God"s existence

Unfortunately, I am having a hard time understanding your first point. I don't want to misinterpret, so please correct me if I am wrong. You are saying that because a world without God is so contradictory and illogical, then I am subject to burden of proof? I would have to say this is in fact an extremely interesting and intelligent point that Is never thought of. However, one issue I have with your argument, is a lack of proofs. You made the claims that "laws of logic, laws of nature, uniformity in the universe, etc. are impossible in a naturalistic/materialistic worldview", yet you only attempt to provide evidence for the laws of logic. If we are to hold a proper debate " I would expect you to provide at least an explanation for your points - or not to mention them at all. Since you have yet to elaborate these other claims, for now, I will ignore them. Let us then address your laws of logic claim. You say these laws "cannot exist in a universe apart from God, as they are universal and immaterial". This "contradicts the naturalist/materialistc worldview which asserts only material nature exists", as you claim. I would disagree that these laws cannot exist apart from God, for in my opinion they have nothing to do with him, and furthermore, logic itself is not universal or immaterial. Logic is defined largely as two things. One, it is a system defined and used by humans as a thought tool. We have given definition to the system in which we make arguments, solve problems, and invent solutions. This can be seen throughout history, as philosophers developed these laws as time progressed. They did not discover them as Newton discovered the laws of gravity, they were invented. Although these laws may be extremely well thought out and complex, this does not make them divine. Two, the region of our brain which is responsible for logic is tangible and observable (just as it is in many other species displaying logical abilities). Logic is merely a problem-solving ability that allows species to choose the most favorable outcome. Therefore, the "Laws of Logic" are not a divine force, but a concept simply created by man. Now on to your second point on evolution. You say that you believe in evolution on the micro level, but you don't see how this provides evidence against God. Well, if that is how you see evolution, then it would make sense for it to be unworthy evidence. However, I was not making the point for solely micro level evolution. Evolution is not exclusive to micro levels, it is a law of nature that shapes species and creates new ones. Common ancestry, an idea you refuse, is based upon the ideas of micro level evolution, something you agree with. This cherry picking is not acceptable within the scientific world. If you can not agree with common ancestry, then you can't agree with evolution. Back to my point, if evolution is true, then God's existence must be false; because he did not make humanity, nor any species. Here are the best sources I could find to support evolution's existence as it is regarded as scientific fact. I would encourage you to change your view on evolution, even if you remain religious, for many people of faith also accept evolution. Denying evolution is an outdated and ignorant trend akin to denying the shape of the earth. https://evolution.berkeley.edu... http://humanorigins.si.edu... http://biologos.org...