Atheism is unreasonable

[His_Majesty]

Finally, someone has shown up to inform us of what a Christian believes...no longer do we have to wonder.

No problem, I'm only here to help

So, you don't believe in magic? I thought you said you were a Christian.

We both do, in a sense. The difference is, the magic that I believe in comes with a magician that is doing the tricks...can't say the same for atheists.

Rule of thumb: If you have to so over-simplify a claim to make it sound absurd...it isn't absurd.

I stated the facts.

But an atheist doesn't have to believe that, a naturalist has to believe that, an atheist could believe any cause for the beginning of life except that a god did it.

Right, avoid the God hypothesis at all costs. Gotcha.

I don't think you grasp what the word 'suddenly' means.

Whether it happened suddenly or gradually doesn't matter to a person who doesn't believe it happened at all.

I couldn't get myself to believe in that utterly stupid strawman of the abiogenesis scenario if I tried, either.

I agree, the belief in abiogensis without intelligent design is utterly stupid.

Atheism isn't necessarily more reasonable. Methodological naturalism is shot to pieces the moment you can show there's something that's not natural. Got anything like that?

When I can conceive the thought of consciousness originating from inanimate matter, I will abandon my beliefs.

Yep. That you find it hard to believe has not the slightest bearing on whether or not it happened.

I agree...but since the scientific evidence doesn't support the notion anyway, my mind became a free agent and signed a life long contract with the "Christianity Jesus worshippers". Pretty good team to be on. A winning team.

So what part of that definition requires an atheist to agree with your nonsensical version of abiogenesis, or ANY version of abiogenesis?

I have to answer this nonsense? If God didn't do it, then who else was around to do it but nature?? When God moves off the block, nature is the only one left in the neighborhood. If you have any other alternatives than these two, then please, enlighten me

And some don't. Atheist is not a synonym for naturalist.

I think it is...I mean, to be honest...to see you people on here constantly making such statements is ridiculous. Either God did it, or nature did it. There aren't a million different options on the table here. But we can keep playing the denial game.

Nonsense. Theories need not have repeated experiments in order to be validated. Don't take my word for it; look up theories like stellar formation.

Yes it does. You see a phenomenon, you ask a question, you form a hypothesis, you conduct an experiment, and you falsify or validate your hypothesis.

There has never been a experiment which has validated the natural occurence of consciousness from unconsciousness or life from nonlife. None.

Also, the construct "just a theory" in your post leads me to believe that you don't understand the importance of a theory in the scientific hierarchy of understanding. In other words, you're equivocating two different connotations of the word "theory".

As just mentioned, abiogenesis or consciousness from unconsciousness has never been empirically validated, regardless of what meaning of "theory" you'd like to use in this context, or out of this context.

Yes, brains existed before consciousness did. You can at least be right by accident sometimes, I've seen worse.

So the origin of consciousness has come from within the brain, which is like saying the origin of the engine of your car has to come from within the car. It is foolishness.