The Christian God exists (10)

I will re-address my opponent's paragraphs in the same numbered fashion.1. Yes, you may have intended to use spontaneous generation, however that is not an accurate term to describe abiogenesis. The process of abiogenesis was not spontaneous; there were millions if not billions of cosmic evolution before it. Also, much like the process of the evolution of species, the boundaries are blurry for what constitutes "organic material" and "life". You could, for example, say the first instance of DNA was the first organic material, or go back to RNA, or nucleotides, and the list goes on. It's tough to pinpoint exactly what these first organic materials and life were. So this life was not "spontaneously generated", but rather came about through billions of years of cosmic evolution. Yes, we don't know that much about what the first life actually was or the conditions it came in, however, as you say, a supernatural being should not be considered; this is a god of the gaps argument.2. Yes, that's pretty much how cosmic evolution happens. Elements fuse, split, bond, etc. this forms other elements, coumpounds, etc. and eventally leads to the universe as we know it. Life is not an element, it's not on the periodic table. And yes, theoretically speaking, humans, with the best lab environment, tools, and conditions possible, over 13 billion years, and some luck, humans would most likely be able to create life. Abiogenesis requires some faith, but it's your theory against mine, and I find "we don't completely know, therefore God" to be a less coherent and evidenced explanation.3. You're welcome.4. Correct. Atheists say that there is no evidence for god because personal claims do not count as evidence. A woman has tried to drown her son in a puddle because "Jesus told her to"[1]. Does this mean that we should exempt her because god told her to do it? These cases are more likely skizophrenia and/or people seeing and hearing what they want to see and hear. Eyewitness accounts are not trustworthy. Many people are open to the idea of god, we just don't see any evidence for him.5. Okay, just because we have questions doesn't mean god. Scientific theories are not complete, as there are some things we just don't know yet. This seems like somewhat of a pointless question.As for my comment, I stand by it and see no problem with your's, either. I honestly don't care if somebody chooses to believe in god because they don't understand science or because they find it a more comfortable belief. However, when people try to shove that belief down my throat, infringe upon others' rights because of that belief, or substitute science with their beliefs, that's when I'll challenge their beliefs and show how unfounded they are. Also, debate is a good forum for getting your ideas out there and learning, which is why I debate. I don't walk around demanding debates and refuting god because I can leave others and their beliefs alone; however I do like to discuss these ideas so that we can progress as a society, thus why I leave the option to discuss with me on this site.6. Good.7. I'm feeling really lazy right now, so because you've dropped the point I won't counter-rebut.8. I feel that you have not shown why abiogenesis is invalid.Sources:1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...;