Originally Posted by kokovo
Okay, first of, I'm agnostic, meaning I believe these things are pretty much impossible to know.
So as everyone knows, Christianity/Judaism/any other religion is based on faith.
Faith that everything that we know was created by some higher power and when we die we go to heaven and chill on some clouds.
However the thing about faith is that it can never be dis-proven.
Science could come up with what they believe to be the proven answer to the universe but religions will still have their faith, and faith is all a religion needs to survive.
So it seems to me that you're all just going over the same "evidence" that man has for years.
Long story short: While I respect everyone's opinions, I don't see the point of discussing this. Nothing has been proven and I doubt anything ever will.
Of course there is. For example, this is the only reason why we can clear up some of your misconceptions about science. Science will never "prove" an answer to the universe. Science deals with the natural universe and has nothing to do with the supernatural. Therefore, even if abiogenesis is true, this does not exclude God as the creator behind abiogenesis
. Therefore, the pointlessness of the topic stems firstly from misconceptions of science, compounded by religious beliefs.
Some people can't accept that there is a possibility that "there is no meaning to life". Others, like I, have accepted that there is no intrinsic meaning to life, but that it is what we make of it that is its meaning. From my own point of view, it matters not whether or not we transmigrate. It only matters what we do what we feel matters to us. Ironically, this definition has caused me to butt heads with some of our fine users at PE2K more than once. lol