(April 22, 2014 at 11:25 pm)Revelation777 Wrote:(April 21, 2014 at 6:52 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote: Let's go over this again:
<God exists> + <God has always existed> + <God is all powerful> + <God created the universe> each have no evidence, yet each premise is required for a theist or deist viewpoint.
<Abiogenesis might be how life originated> has evidence behind it.
How are these two "interchangeable" by any stretch of the imagination?
You have a theory with evidence, and somehow have equated that to an unfounded assertion that there must be some sort of magical being, somewhere in the universe, that is empirically unverifiable, unfalsifiable (and therefore not scientific), and this magical being suddenly becomes an "alternative choice" to a well-founded theory with supporting evidence.
What is this, amateur hour?
It's the same as saying <lightening is an electrostatic discharge between charged clouds and the planet> or <Thor exists> <Thor is the God of Thunder and Lightning> therefore <Thor causes lighting> are interchangeable "theories."
What?
In the same vein: Either God exists, or I have a piece of lint in my pocket. I have a piece of lint in my pocket, therefore God does not exist.
Someone should write a mobile app where you can shake your device, and 2-3 random premises appear with a conclusion.
I guarantee you some of the Theists on this board would start copy-pasting arguments whenever they ended in "Therefore God"
You base your beliefs, and they are beliefs, on what you observe naturally. God, is a supernatural being. He created a natural world but there are also supernatural events that have occurred, are presently occurring, and will occur. Just because you have not experienced any doesn't mean the supernatural doesn't exist.
No, it's knowledge. Knowledge changes.
And just because a contradictory book says there's a god doesn't mean there is on.
No supernatural events have been witnessed by enough people to be convincing or tested.
Dying to live, living to die.
