was no natural evidence? Either you lack comprehension or you are being manipulative with my words. I don't think you're dumb, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

I think you'll find thats game, set and match. :-)

Well you got the game part right because you obviously like playing games. But you're the atheist. What is the logic behind this position?

Through out this thread you've claimed that natural evidence either: a) doesn't count or b) doesn't exist. Do you have the memory of a goldfish or are you being willfully ignorant?
Oh *right*, its my lack of comprehension that just forced you to make an ridiculously unbacked claim. Good one. Way to turn the tables on me, you shouldn't be embarrassed of that response at all. Do you blame all of your mistakes on others or is this a one off? I'm guessing its the first option.

Oh and I like playing games because it gives me entertainment before I take on someone with challenging points that actually takes up more then 1% of my IQ to discuss. You are not such an individual. You're more the court jester that entertains me before I deal with serious matters.
Be proud my little clown, be proud. :-)

No I never made such claim. You have EVERY single one of my post quoted. Find the quote where I said natural evidence either doesn't count or doesn't exist? (Hint:there is no such post) Now you are either a liar or you lack comprehension. Now you don't sound like you're dumb, so I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.