deiscovery

When listening to notable atheists speak, they turn to science to back their claims. -like DoG's comments, but with much more meat on the bones... "There is zero evidence for any Gods. Until you can prove they exist the4n they don't!" Can an atheist make their claims without using science? It comes off as a sort of partnership (atheism and science). I think it is unfair and they should release the presumption that science backs their claims.

I think the knee jerk reaction is to come back at religion. I am trying not to include religion (Christian) in the statement. My belief is that Atheism claims scientific arguments or the lack of them for there stance that there is no God. I think they should leave science out of their arguments. We do not have any evidence, measurement or detection of "spiritual" entities or claimed places (angels, Holy Spirit, the anointing, heaven, hell) at this current time in history to prove or disprove God. Atheism should just state that and leave science out of it's arguments. I would like to stay on topic if possible...

My comments are based on the common idea that "To prove that God does not exist we will turn to science ..." I think this is unfair to science.

It is our belief that the discipline of science has been hijacked by atheists and used to support atheistic beliefs. It is our belief based on scientific method and empirical evidence; atheism cannot state that there is no God. It can only state “at this present time in human history we cannot prove with existing instruments of measurement and detection that there is or is not a God or a spiritual realm where he is suppose to exist.”