Have you or have you not said, in innumerable posts:
”Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word...”
Yup... and that is why it is a strawman / dishonesty when you try to argue the claim is 'science... proves god's word'
”Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word...”
vs.
“Science... proves god's word.”
Is your objection the distinction without a difference between “confirms” and “proves”? Seriously?
How you can deny (”Science helps confirm the truth of God's Word...”) doesn’t imply, “Goddidit!!!” is beyond comprehension.
It does seem beyond your comprehension.
It’s beyond ANYONE’S comprehension.
I don't think you can be helped.
I’m not the one in need of help.
If I misrepresented every evolutionist argument with ' Evolution did it' instead of trying to address what someone was actually saying, it would be a straw man and it would be dishonest.
If “god’s word” says “god created (everything)” and “god’s word” is “absolute truth”, please explain how “Goddidit!!!” explains, life, the Universe, and everything.
Since science rules out "goddidit" as an explanation…
Haha.. If someone claims God created, then show the context...Until you do that, you just keep making logical fallacy arguments.
Since one of your common mantras is, “in the beginning god created”, wouldn’t it be fair to conclude you are claiming “god created”, i.e. “Goddidit!!!”?
…
for natural phenomena then YOU (the creationist) must find some way to substantiate how "logic" explains "goddidit". My guess is your explanation will include something similar to, "Abiogenesis without my personal concept of deity's involvement is impossible because life from non-life is so incredibly amazing, not understandable, and unimaginable it must be wrong".
As you admit... you are imagining something, then arguing against it. It is the definition of a straw man.
What am I admitting and what am I imagining? Nice edit job btw.
This would be true if it is what “atheists” actually thought was the origin of the universe or the origin of life. You’ve been corrected on this strawman countless times but you keep using it anyway :sigh:.
My claim was 'Atheists either have to believe NOTHING DID IT... or that the cause existed eternally..
Yeah, and it is as wrong now as it was every time you posted it in the past (as has been pointed out repeatedly by myself and others) and will be every time you post it in the future.
Ok... So, tell us what caused everything? Turtles all the way down?
I don’t know and neither do you. The difference between us is I’m not going to insert, “Goddidit!!!”, just because humanity lacks the knowledge.
The Universe as it is now was “caused” by what the Universe was like before the “Big Bang”.
So, the cause existed eternally?
I don’t know and neither do you. The difference between us is I’m not going to insert, “Goddidit!!!”, just because humanity lacks the knowledge.
You make the “argument from ignorance” that because it is unknown what the intermediate “cause” was it must have been your chosen concept of deity, you know, “GODDIDIT!!!”
You are having problems with logic.
Why? If your logic (“world view”?) dictates you can’t live with yourself if there are unknowns in your life then it isn’t my “logic” which is faulty.
The claim is that either there is a cause which existed eternally....or, that nothing caused everything.
Yeah, that is your (faulty) claim. So, what caused everything? Was it an eternally existent, intelligent, uncaused cause? What is the name you normally give this eternally existent, intelligent, uncaused caused?
