Originally posted by RJHinds
Would you take the time to read this with an open mind?
http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheismintro.html
I am reading this and here is part of it:
"So, we have come to realize that the universe first began to exist 13.7 billion years ago. Atheists are left with a dilemma, since their worldview requires that all things that begin to exist must have a cause. So, logic requires the admission that the universe had a cause. Virtually all atheists say that this cause was some natural phenomenon. It is also possible that the cause of the universe was a supernatural intelligence (i.e., God). However, there is no direct observational evidence for either belief."
The problem with that view is there actually is coming onboard, more observational evidence of what came before the big bang.
The fact is that Earthy science is in its infancy and statements like that abound in the theistic universe.
Theists love to put up old science as if it were fixed in place like theology.
That is where we fundamentally differ. Science is not fixed in place, we continually learn from science and all the sciences use the same fundamental methods to arrive at their conclusions but you refuse to see that the same methods that have already produced incredible results in many fields are used in evolution, geology, the age of the earth, and so forth, sciences that you refuse to belief could come from valid scientific methods which they in fact do.
You can poo poo the results all you want but it is exactly the same scientific method that produces the latest antibiotic medicine as produces the evidence for evolution.
You also cannot get past the idea that evolution does not speak for the beginnings of life on earth, which is in fact a separate scientific endeavor.
The fact that abiogenesis cannot be proven to be valid is only because of the infancy of the science involved. You have a short window to scoff but it will produce results in the years and decades to come.