Then it is also a fallacious logical argument from incredulity to claim that nature did it all and not magic when the person claiming that does not believe in magic (or whatever the mocking synonym for God that the person might want to use).
I sort of disappeared but will get back to trying to answer your last post to me.
In the meantime, have you seen the following video which also does not see anything pre existing that God made stuff from. It explains Genesis 1:1-3 almost as I have seen it, even with the alternative translation...
It's not really a logical fallacy unless someone is wanting to make it into a logical argument that proves that there is a creator.
Otherwise it is one of the many things in life that can turn us to consider the possibility of a creator.
The answer is that the English language is called a living language and the meaning of words changes over time, depending on their useage.
"Ghost" has a different connotation for many people these days than it used to have. This change of meaning of words is one reason that new translations are...
No I,m not familiar with pre-1611 Bibles in English.
A SDA minister gave a KJV Bible to me when I was studying Christianity as a young man. It had a concordance and I became familiar with that Bible and learned passages from that Bible. The word Ghost and Spirit in the KJV did not bother me as I...
From What is the difference between the Holy Spirit and Holy Ghost? | GotQuestions.org
Of the modern English translations of the Bible, it is only the King James Version of the Bible which uses the term “Holy Ghost.” It occurs 90 times in the KJV. The term “Holy Spirit” occurs 7 times in the...
Sorry, your misunderstanding.
Sure, science does not tell us that the Flying Spaghetti Monster does not exist, but we believe that the FSM does not exist anyway,,,,,,,,,,,, just as you believe that gods do not exist because you reject evidence for them Even I reject the evidence for most of...
Yes, to have an idea of what I am on about you need to look at the context.
And yes "living organisms" are made of chemicals, but that does not mean that "life" the thing that animates the chemicals, is chemicals.
Yes, science cannot find or analyse spirit, but that is no reason to say that...
Science's limitations means that science can study only physical/material reality. When it is studying life forms, it is studying chemicals and it defines life in physical terms. When I talk about "life" I am talking about what animates chemicals to make them alive.
Science's lack of evidence...
Since science does not say that a living spirit God does not exist, that means that science does not say that chemicals are the basis of life.
If however you are talking about biological life, the word "biological" does tells us that chemicals are involved.
We are talking about different...
Just as I thought. While awaiting evidence for the supernatural, you follow the evidence, iow believe that there is no supernatural.
You can't follow what you call evidence and believe there are no gods and also defer belief in gods (sit on the fence).
The fact that you can wave your hand and say 'ordinary observable chemistry and physics' does not take away the complexity of what is in that wave. Basically what you are saying is that you can't see a designer and so no designer is needed. And if there is no designer needed when you cannot see...
I'l go with the first one, that you are not following correctly. But that is OK, I don't expect atheists to be able to follow correctly. I forgive you.
It sounds like you mean that you believe that there is no designer and do not believe that there is a designer?
or at least that would be your...
Yes there are what we call the natural laws, wherever they came from.
Science cannot say where they came from but humans either believe they come from a creator or not.
Sometimes this belief or lack thereof is determined by a preconceived worldview.
Some see the possibility of the...