It suggests that there may not be an answer, but we will never know without evidence.
>> It suggests that there may not be an answer,
You’re seriously suggesting that there may be NO answer to the question “how did we get here?”, despite the fact that our existence proves that we got here somehow? Logic is clearly not your strong suit.
>> but we will never know without evidence.
This is my point exactly. The question “how did we get here?” has an answer that can never be provided by the scientific method. The scientific method is an inherently limited doctrine precisely because it relies solely on evidence.
There are certain facts of existence — such as the origins of life (your apparent inability to understand this fundamental concept notwithstanding) — which will always defy evidence. Thus, there will always be question which the scientific method is entirely incapable of answering.
It is these questions which are entirely in the realm of faith.
Earlier in this thread, we had the following exchange:
>>> Their entire theology rests on the assumption that the human mind is capable of comprehending everything in the universe
>> I hold that truth to be self evident.
Two responses. First, a “self-evident truth” is simply another word for faith. You have thus accepted a premise based on no empirical evidence whatsoever (as the premise is “self-evident” to you).
Second, prove it.
H