Quote:
Originally Posted by Skinny.
There is a hell of alot more facts supporting scientific explanations for existence than there is for an invisible man in the clouds who controls the universe.
People spend they're whole lives believing in a god they have never seen or herd from, with no evidence or reason to believe in his existance, yet they want people to prove he doesn't exist.
|
If that is your logical argument then your conclusion can be that atheism is more probable to be the truth than religion. This doesn't not mean you have proved atheism 100% correct. It just means atheism is the more logical choice.
The reason people want people to prove he doesn't exist is because in order for religion to be 100% wrong I don't think just not being able to prove his existence is enough. While it is a logical argument to prove that you can't prove a god to be real, logic is flawed. What I mean by that is that even though you logically prove that you can't prove God to be real, and logic would say he isn't real, the fact that you can't disprove his existence says something. While you can give me burden of proof bull****, I am a seeker of facts and would like to understand this relationship more. So who is actually more logical, the person ignoring the relationship or the person seeking to understand the relationship?
Quote:
|
This post made me lol. Your faith isn't superficial at all.
|
I didn't understand your post very well. I don't know if that second comment was sarcasm or not.