Quote:
Originally Posted by MMM
And you cannot prove the existence of a deity either. That's why religions are called "faith-based". That's where they creationist argument crumbles in a way in my eyes because creationists hold scientists to a higher standard than they hold their own faith. And, sadly, that is where the discussion ends.
|
According to you, "you can't prove the existence of a deity," which is a creationist flaw. But then, by not denying the statement that you can neither
disprove the existence of a deity, I assume you agree with it? (Fill me in, please)
I'm convinced that
neither side can
prove they're correct, or that the other is incorrect. My reason is this: The evolutionist argument typically begins at the primordial soup and builds off from there. The creationist argument typically begins at the cause of
all things; divine, intelligent creation. There seems to be a huge gap...
Divine, intelligent creation is the clear target for scrutiny from evolutionists, obviously... but, when I ask evolutionists about what happens before the primordial soup, instead of referring to the Big Bang, like I expect, they often give some evasive response, like "definitely not some guy in a dress, floating in the clouds" or "I don't care."
Why is this?
Holy crap, it's ivi.
Hi, ivi.
