Apparently "There's no proof there isn't" = proof there is. In that case though there is a Bigfoot and a secret school for witches and wizards. Afterall, there's no proof there isn't.

Maybe that's "apparent" to you, but not what I believe.

Science has not yet been able to prove the total absence of Intelligent Design so there is no proof a god does not exist either.

Ah Intelligent Design...

Here's how you handle that.

Do you believe that aliens could have seeded Earth with the necessary components for life to arise on our planet? Because that would be intelligent design.

If you just believe God created everything then say you're a religious person who believe in the creation story from the Bible and stop hiding behind pseudo-scientific terminology.

@MudRunLvr.... loving everything you've posted. Perfect. Perfect responses. Cheers!

For alpha2omega:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_the_eye

We'll never know with 100% certainty exactly how it happened because we weren't there to observe it, but we can make reasonable hypotheses based on available evidence. Evolution is probably the most well studied and well supported scientific theories we have. Saying "oh yeah? well evolution can't explain X!" is a common creationist argument.

We believe in the theory of evolution because time and time again, it's supported by actual data. On the other hand, there is no evidence for intelligent design and no reason to adopt it as model to explain life as we know it. Intelligent design is NOT a scientific theory, and is itself fundamentally unscientific.

So, since there is currently not a working theory of how the universe originated, you are willing to accept that it was due to a benevolent and all powerful entity that has a plan for every soul on this particular planet. Isn't that a bit of a leap in logic considering the lack of evidence to support this?

Not a big leap considering all the other evidence I have for the existence of God.

You have no evidence for the existence of a God. No one does. That's why it's called "faith".

You have no evidence for the existence of a God. No one does. That's why it's called "faith".

I believe Jesus is the son of God. I believe what Jesus taught us when he walked the earth. I believe he was crucified, died, and rose again. I believe the stories passed down generation to generation going back to the eyewitnesses to Jesus' life. Those who followed him and those who didn't. I wasn't alive during the Civil War, but I believe what was written and the stories passed down. So, I have faith in both events in history.

You have no evidence for the existence of a God. No one does. That's why it's called "faith".

I believe Jesus is the son of God. I believe what Jesus taught us when he walked the earth. I believe he was crucified, died, and rose again. I believe the stories passed down generation to generation going back to the eyewitnesses to Jesus' life. Those who followed him and those who didn't. I wasn't alive during the Civil War, but I believe what was written and the stories passed down. So, I have faith in both events in history.

Proof is about WAY more than seeing something with your own eyes. I can believe in fairies and wizards. That doesn't make them real. I can disbelieve in the Holocoust. That doesn't mean it wasn't real. So far you haven't given any proof that doesn't amount to te exact same thing that can be said about hobbits and orcs.

Also, if you need religion in order to have morals then you have no morals. Being good because it's the right thing to do is a far better statement on the quality of your character than to say you are good because you don't want to go to hell. As to who/what dictates morals if you have no religion I really don't understand what is so confusing about that. My parents taught me morals and values. Society did too. Religion played a part for me because I was raised Catholic. My kids haven't been raised with any religion though. They learned their morals based on what my husband and I have taught them and what they have seen and the society we live in.

As I stated, I believe in the prophets, that Jesus is the son of God, and all the stories passed down by his apostles and those who knew him and witnessed his life. From everything I have experienced in life and everything I have studied and read about God, I believe in His existence. I haven't read or experienced anything that would lead me to believe otherwise. And I've done a lot of studying.

Can you please elaborate on why you believe what you believe? You said you've done a lot of studying. What are some of the major points?

until it is something more than a fairytale with NO PROOF then I'll have to keep believing there isn't.

Do you really believe Christianity is nothing more than say Cinderella, Snow White, and any other fairy tales? Why is it that millions of people for thousands of years would believe in this fairy tale?

Do you believe in love? There is no actual proof of love. You have to have faith and believe that someone lives you- even if they do wonderful things for you. There is no proof.

Self-existent is the same as what I said. Why is it logical to think that God always existed but the universe did not?

Now if Big Bang Theory is true that means the universe as we know it did have a beginning. But I've heard plenty of theories about multiple universes existing almost as if soap bubbles, theories of a universe that continually expands and contracts upon itself, etc. etc. Different ways of theorizing that the universe, in way, always existed or is self-regenerating.

Saying, "No. It's not possible for the universe to always exist on it's own." while believing in a creator who has always existed on his own is just double talk to me.

If the universe always existed.. well to borrow a phrase I know you won't like.. it cuts out the middle man. Like this: "The universe had to come from somewhere, God created it. Where did God come from? God always existed." Ok, the universe always existed. Simpler and more logical answer."

Plus I'm not completely sold that something can't come from nothing. There's a whole lot of life on this planet that wasn't here before. Yes the materials were here, but even scientists still haven't been able to recreate what it was that gave that first one celled organism "life". When people choose to see God's hand in that, well I certainly don't fault them. (I fault them when they think God poofed one dude and one woman into existence in some garden with talking snakes).

Hmmm. Maybe a different approach. There is nothing about the universe that leads me to believe that it is self-existent. Astronomy tells us that the universe had a beginning (including space and time). If you say the universe always existed (putting aside the best evidence of science), one still must ask what is the source of the eternal movement of the universe. From all we can tell, the universe is governed by entropy which involves the movement towards disorder and the death of the universe. Eternal motion needs an eternal mover, something that the universe is unable to account for. It is more rational to believe that the changing, expanding universe with finite energy is the result of a creative power that is self-existent.

Further, if the universe is infinite in its duration (i.e., it has existed for an infinite amount of time), then how did we get to this moment? For instance, what if you had to do an infinite number of things before you could leave your house? When would you leave? Never, of course. You can never reach the end of an infinity. If an infinite number of moments preceded this moment, we would not be here. In other words, the idea of an infinite past for the universe of time and space is irrational.

Theories about multiple universes are groundless from a scientific perspective. They are inherently unprovable and are purely speculative. The primary motive for proposing them, it seems, is to avoid the conclusion of the existence of God. Besides, saying that this universe is caused by another universe only prolongs the problem since the same questions can be asked about the universe that caused this one, etc. Such theories strike me as wishful thinking that doesn't really solve anything.

I say that it is unreasonable to say this universe "exists on its own" because the properties or attributes of the universe show us that it needs an explanation beyond itself (that's why people propose multiple universe theories, they know this one does not explain itself!). If this universe needs an explanation beyond itself then it follows that there must be a different kind of reality upon which this one depends that is self-existent. Multiplying universes like this one only delays this conclusion.

Again, saying the universe always existed is not only contrary to science but it simply does not make sense for the reasons I've already mentioned. If we discover God as the necessary cause of a dependent universe that does not explain itself, it doesn't make sense to go on to ask what is the cause of God. God is, by definition, uncaused. There must be an uncaused reality and the universe is not a good candidate for that status.

"Nothing" cannot be the cause of something. Nothing has no explanatory power. How can that which has no existence be the reason or cause of something that has existence? This sounds like nonsense to me. It seems like your last paragraph concedes that it is plausible to believe that life involves a causal act of God. This is obviously more reasonable than saying that "nothing" is the cause of it.

Millions of people for thousands of years believe in Allah too. Millions of people for thousands of years believe there is no God. You have yet to offer any proof at all. "I believe" isn't proof it's faith and no more proof than "I believe in wizards" is proof of magic.