nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

PDN

This new 'catch-all' thread will operate similar to the Creationism and Protestant/Catholic Debate threads.

Too many threads are spoilt and dragged off topic when a non-Christian poster demands, "What evidence do you have for God?" While some may enjoy such discussion, it is frequently off-topic and derails discussion of other subjects (the very discussion that is the reason for this Forum's existence).

So, in order to protect the Forum and facilitate on topic discussions, all that stuff now belongs here. Anyone who keeps trying to derail other discussions by demanding evidence for God's existence will be warned, and if those warnings are ignored then swift infractions and bans will ensue.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ABC101

RikuoAmero wrote: »

ABC, just to let you know, there are M-Discs
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Systor-Write-Forever-M-DISC-Blank/dp/B006GC0R90/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417371569&sr=8-1&keywords=M+disc

Supposedly able to last for a thousand years.

Now, I do have to ask...why are you so concerned about data storage and listing all the problems we have with it, if God were to show up and be captured on video? Surely your god can just wave the problem away?

M-Discs..... Well I never!!!!

Guess one learns something new every day ...... eh!!:pac:

Nick Park

tommy2bad wrote: »

Just adressing the bit's in bold; first your misrepresenting the classic protestant position, in faith alone, it's not true to say they mean that you can act anyway you like and gain salvation just by believing. It's meant to highlight the fact that good works without faith will leave you in the same position.
Again a misunderstanding of the Immaculate conception, it's not Mary's virginity that grants her the title, it's her lack of original sin. The virginity tradition is separate and has nothing to do with her immaculate conception.
I think you almost get the first commandment, your just being a bit legalistic about it. Love can never be demanded or forced, that fact should give you a clue as to what the commandment actually means.

You are correct in pointing out that it is a pretty bad misrepresentation of Lutheran belief (or indeed of other forms of Protestantism) to say that they teach that "all you have to do is believe."

Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who was murdered by the Nazis) used to teach against the concept of 'cheap grace' - his point was that saving faith is costly and actually demands everything of the believer.

Faith is committing and trusting oneself to Christ. It starts with belief, but involves radical change to one's behaviour and identity.

RikuoAmero

Nick Park wrote: »

You are correct in pointing out that it is a pretty bad misrepresentation of Lutheran belief (or indeed of other forms of Protestantism) to say that they teach that "all you have to do is believe."

Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who was murdered by the Nazis) used to teach against the concept of 'cheap grace' - his point was that saving faith is costly and actually demands everything of the believer.

Faith is committing and trusting oneself to Christ. It starts with belief, but involves radical change to one's behaviour and identity.

I'm reading verses here http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Salvation/
and most of them just boil down to "Believe and you are saved/have eternal life". There's a couple here and there that mention doing good things, and I think at least one saying good works alone are useless.
Can I ask one thing of you that I'm curious about - you mention this Dietrich person. Why is it that in brackets you had to point out he was murdered by Nazis? In the context of this discussion, the fact he was murdered by them means little to nothing to me. Lots of people were murdered by them.
Also - what about my behaviour would change if I were to believe? For example, if I were to believe in the claims of Nazism, one change to my behaviour would probably me being anti-semitic.

Nick Park

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I'm reading verses here http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Bible-Verses-About-Salvation/
and most of them just boil down to "Believe and you are saved/have eternal life". There's a couple here and there that mention doing good things, and I think at least one saying good works alone are useless.

It all depends whether the person doing the 'boiling down' is genuinely representing their meaning, or just ripping them out of context.

Can I ask one thing of you that I'm curious about - you mention this Dietrich person. Why is it that in brackets you had to point out he was murdered by Nazis? The fact he was murdered by them means little to nothing to me. Lots of people were murdered by them.

I mentioned it because I, and a lot of other people, find it interesting.

Also because, as a Lutheran, he could have quietly lived out his life as an academic if he truly thought that all that was necessary was "just to believe". However, Bonhoeffer realised that being a Christian involved obedience to Christ (one of his most famous books was called "The Cost of Discipleship"). Therefore he defended the Jews, resisted Hitler, and joined the anti-Nazi opposition in Germany. His awareness that true faith leads to self-sacrificial actions cost him his life.

Also - what about my behaviour would change if I were to believe? For example, if I were to believe in the claims of Nazism, one change to my behaviour would probably me being anti-semitic.

Again, we are not talking about what would change if you merely 'were to believe'. The Bible says that even devils believe. The changes would occur if you were to place saving faith in Christ. That would then involve obeying Christ - loving others (Including your enemies), forgiving those that have wronged you, behaving in an ethical and moral way etc.

If, given time, none of these changes occurred then, according to the New Testament (and Lutheran teaching) that would be a pretty clear indication that your so-called faith was bogus. As Jesus said, good trees don't bring forth bad fruit.

RikuoAmero

It all depends whether the person doing the 'boiling down' is genuinely representing their meaning, or just ripping them out of context.

Read them yourself. Most of the verses in that link say stuff like "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves:" or "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Most of those verses mention belief only.

Therefore he defended the Jews, resisted Hitler, and joined the anti-Nazi opposition in Germany. His awareness that true faith leads to self-sacrificial actions cost him his life.

This to me has the strange implication that only christianity leads to self-sacrifice. If I'm wrong, please correct me. It matters little to me if, because he believed, he then went on to do this courageous thing and sacrificed himself. I too can do and have done courageous things that require sacrifice on my part. Believers and non believer alike, throughout history, have made the ultimate sacrifice (of course, there is the obvious question coming from the atheist camp that if a believer makes that sacrifice believing that doing so will gain them the ultimate reward, is it really a sacrifice to be admired? i.e. it then seems self-serving)

That would then involve obeying Christ - loving others (Including your enemies), forgiving those that have wronged you, behaving in an ethical and moral way etc.

Apart from loving enemies, I have done all those things and continue to do them, all without subscribing to a belief that a man 2,000 years ago came back from the dead. That belief is superfluous.

tommy2bad

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Explain this please?

God decides, our part is to acknowledge that power. What we must not do is presume that our faith or good works will do the trick. Your position, taking your chances with God is just presuming your good life will make any difference.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Then I have to disagree with you. If loving God somehow allows one to love their fellow human, then this would logically mean that someone like me who isn't convinced of God's existence (and therefore doesn't love him) would be unable to love their fellow human. However, I do. There are quite a few people I love. To me, what you're espousing is as silly as saying "Loving this action figure is linked to loving your fellow humans: if you love one, you automatically love the other"

Wow, way to distort something! No theirs no follow on between loving god and loving your fellow man, you can love either, both or none. One is not a consequence of the other. Loving your fellow man is a condition of loving God but it dosn't always follow that people who love God keep that condition.

RikuoAmero wrote: »

I disagree. Faith is a belief without evidence or justification. I would say that it's opposite is a justified true belief a.k.a. knowledge.

Then I direct you to the following passages in the bible where God commands against doubt.

LOL atheist quotes bible at believer. You are reading doubt as intellectual doubt which it is not. It's reticence, lack of commitment. Feel the fear and do it anyway.

tommy2bad

Originally Posted by RikuoAmero
This to me has the strange implication that only christianity leads to self-sacrifice. If I'm wrong, please correct me. It matters little to me if, because he believed, he then went on to do this courageous thing and sacrificed himself. I too can do and have done courageous things that require sacrifice on my part. Believers and non believer alike, throughout history, have made the ultimate sacrifice (of course, there is the obvious question coming from the atheist camp that if a believer makes that sacrifice believing that doing so will gain them the ultimate reward, is it really a sacrifice to be admired? i.e. it then seems self-serving)

Again you are assuming that the belief of the believer is certainty. It isn't. This might give you some idea of the sacrifice they make, that with all the doubts they harbour they still commit to this path in the hope of something better. For themselves? Possibly but mostly because they believe it's something better for everyone. Even their enemies.

RikuoAmero

Well thanks for the discussion ABC and tommy. I have to close this discussion by saying that I am not convinced. Even if I were to get down on my knees, pray and start going to mass again, I would still retain memories of all the questions I asked of the religion while an atheist, all of the questions that were simply not answered, or not answered satisfactorily. In short, I can't switch my mind to belief mode, so to speak, and even if I could, I'd still have all these questions the belief fails to answer.
As for your dig about "lol, atheist quotes bible to believer"...I have seen on far too many occasions while talking to believers that I, as the non-believer, possess a superior knowledge of the bible. I first started realizing that most believers never bother back when I was in school, we were studying the bible and I commented sarcastically "What, am I the only one who's actually read the bible?" only to realise...yes, I was the only one.
I will more than likely pop up again here in this thread, but for now, I'm finished with this discussion.

Nick Park

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Read them yourself. Most of the verses in that link say stuff like "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves:" or "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned."
Most of those verses mention belief only.

A verse is generally one sentence, or at the most two sentences, which is contained in much longer passages. If you try to look at one verse on its own, ignoring everything around it, then you will distort its meaning. That is what people mean when they speak about something being 'out of context.'

For example, you quote "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves". That is Ephesians 2:8. But the very next sentence says: "For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (2:10)

This to me has the strange implication that only christianity leads to self-sacrifice.

Then I despair of having a conversation with you in English.

We can't really discuss things if you're going to go imagining things that I never said or hinted at.

J C

Nick Park wrote: »

You are correct in pointing out that it is a pretty bad misrepresentation of Lutheran belief (or indeed of other forms of Protestantism) to say that they teach that "all you have to do is believe."

Lutheran theologian Dietrich Bonhoeffer (who was murdered by the Nazis) used to teach against the concept of 'cheap grace' - his point was that saving faith is costly and actually demands everything of the believer.

Faith is committing and trusting oneself to Christ. It starts with belief, but involves radical change to one's behaviour and identity.

The amazing Dietrich Bonhoeffer certainly gave everything in his commitment as a Christian Minister to the Lord Jesus Christ.
He was stripped naked to humiliate him and led to the execution yard at Flossenbürg concentration camp, where he was hung by the Nazis on 9th April 1945, along with other members of the German resistance. Starting at dawn, it is believed that the hanging was conducted over six hours and he was repeatedly revived so that further horrific torture could be inflicted upon him by the sadists who executed him.

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was known for his staunch resistance to the Nazi dictatorship, including vocal opposition to Hitler's euthanasia program and genocide of the Jews and he was also involved in operations to help German Jews escape to Switzerland.

He said "Christians in Germany will have to face the terrible alternative of either willing the defeat of their nation in order that Christian civilization may survive or willing the victory of their nation and thereby destroying civilization. I know which of these alternatives I must choose."

Prior to his arrest, he was harassed by the Nazi authorities and he was forbidden to speak in public and was required to regularly report his activities to the police. In 1941, he was forbidden to print or to publish. In the meantime, he joined the Abwehr (a German military intelligence organization) which was also the center of the anti-Hitler resistance.

As he was led away to face court martial, just as he concluded his final Sunday service he said "This is the end — for me the beginning of life."

What an amazing man ... that both Christian and Atheist can equally be inspired by.

catallus

Speaking of the Nazis, it would also be good to remember Czeslaw Milosz, who said "The scriptures constitute the common good of believers agnostics and atheists alike."

J C

catallus wrote: »

Speaking of the Nazis, it would also be good to remember Czeslaw Milosz, who said "The scriptures constitute the common good of believers agnostics and atheists alike."

... indeed ... and let us not forget the selflessness of Roman Catholic priest, Maximilian Kolbe, who volunteered to take the place of one of ten men chosen to be starved to death by SS-Hauptsturmführer Karl Fritzsch, the Auschwitz deputy camp commander, in reprisal for an escape by three men from the camp.
He survived two weeks of starvation and dehydration and was the last man alive, when the camp guards decided to empty the underground bunker in which he was held ... and they injected him with with a lethal injection of carbolic acid on 14th August 1941.

ABC101

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Well thanks for the discussion ABC and tommy. I have to close this discussion by saying that I am not convinced. Even if I were to get down on my knees, pray and start going to mass again, I would still retain memories of all the questions I asked of the religion while an atheist, all of the questions that were simply not answered, or not answered satisfactorily. In short, I can't switch my mind to belief mode, so to speak, and even if I could, I'd still have all these questions the belief fails to answer.

Just when I was going to go over James, Matthew, Romans & Mark!!!:pac:

Indeed.... discussion completed.

Wishing you nothing but the very best in all things!! Cheerio!!:)

Safehands

tommy2bad wrote: »

Again you are assuming that the belief of the believer is certainty. It isn't. This might give you some idea of the sacrifice they make, that with all the doubts they harbour they still commit to this path in the hope of something better. For themselves? Possibly but mostly because they believe it's something better for everyone. Even their enemies.

I used to be a believer Tommy. I started to ask myself questions about that belief. I love the stories about Jesus. I still believe he did exist. I think he was probably a very enlightened, great man. Probably a bit like Gandhi.
I asked myself one question which really highlighted the authenticity, or the lack of it, the clerics who were tutoring me actually possessed. What would Jesus say about the church if he can back. Would he shake hands with these guys who claimed to represent him? Clearly he would not. So I decided that this church did not represent the values of Jesus. Then I thought about all of the churches and their different beliefs. I wondered which was the right one, between the Catholics, various protestant groups, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. All had very well educated, brilliant men and women who could espouse the benefits of each religion. They could not all be right though. Were any right? I decided then that each had their own merits, but each were fulfilling a basic need in humans. A need that satisfied a level of spirituality and which purported to give us the answer to the most fundamental human question: What happened after we died?
I decided that they were probably all contrived at a high level to keep that spiritual need fed. That is what I still believe today. We still have a great capacity to contrive stories to satisfy our beliefs. That ability, undoubtedly helps a great number of people. It doesn't mean the stories are true.

tommy2bad

Safehands wrote: »

I used to be a believer Tommy. I started to ask myself questions about that belief. I love the stories about Jesus. I still believe he did exist. I think he was probably a very enlightened, great man. Probably a bit like Gandhi.
I asked myself one question which really highlighted the authenticity, or the lack of it, the clerics who were tutoring me actually possessed. What would Jesus say about the church if he can back. Would he shake hands with these guys who claimed to represent him? Clearly he would not. So I decided that this church did not represent the values of Jesus. Then I thought about all of the churches and their different beliefs. I wondered which was the right one, between the Catholics, various protestant groups, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. All had very well educated, brilliant men and women who could espouse the benefits of each religion. They could not all be right though. Were any right? I decided then that each had their own merits, but each were fulfilling a basic need in humans. A need that satisfied a level of spirituality and which purported to give us the answer to the most fundamental human question: What happened after we died?
I decided that they were probably all contrived at a high level to keep that spiritual need fed. That is what I still believe today. We still have a great capacity to contrive stories to satisfy our beliefs. That ability, undoubtedly helps a great number of people. It doesn't mean the stories are true.

Why not? They could all be right, who said theirs only one right answer.
Anyway, to paraphrase Woody Allen, you say your an atheist, God might refer to you as His loyal opposition

Harika

tommy2bad wrote: »

Why not? They could all be right, who said theirs only one right answer.
Anyway, to paraphrase Woody Allen, you say your an atheist, God might refer to you as His loyal opposition

Ironically the bible is not very clear in this and after reading it, there could be more than one god. (It is just clear that the christian god is the master of the other gods). In fact it can be discussed if god himself is three gods (himself, jesus, the holy spirit) or is it an all in one package.

Safehands

tommy2bad wrote: »

Why not? They could all be right, who said theirs only one right answer.

Actually, the Catholic church did!

Safehands

tommy2bad wrote: »

Why not? They could all be right, who said theirs only one right answer.

Actually, the Catholic Church did!

RikuoAmero

tommy2bad wrote: »

Why not? They could all be right, who said theirs only one right answer.
Anyway, to paraphrase Woody Allen, you say your an atheist, God might refer to you as His loyal opposition

Now you've lost the plot completely. So a christian is correct when he says to be saved, you have to believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died and was resurrected...and a muslim is correct AT THE SAME TIME when he says that there is only one god, that Jesus was merely a prophet and that to believe that God (Allah) was incarnated as a man is blasphemy worthy of damnation?

tommy2bad

RikuoAmero wrote: »

Now you've lost the plot completely. So a christian is correct when he says to be saved, you have to believe Jesus Christ is the Son of God, who died and was resurrected...and a muslim is correct AT THE SAME TIME when he says that there is only one god, that Jesus was merely a prophet and that to believe that God (Allah) was incarnated as a man is blasphemy worthy of damnation?

I'd say both are wronger than a wrong thing on those points. I would say the Christians have a better grasp of it than the Muslims but in fairness Islam isn't all wrong either. I think if you are looking to religion of any colour or hue for explanations of how things are in the way we use the scientific method to understand the world, you're in for a lot of grief.
Both Islam and Christianity share a lot of similar principals as do most religions. If it a detailed description of the pantheon of heaven you're after then the Viking stuff is more fun.
Of coerce all this is my personal musings, remember (read in a fast voice) I AmNotATheologian nor do I play one on TV, some settling of contents may occur, terms and conditions attached, your mileage may vary, shares may go down as well as up.

tommy2bad

Safehands wrote: »

Actually, the Catholic Church did!

Oh come on, their not the only ones to make this claim!

Safehands

tommy2bad wrote: »

Oh come on, their not the only ones to make this claim!

Just to recap, my original question: They could not all be right though. Were any right?

Your reply posting:Why not? They could all be right, who said there's only one right answer?.

My response: Actually, the Catholic Church did!

Your second reply: Oh come on, their not the only ones to make this claim! ( that there is only one right answer)

Tommy my friend, you will just have to make your mind up which it is.

tommy2bad

Safehands wrote: »

Just to recap, my original question: They could not all be right though. Were any right?

Your reply posting:Why not? They could all be right, who said there's only one right answer?.

My response: Actually, the Catholic Church did!

Your second reply: Oh come on, their not the only ones to make this claim! ( that there is only one right answer)

Tommy my friend, you will just have to make your mind up which it is.

Never, that way lies madness!:D the trick with faith is to accept that it takes a leap to reach it and to not make the mistake of landing once the leap is made. Live in the leap.

I'm not really helping am I?:(

J C

Safehands wrote: »

I used to be a believer Tommy. I started to ask myself questions about that belief. I love the stories about Jesus. I still believe he did exist. I think he was probably a very enlightened, great man. Probably a bit like Gandhi.
I asked myself one question which really highlighted the authenticity, or the lack of it, the clerics who were tutoring me actually possessed. What would Jesus say about the church if he can back. Would he shake hands with these guys who claimed to represent him? Clearly he would not. So I decided that this church did not represent the values of Jesus. Then I thought about all of the churches and their different beliefs. I wondered which was the right one, between the Catholics, various protestant groups, Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. All had very well educated, brilliant men and women who could espouse the benefits of each religion. They could not all be right though. Were any right? I decided then that each had their own merits, but each were fulfilling a basic need in humans. A need that satisfied a level of spirituality and which purported to give us the answer to the most fundamental human question: What happened after we died?
I decided that they were probably all contrived at a high level to keep that spiritual need fed. That is what I still believe today. We still have a great capacity to contrive stories to satisfy our beliefs. That ability, undoubtedly helps a great number of people. It doesn't mean the stories are true.

Like all Human endeavours, religions have approximations of the truth ... some closer to the truth ... some further away.

You're correct that they can't all be right (about every detail) ... but they all have some details that approach the truth.

... and you're also correct that there are many man-made contrivances within many religions.
If we genuinely seek the truth, I believe that God will make it available to us ... but we are free to deny God, just like everything else in life.

I believe that the Christian Faith represents the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
In summary, it states that God always existed, created everything and is its ultimate cause, is a personal God of three persons, is omnipotent and omniscient as well as being transcendent.
He also incarnated into a Human being, lived on Earth and died in sacrificial and judicial atonement for all sin ... and as a result, everybody who believes on Him may be Saved from His eternal justice ... to enjoy His eternal mercy and love.
You are free to believe this, or not ...
After devoting a lot of thought to it and looking at the many alternatives ... I believe this to be true.:)

Safehands

tommy2bad wrote: »

Never, that way lies madness!:D the trick with faith is to accept that it takes a leap to reach it and to not make the mistake of landing once the leap is made. Live in the leap.

Coincidentally I was just watching a frog on TV, as I read that posting. He lives in the leap.

Now that is supernatural! A miracle!

Safehands

J C wrote: »

Like all Human endeavours, religions have approximations of the truth ... some closer to the truth ... some further away.

You're correct that they can't all be right (about every detail) ... but they all have some details that approach the truth.

... and you're also correct that there are many man-made contrivances within many religions.
If we genuinely seek the truth, I believe that God will make it available to us ... but we are free to deny God, just like everything else in life.

I believe that the Christian Faith represents the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
In summary, it states that God always existed, created everything and is its ultimate cause, is a personal God of three persons, is omnipotent and omniscient as well as being transcendent.
He also incarnated into a Human being, lived on Earth and died in sacrificial and judicial atonement for all sin ... and as a result, everybody who believes on Him may be Saved from His eternal justice ... to enjoy His eternal mercy and love.
You are free to believe this, or not ...
After devoting a lot of thought to it and looking at the many alternatives ... I believe this to be true.:)

An excellent summary of the old and new testaments. Doesn't mean any of it is true, but well done JC. The trouble is, we know all that already. Heard it hundreds of times. It still contains religious cliches which are not going to convince people who think logically.

tommy2bad

Safehands wrote: »

An excellent summary of the old and new testaments. Doesn't mean any of it is true, but well done JC. The trouble is, we know all that already. Heard it hundreds of times. It still contains religious cliches which are not going to convince people who think logically.

Actually if you only use logic it all works within the rules. I think your mixing up empiricism with logic. I understand the inclination to dismiss what you cant see hear touch smell taste but it's not the sum total of the human experience. Man shall not live by bread alone.

nozzferrahhtoo

tommy2bad wrote: »

dismiss what you cant see hear touch smell taste but it's not the sum total of the human experience.

That is why when I communicate with theists I use a very carefully structured sentence to ensure they do not think I am limiting myself in the way you suggest above.

That sentence, which I am sure you have seen me type before, is "Have you any arguments, evidence, data OR reasoning to lend even a modicum of credence to the claim there is a god".

And you will find the limitation you describe simply does not exist within that sentence. Anywhere.

J C

Safehands wrote: »

An excellent summary of the old and new testaments. Doesn't mean any of it is true, but well done JC. The trouble is, we know all that already. Heard it hundreds of times.

Many people don't know it already ... and the truth about God bears repeating ... especially when some Atheists and their friends keep endlessly repeating their denials of God ... and scoffing at Christian believers.

Safehands wrote: »

It still contains religious cliches which are not going to convince people who think logically.

I think logically, as do billions of other Christians ... and we believe it.
You have just said that I provided and excellent summary of the Old and New Testament, that all Christians believe in ... and you then proceeded to make an unfounded and inflamatory statement that this wouldn't convince people who think logically ... with the obvious implication that Christians don't think logically.
Atheists don't have a monopoly on logic ... and I find your unfounded generalization about Christians to be quite offensive and insulting TBH.

Please point out anything illogical in what I posted.

J C

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

That is why when I communicate with theists I use a very carefully structured sentence to ensure they do not think I am limiting myself in the way you suggest above.

That sentence, which I am sure you have seen me type before, is "Have you any arguments, evidence, data OR reasoning to lend even a modicum of credence to the claim there is a god".

And you will find the limitation you describe simply does not exist within that sentence. Anywhere.

Evidence for God ... eh ... how about the Ultimate Cause, the origin of the Universe, matter, energy, ID in life and indeed the fact that life exists, in the first place?

How about the fact that the Bible has been proven to be historically accurate and science has proven that we are all descended from one man and one woman, the population of the world went through a population bottleneck when only a small number of people survived and the world is covered by sedimentary rock catastrophically and rapidly laid down under water and full of fossilised dead things all over the Earth.
How about the presence of evil, sin, death and disease in a world where living creatures are almost perfect despite the ravages of random mutagenesis and all kinds of other damaging effects.
How about Paschal's Wager ... that you have nothing to lose from living your life in accordance with Christian principles ... and everything to gain ... even if there is nothing when you die ... whereas there could be very serious downsides potentially in not doing so ... both here and now and in the next life, if it turns out that there is one.
I could go on ... but I don't want to start another mega thread ... but I'm also not prepared to stand by on a Christian Forum and allow people to make unchallenged fallacious comments that there is no evidence for God ... when the evidence is literally staring them in the face.:)