Two babies discussion.

[KevinM1]

A belief in god has also led to things like witch trials, the Inquisition, abortion clinic bombings, and the Lord's Resistance Army, to say nothing of it being used as a justification for things like slavery and virulent homophobia.

People have used almost any excuse to do evil. That doesn't nullify the enormous good that has been done by people because they worship God or a god. If people have done so much good in the name of God, you can't say that belief in God is an evil thing, especially when we are taught to love our neighbor.

I have never said that the belief in a god, in and of itself, is evil. Just that it has directly led to evil actions, actions that cannot be wiped away by the good that belief has also directly led to.

Keep in mind that a lot of the negative things theists like to hang on atheists, like Soviet Russia's treatment of Christians, weren't actually done in the name of atheism. They were done as a means of control for other ends.

I see assertions like yours - "belief in a god has made people do a lot of good in the world" - and my immediate reaction is, "So what?" Belief in a god is not necessary in order to do good. Bill Gates would be a great example of that, as would many other atheist individuals and groups who do their part with little to no fanfare. And, it also begs the question "Would the people who did good work in god's name not do that if they didn't believe it was expected of them by the ultimate authority figure?"

So, the assertion, in my mind, holds little value. It's nice that good things were done, but the same belief has also caused a lot of damage, and evidence shows that the belief isn't actually necessary for people to actually help their fellow man. Theists don't hold the monopoly on empathy.

Finally, a lack of evidence is not evidence itself. That we 'don't know how to create matter from nothing or understand infinity' doesn't mean that lack of ability/understanding points to god. All you're doing here is regurgitating the God of the Gaps fallacy.

I don't think it proves that there is a God in a scientific way, but I think it is evidence that there is something beyond the natural. Since science is unable to study the supernatural, I can't use science to prove to you that there is a God. So if you're relying on science to decide if God exists or not, I agree that you'll never find him. But, like I've said before, you're really limiting yourselves. In fact, I believe you're outsmarting yourselves.

I don't see it as evidence for the supernatural at all. Again, a lack of evidence isn't evidence of anything. All it is is a lack of evidence. "I don't know" is a completely reasonable answer because it's truthful and doesn't presuppose anything, one way or the other.

Here's the thing: there could be a god. No one will truly know until they're dead. But there's no credible evidence pointing to the existence of one. And the existence of current mysteries doesn't necessarily point to the divine. So, why spend time believing that it does, in fact, exist? Why get worked up in a lather based on stories dating back to the Iron Age and earlier?