For the first, time, I ventured right into Humanist territory to spark a debate: the Facebook page of the American Humanist Association (AHA). Up until now, I had only engaged in debates with humanists on Christian pages such as evangelist Ray Comfort's Facebook page.
Humanists have this deceptive belief that their views are based on “facts,” when in reality, their views are based on faith. Watch how one particular humanist, CT (abbreviated to protect her ID), struggles to back up her claim that she bases her opinion on “historical, empirically tested, verifiable facts.” CT commented on a post by the AHA, and I challenged her claims.
CT: I will listen to opposing viewpoints if there is substantial and verifiable proof to back it up. But if they are just spouting ridiculous nonsense, then no, I won't. I base my opinion on facts; Historical, empirically tested, verifiable facts.
Me: CT, do you believe something can come from nothing (Big Bang) and that life evolved from non-life (evolution)? If so, what empirically tested and verifiable facts do you use to support those beliefs?
CT: While there is no "proof" of that specific event happening, most scientific theory points to a big bang start of life on Earth. Scientists have been observing similar events throughout the universe for decades, so I feel confident in that evidence to support it. As for evolution there is ample evidence everywhere that is more than just a theory. Archeologists have found evidence of several different human-like species that all became extinct while homo sapiens evolved to survive. And with advances in genetic technology DNA is now analyzed to study the connections and how species evolved.
Me: Thank you for the reply. What "similar events" did scientists observe that supports "something" coming from "nothing"? What observable evidence supports life coming from non-life? Also, how do you know that the fossilized bone fragments of ape-like creatures are our ancestors if you were not there to observe their lives, and to even know whether or not those specific creatures reproduced?
CT: I see where you are going with this. Let me ask you, where is your proof, other than the Bible, that God created everything?
CT: See, I actually have a life and I am not going to go track down every scientific, astronomical, and medical journal I have ever read, to link here, when I know damn good and well you won't accept them as evidence. This is EXACTLY what the original article was talking about.
Me: Yes, so are you willing to admit that your opinions are often based on faith, and not fact? I reject the notion that I have to put the Bible aside. In fact, one ultimate “proof” that the Bible is true (and that God is the Creator) is the fact that you are forced to borrow from it, even though you may claim to not believe it. For example, you believe in something called “proof.” You are making a lot of assumptions with that belief. You must believe in “truth” versus “lie.” How do you account for a definition of an immaterial concept such as “truth” in a naturalistic, atheistic worldview? The Bible accounts for this (John 1:1, John 14:6). Also, you must believe that your brain is functioning well enough to trust your own conclusions. Yet, if you are evolved through random chemical processes, then how can you ever trust your own conclusions to be accurate? The fact that we even have the ability to explore the universe makes sense because we are specially made in the image of God (Gen 1:27).
CT: And I reject a discussion with someone who uses an archaic text that is 2,000 years old as proof of anything.
Me: And yet, you believe in an event that happened a supposed 13.7 billion years ago (universe born from nothing), with absolutely no eyewitness accounts whatsoever. Will you at least admit that you are relying upon faith?
This debate might not have ended. I thought CT quit the debate after her last comment saying “And I reject a discussion…” However, she did comment later on after I went to bed that night, but I did not see it until two days later. I replied to her comment, so we will see if she sees and responds. Perhaps there will be more to come!