The futility of trying to prove god does not exist.

On the other hand, it is quite plausible that some unseen force exists outside of our natural environment, someone or something that can manipulate the laws of physics or even break them, if this were true, it would explain all existance.

Prove it.

actually I can prove that evolution is not a fact in just one sentence. There is not sufficient evidence to prove that Macro-evolution has ever taken place.

Exactly!! Using Mr Bings idea you have placed the burdon of proof upon yourself adam24.

Go to it.

So if something NATURAL is explained by some supernatural, then thats not science? Lets pretend for a moment that everyone knew as an absolute fact that God created the universe. Are you telling me that God would not be considered science? He would be the one that created all natural things, mantains all natural things, and explains all natural things, but he would not be science?

No one has ever seen Macro-evolution, not once, ever, in all of recorded history, so that cant be science either.

It is an unseen force, that manipulates all life, and can never be tested in a lab, but it is science? Sounds like a double standard to me. Anything that exists, falls under the definition of science.

The only reason you dont think God is science, is because you dont believe he is real.

Well, I dont believe evolution is real, so its not science

I have never seen a living dinosaur...not science

I dont believe in the big bang...not science

I have never seen another galaxy...not science.

What about black holes? No one knows for sure that they really exist, so how are they science.

Obviously, all those things I named are science, but the fact that I have never seen one does not change that fact. Same goes for creation, just because you did not see it, dosent mean it didnt happen.

So if something NATURAL is explained by some supernatural, then thats not science?

Obviously, all those things I named are science, but the fact that I have never seen one does not change that fact. Same goes for creation, just because you did not see it, dosent mean it didnt happen.

My religious friends constantly challenge me to prove that god does not exist.

Not only can I not do that but it is unfair to ask me to do it.

To make the point, lets suppose I say that Evolution is a fact.

You then say: "I don't think so. Show me."

I reply: "You show me first that Evolution is NOT a fact."

In the above exchange, I am wrong because I am asking you to prove a negative.

The responsibilty to prove belongs to the person making a claim which in this case is me, claiming that Evoution is a fact.

You do not need prove anything. The onus is on me. I need to be able to provide you with enough scientific proof demonstrating that at least the probability of Evolution occuring is a high probability. If I cannot do that, I fail.

Similarly, for someone claiming that there is a god, it is his/her responsibility t prove this claim.

I - as a nonbeliever - do not need to prove the non-existance of god. One cannot prove a negative.

So, the claim on the existence of god/gods need to be proven by those making the claim. Further, the proof should be about as rigorous as we require from evolution.

What do I mean by that?

Well, if I were to say, Evolution is a fact because Darwin says so or his books say so, then you would be correct in rejecting such a proof unless the writings described actual emperical studies and more importantly, subsequent THIRD PARTY emperical data, studies and experiments verifed the fact. If they did not verify the fact, then the theory collapes. If they verifed it with caveats,then the theory requires to be modified.

Simiarly, it is not good enough to say "God exists because the Bible/Koran/Bhagwad Gita/ the Vedas/The Torah says so".

Emperical proof needs to be provided.

The prophecies are the evidence that most ignore. That is where you will find the evidence. A Book alone without a claim will not prove anything. Yet a Book that fortells the future, well, that's something else again.

A simple bit of copy-paste just to spice up the pot.

1. There are several mundane ways in which a prediction of the future can be fulfilled:
1. Retrodiction. The "prophecy" can be written or modified after the events fulfilling it have already occurred.
2. Vagueness. The prophecy can be worded in such a way that people can interpret any outcome as a fulfillment. Nostradomus's prophecies are all of this type. Vagueness works particularly well when people are religiously motivated to believe the prophecies.
3. Inevitability. The prophecy can predict something that is almost sure to happen, such as the collapse of a city. Since nothing lasts forever, the city is sure to fall someday. If it has not, it can be said that according to prophecy, it will.
4. Denial. One can claim that the fulfilling events occurred even if they have not. Or, more commonly, one can forget that the prophecy was ever made.
5. Self-fulfillment. A person can act deliberately to satisfy a known prophecy.

There are no prophecies in the Bible that cannot easily fit into one or more of those categories.

2. In biblical times, prophecies were not simply predictions. They were warnings of what could or would happen if things did not change. They were meant to influence people's behavior. If the people heeded the prophecy, the events would not come to pass; Jonah 3 gives an example. A fulfilled prophecy was a failed prophecy, because it meant people did not heed the warning.

3. The Bible also contains failed prophecies, in the sense that things God said would happen did not (Skeptic's Annotated Bible n.d.). For example:
* Joshua said that God would, without fail, drive out the Jebusites and Canaanites, among others (Josh. 3:9-10). But those tribes were not driven out (Josh. 15:63, 17:12-13).
* Ezekiel said Egypt would be made an uninhabited wasteland for forty years (29:10-14), and Nebuchadrezzar would plunder it (29:19-20). Neither happened.

4. Other religions claim many fulfilled prophecies, too (Prophecy Fulfilled n.d.).

5. Divinity is not shown by miracles. The Bible itself says true prophecies may come elsewhere than from God (Deut. 13:1-3), as may other miracles (Exod. 7:22, Matt. 4:8). Some people say that to focus on proofs is to miss the whole point of faith (John 20:29).

Please explain how Jerusalems East Gate Prophecy easily fits into one of your above categories?

He has on countless occassions you just fail to listen or even attempt to understand.

Please explain how Jerusalems East Gate Prophecy easily fits into one of your above categories?

#2 & #4

The East Gate Prophecy had no string attached. There were no warnings connected to it. The Bible simply states this will happen. So that rules out No. 2 . The fact that other religions claim thay have fulfilled prophecies. So what? This prophecy is a valid fact. We can look at other prophecies from other religions. Yet, those prophecies have little to do with this one that is obviously true. So that rules out No. 4.

And I have asked others in the past to show me some of these other prophecies from the other religions, and I'm still waiting.