Quote:
Originally Posted by jeepnut
I'll touch on the rest of your post at a later date, but I wanted to discuss this part specifically. How is it not faith to believe that the answer to the existence of the universe will be explained scientifically? You state that every other event in nature can be explained scientifically, but this is self defeating. Nature has not produced evidence of anything coming into existence from nothing. Further, everything we have observed in nature has at least a defined beginning if not a currently observable end. Nature has yet to produce evidence that either of these explanations is possible.
Isn't it the common atheistic definition of faith that it is the belief in something without evidence?
|
I don't believe that something came from nothing - that's your belief. It's not that I have faith in science's ability to come up with proof - it's that I'm not going to believe anything without proof.
I am not putting forth any hypothesis for how the universe came to be - you are. Therefore, the burden of proof is on you. I reject the idea that God created everything because there is no basis for it and not a shred of evidence to support it. You are putting forth that idea, so you must provide the proof.
So far your only proof is "You don't have a better idea, so my side is most likely correct." That's not proof or a valid argument by any stretch of the imagination. Scientists can't just come up with any crazy hypothesis they want and support it with the argument of "The other side doesn't have anything to refute it." They need evidence.
The Bible isn't evidence. It's a book of unsubstantiated stories. Some probably happened, a lot of them probably didn't.