Creation vs. Evolution (1 Viewer)

[Lonesome Dove]

Science cannot currently explain the events since the BB, but I have no doubt that it will be adequately explained at some time in the future.

This sounds like faith to me.

dang, my words exactly.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

so, if it can't prove it, you need faith to believe it...evolution (aka - we got here from nothing through evolution, abiogenesis, & the big bang) is as much a religion as creation because niether of them can be proven...and you guys still have ignored half the stuff I've posted already ( so why post anything else?)

Two murder trials. Neither murder has eyewitnesses. In murder number one, the lawyer argues that the defendant must be guilty because he just seems guilty. In murder number two, the lawyer brings out fingerprints, DNA analysis, tire tracks, trajectory analysis, receipts from the murder weapon, full dossiers on the victim found at the accused's house, etc. But neither case has an eyewitness, so are they require equal amounts of 'faith' to reach a verdict?

No not equal amounts of faith but each some faith, but this doesn't take into account the consequences of being wrong.Faith takes so little effort and could have so much reward. Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallableYou might be more sure in the case with evidence but you could still be wrong. I am just not arrogant enough to think anyone has figured it out. Since no one can figure it out, I must go on feeling.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

This is news to me. I believe science CAN currently explain events since the big bang. Our understanding of how we got from the big bang to today is pretty clear.

There are currently holes in the theories. They will soon be closed, but there are holes, nonetheless.

I don't know that not being able to explain every jot and tittle is the same as saying that we don't have robust theories, that generally explain how the universe and life on earth developed, that are predictive, that explain the vast majority of observations without a lot of contortions, that in a word - work.Einstein replaced Newton, where necessary - but the creationist folks would never have come to know that Newtonian physics don't work on the large scale. Planck replaced Einstein, where necessary - but the creationist folks would never have come to know the quantum scale existed.We can't explain "where all the matter is" in space - we know that either it must be there, or our equations are wrong. We can't identify precisely how amino acids "came to life," but we know that this doesn't seem outlandish given what we know about amino acids. Through our own DNA we can trace our genetics back to friggin' bacteria, it seems, in the case of mitochondrial DNA.We are talking small gaps in a story line that otherwise holds together and is extremely robustly told. These are like a few typos in a 300 page book compared to how "scientifically" the Bible tells this story.

So maybe the Gaps are bigger in the bible than scientific theories.You acknowledge that there are gaps in scientific theory. But yet you still believe the scientific theories.There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

 

[Jericho]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallable

Humans created religion.

 

[Lonesome Dove]

Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallable

Humans created religion.

Oh religion has nothing to do with God...but good point

 

[Lonesome Dove]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

But you are sure there isn't a God? Or he is just dead?

 

[CowboysFromHell]

Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallable

Humans created religion.

Oh religion has nothing to do with God...but good point

Humans created God, too.

 

[Jericho]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

But you are sure there isn't a God? Or he is just dead?

If you stop using your stupid alias and start posting as DT's Mules then I may think about answering you.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallable

Humans created religion.

Oh religion has nothing to do with God...but good point

Explain this one. Religion is the celebration of your faith in God, no?

 

[1586]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

But you are sure there isn't a God? Or he is just dead?

If you stop using your stupid alias and start posting as DT's Mules then I may think about answering you.

I didn't know it would affect your answer.

 

[1586]

Humans created theoriesHumans are fallableTheories are fallable

Humans created religion.

Oh religion has nothing to do with God...but good point

Explain this one. Religion is the celebration of your faith in God, no?

2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practicesit's the institutionalized system I was refering to. So in the technical sense from the denotation above, i have religion.in the connotation of institutionalization, i don't

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

This is news to me. I believe science CAN currently explain events since the big bang. Our understanding of how we got from the big bang to today is pretty clear.

There are currently holes in the theories. They will soon be closed, but there are holes, nonetheless.

Here is another faith based statement. You are sure the holes will be closed? Are you SURE sure, or just kind of sure. On what do you place your surety?Just an observation....

 

[Jericho]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

But you are sure there isn't a God? Or he is just dead?

If you stop using your stupid alias and start posting as DT's Mules then I may think about answering you.

I didn't know it would affect your answer.

I just don't like alii.I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there is life on other planets.

 

[Mr. Know-It-All]

Larry, instead of trying to shoot holes in what is observable and testable (because your scientific background is demonstrably negligible) why don't you just believe that the reason the earth appears to be old is that God created it to appear to be old?That way, we will have absolutely no common point of reference to debate and this thread can eperience the death it so richly deserves.

For God to create the world in this manner would surely be against his attributes, no? That argument would never fly because for God to do this, he would have to lie. Lying is against his nature. I am not saying he couldn't do it, but I am saying it wouldn't make sense for him to do it and still have the attributes of being holy.Then again I am not sure if he could build a rock that he couldn't lift.

 

[1586]

There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

My disbelief in god(s) has nothing to do with the bible.

But you are sure there isn't a God? Or he is just dead?

If you stop using your stupid alias and start posting as DT's Mules then I may think about answering you.

I didn't know it would affect your answer.

I just don't like alii.I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there is life on other planets.

So you are agnostic, not an atheist.Are you a pragmatist?

 

[Mr. Anonymous]

This is news to me. I believe science CAN currently explain events since the big bang. Our understanding of how we got from the big bang to today is pretty clear.

There are currently holes in the theories. They will soon be closed, but there are holes, nonetheless.

I don't know that not being able to explain every jot and tittle is the same as saying that we don't have robust theories, that generally explain how the universe and life on earth developed, that are predictive, that explain the vast majority of observations without a lot of contortions, that in a word - work.Einstein replaced Newton, where necessary - but the creationist folks would never have come to know that Newtonian physics don't work on the large scale. Planck replaced Einstein, where necessary - but the creationist folks would never have come to know the quantum scale existed.We can't explain "where all the matter is" in space - we know that either it must be there, or our equations are wrong. We can't identify precisely how amino acids "came to life," but we know that this doesn't seem outlandish given what we know about amino acids. Through our own DNA we can trace our genetics back to friggin' bacteria, it seems, in the case of mitochondrial DNA.We are talking small gaps in a story line that otherwise holds together and is extremely robustly told. These are like a few typos in a 300 page book compared to how "scientifically" the Bible tells this story.

So maybe the Gaps are bigger in the bible than scientific theories.You acknowledge that there are gaps in scientific theory. But yet you still believe the scientific theories.There are gaps in the Bible but you can make the leap that God doesn't exist?

I am not at all sure that there is no God. You can't prove a negative, and I have no desire to prove that there is no God even if I could.However, I am quite sure that humans evolved from lower order animals over millions of years, and that the universe is billions of years old, and that we are made of stardust. - I will concede the possibility of God's presence at the beginning, though I can't prove it and am agnostic about it. My mind is unable to grasp infinities and singularities and so here is where I just say "I don't know - maybe."- I will concede the possibility that God waved a magic wand disposing life on that first amino acid/RNA lifeform (or whatever it was) IF, in the fulness of time, science cannot explain precisely how life arose from inanimate chemical matter, then. I fully expect this to be demonstrated scientifically and would be shocked if it wasn't in my lifetime. I concede this because, again, you can't prove a negative, and the positive hasn't been demonstrated. I can't say I'm agnostic about this, sure as I am that I will live to see it demonstrated.- I will concede the possibility that God provides some "extra little something" (or soul, if you will) to humans, though if he does so I believe in his benevolence and omniscience he does so to babies when they're born and not zygotes when eggs are fertilized. I'm agnostic about whether we are special... I kind of doubt it.God's presence at the beginning, his role in disposing life on inanimate matter, and his role in creating souls are none of them provable scientifically nor necessary scientifically and so I will NOT concede that they have any role in science class. If science hasn't explained it, then it is unexplained by science, and that's the end of class for the day, folks. Go forth, learn more, and perhaps we will know vastly more in the next generation, as we have in every generation since the Renaissance freed man from religious supression of scientific inquiry.

 

[Hipple Long Ware & Peete]

I for one feel more productive and sane for not having participated in this thread (today).

 

[Jericho]

So you are agnostic, not an atheist.

Are you a pragmatist?

Nope, I'm an atheist. On top of that, I am what is called a strong atheist. A weak atheist has no belief in gods. A strong atheist has a belief in no gods.

 

[1586]

So you are agnostic, not an atheist.Are you a pragmatist?

Nope, I'm an atheist.

Sorry, I misread the part about life on other planets.Simple question, with complex answer. How can you be sure God doesn't exist? Do you believe or feel that you know 100% that there is no God? If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

 

[Jericho]

Simple question, with complex answer. How can you be sure God doesn't exist? Do you believe or feel that you know 100% that there is no God?

I can be every bit as sure that god(s) don't exist as a religious person is that they do. Put another way, I can be equally sure about the Christian god not existing as a Christian can be about Thor not existing.

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

That wouldn't be consistent with my beliefs. If I truly believe that that would be wasting my time, then why would I waste my time? I could find a much better use for my time, even if it's just minutes per day.Plus, Pascal's wager is a really weak argument for faith. I would expect any alleged god worth its salt to see right through that.

 

[Wintermute]

So you are agnostic, not an atheist.

Are you a pragmatist?

Nope, I'm an atheist.

Sorry, I misread the part about life on other planets.Simple question, with complex answer. How can you be sure God doesn't exist? Do you believe or feel that you know 100% that there is no God?

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

As a strong atheist, his belief is that there is no god or gods. It is no different asking a strong atheist "how can you be sure?" than it is to ask you to prove that a god does indeed exist.

 

[Mr. Anonymous]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

So God is okay with "hey, I don't really believe in you, but just in case you exist, thanks?" That's good, because that's basically my m.o. Nice to see that you can just pick a faith to do this within and don't have to try to squeeze into the "there is no salvation but through me" one. I choose some amorphous Judeo-Christian type since that's my cultural background, same as everyone else in the world does.Of course, I'm sure many people don't believe in God but figure, "hey, if I'm wrong, surely God won't punish me for not believe in Him given that so little evidence appears to support his existence." Better that, than believing that God wants us to ignore that which we can learn with out own God-given brains and instead follow some dogma, unsupported by the facts in front of us, and squeeze our way through the John 14:6 route by closing our eyes and our ears to reason. I definitely don't believe in the kind of God who ONLY wants superstitious sychophants in Heaven. The rest of us are going to be some kind of grab-bag of folks who believe in evolution or have never heard of it, aren't sure which religion is right if any, aren't sure there is a God, etc.

 

[Bubba]

this thread is depressing...i so wish i'd come up with the goofy larry_boy alias and shtick first... :(

 

[Jericho]

I'm sure many people don't believe in God but figure, "hey, if I'm wrong, surely God won't punish me for not believe in Him given that so little evidence appears to support his existence."

I don't even worry about that, so strong is my certainty that there is no god.Besides, even on the off-chance that there is a god, that doesn't necessarily mean Christian dogma holds. There could be a scenario with a creator, but no souls or afterlife. Christians have a lot more of a burden of proof than just the existence of god(s). All of their rituals and superstititions and beliefs that fall out of that need to be independently verified as well.

 

[1586]

So you are agnostic, not an atheist.

Are you a pragmatist?

Nope, I'm an atheist.

Sorry, I misread the part about life on other planets.Simple question, with complex answer. How can you be sure God doesn't exist? Do you believe or feel that you know 100% that there is no God?

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

As a strong atheist, his belief is that there is no god or gods. It is no different asking a strong atheist "how can you be sure?" than it is to ask you to prove that a god does indeed exist.

It is very different because of the reward structure.

 

[Jericho]

It is very different because of the reward structure.

The "reward structure" is a subset of god-existence. A god can exist without a reward structure. So now what you're asking is "why not believe in a god, and an eternal soul, and a reward structure?" That's an even more of a long-shot proposition, because not only do I not believe in god(s), I also don't believe in eternal souls.

 

[CowboysFromHell]

It is very different because of the reward structure.

The "reward structure" is a subset of god-existence. A god can exist without a reward structure. So now what you're asking is "why not believe in a god, and an eternal soul, and a reward structure?" That's an even more of a long-shot proposition, because not only do I not believe in god(s), I also don't believe in eternal souls.

Preach it, man! I'm with ya! Edit: Pun intended.

 

[1586]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

So God is okay with "hey, I don't really believe in you, but just in case you exist, thanks?" That's good, because that's basically my m.o. Nice to see that you can just pick a faith to do this within and don't have to try to squeeze into the "there is no salvation but through me" one. I choose some amorphous Judeo-Christian type since that's my cultural background, same as everyone else in the world does.Of course, I'm sure many people don't believe in God but figure, "hey, if I'm wrong, surely God won't punish me for not believe in Him given that so little evidence appears to support his existence." That, instead of assuming that the John 14:6 route is the only way for humanity.

I'm not saying I know what God is ok with. I'm saying no one can. Thus, even if I didn't believe, the "not knowing" part of me would err to the side of caution.This, however, is not how I view things, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.I'm saying that most atheist point to logic and science as to why they don't believe in God. But in the end, it can never be absolute 100% confidence. Thus, as extremely logical people (for the most part), wouldn't the pragmatist in them win out?

 

[1586]

It is very different because of the reward structure.

The "reward structure" is a subset of god-existence. A god can exist without a reward structure. So now what you're asking is "why not believe in a god, and an eternal soul, and a reward structure?" That's an even more of a long-shot proposition, because not only do I not believe in god(s), I also don't believe in eternal souls.

So you don't believe a God exists, but you do believe one could exist without a reward structure?

 

[Jericho]

It is very different because of the reward structure.

The "reward structure" is a subset of god-existence. A god can exist without a reward structure. So now what you're asking is "why not believe in a god, and an eternal soul, and a reward structure?" That's an even more of a long-shot proposition, because not only do I not believe in god(s), I also don't believe in eternal souls.

So you don't believe a God exists, but you do believe one could exist without a reward structure?

I don't believe in any form of god(s). My statement was meant to convey that the concept of a god is not inherently tied in with the concept of a reward structure. If I worded that poorly then I apologize.

 

[Jericho]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

So God is okay with "hey, I don't really believe in you, but just in case you exist, thanks?" That's good, because that's basically my m.o. Nice to see that you can just pick a faith to do this within and don't have to try to squeeze into the "there is no salvation but through me" one. I choose some amorphous Judeo-Christian type since that's my cultural background, same as everyone else in the world does.Of course, I'm sure many people don't believe in God but figure, "hey, if I'm wrong, surely God won't punish me for not believe in Him given that so little evidence appears to support his existence." That, instead of assuming that the John 14:6 route is the only way for humanity.

I'm not saying I know what God is ok with. I'm saying no one can. Thus, even if I didn't believe, the "not knowing" part of me would err to the side of caution.This, however, is not how I view things, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.I'm saying that most atheist point to logic and science as to why they don't believe in God. But in the end, it can never be absolute 100% confidence. Thus, as extremely logical people (for the most part), wouldn't the pragmatist in them win out?

If I have the option to use my time in one of two ways, then using that time in a productive way rather than in a way that I feel would be wasteful is extremely pragmatic.

 

[1586]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

So God is okay with "hey, I don't really believe in you, but just in case you exist, thanks?" That's good, because that's basically my m.o. Nice to see that you can just pick a faith to do this within and don't have to try to squeeze into the "there is no salvation but through me" one. I choose some amorphous Judeo-Christian type since that's my cultural background, same as everyone else in the world does.Of course, I'm sure many people don't believe in God but figure, "hey, if I'm wrong, surely God won't punish me for not believe in Him given that so little evidence appears to support his existence." That, instead of assuming that the John 14:6 route is the only way for humanity.

I'm not saying I know what God is ok with. I'm saying no one can. Thus, even if I didn't believe, the "not knowing" part of me would err to the side of caution.This, however, is not how I view things, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.I'm saying that most atheist point to logic and science as to why they don't believe in God. But in the end, it can never be absolute 100% confidence. Thus, as extremely logical people (for the most part), wouldn't the pragmatist in them win out?

If I have the option to use my time in one of two ways, then using that time in a productive way rather than in a way that I feel would be wasteful is extremely pragmatic.

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

 

[Mr. Anonymous]

I'm not saying I know what God is ok with. I'm saying no one can. Thus, even if I didn't believe, the "not knowing" part of me would err to the side of caution.This, however, is not how I view things, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.I'm saying that most atheist point to logic and science as to why they don't believe in God. But in the end, it can never be absolute 100% confidence. Thus, as extremely logical people (for the most part), wouldn't the pragmatist in them win out?

I'm with you. I don't know if there is a God; I certainly don't know what God is okay with, and therefore don't try to foist my religious views on others - everyone should be free to believe or not believe as they choose. Thank goodness I live in a country whose Constitution currently makes this the law of the land. I prefer that there is an afterlife to rotting in the ground for all eternity, but I don't know what if anything I can do about that, and do not or choose not to believe that literal belief in the Bible is the only way to do something about that.

 

[Jericho]

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

utility * probabilityIf I believe the probability to be zero, then the utility becomes irrelevant.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there is life on other planets.

I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there are no blaffhstorks. (In other words, I'll tell you whether I think something qualifies as a god as soon as you tell me what the necessary attributes of godhood are.)

 

[water]

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

$6.99. I got mine on sale at E-bay last week. Swwwwweeeet.

 

[1586]

I'm not saying I know what God is ok with. I'm saying no one can. Thus, even if I didn't believe, the "not knowing" part of me would err to the side of caution.This, however, is not how I view things, but that's not the point I'm trying to make.I'm saying that most atheist point to logic and science as to why they don't believe in God. But in the end, it can never be absolute 100% confidence. Thus, as extremely logical people (for the most part), wouldn't the pragmatist in them win out?

I'm with you. I don't know if there is a God; I certainly don't know what God is okay with, and therefore don't try to foist my religious views on others - everyone should be free to believe or not believe as they choose. Thank goodness I live in a country whose Constitution currently makes this the law of the land. I prefer that there is an afterlife to rotting in the ground for all eternity, but I don't know what if anything I can do about that, and do not or choose not to believe that literal belief in the Bible is the only way to do something about that.

I have a brother

 

[CaptainHucklebuck]

also, another question...if fossilazation happens over a long period of time, how are there fossils of fish in mid-bite of another fish and things like that?

link?

http://home.att.net/~creationoutreach/pictures/fish.htm

Another unbiased opinion...

ITS A FOSSIL!!its a picture of a fossil... you can't be biased about a fossil, you just state what is there...what is the issue you have with it?

Fossils in lake sediments are often very well preserved because in many lakes the floor is very low in oxygen, and organisms do not oxidise as they decay. Thats what leads to your fish eating a fish example.

Thank you. I just got home and was hoping someone had said this.

 

[1586]

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

utility * probabilityIf I believe the probability to be zero, then the utility becomes irrelevant.

See, this I just cannot buy. Do you agree than humans are fallable? As such current scientific theories are fallable? I just don't see how you can reach 100% confidence without an instruction manual of the entire universe.

 

[Jayrok]

This should not be controversial. An alien, or extraterrestrial if you like, is a being that is from somewhere other than earth. The Christian God, as described in the Bible, is not from earth. Therefore, God is an alien.

God also doesn't believe in a higher power or entity.. does that mean he is an atheist too?I wish I had a time machine. First stop 4 BC'ish, Bethlehem/Jerusalem. Next stop nazareth, then caperneum to see if there was a Guy named Jesus performing miracles. Then a few years later to Jerusalem in the court of Pilate to see what really happened. Then the cross of Golgatha and the Tomb just to see what really happened if anything. The single greatest mystery in the history of the world.

 

[1586]

I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there is life on other planets.

I'm as sure that there is no God as I am sure that there are no blaffhstorks. (In other words, I'll tell you whether I think something qualifies as a god as soon as you tell me what the necessary attributes of godhood are.)

I am a poker GOD. So i kinda have to believe in God(s)

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

Why would that be pragmatic? What if the One True God sends Baptists to Hell, Methodists to The Fire Swamp, and gives everyone else 71 virgin brides? By picking a faith at random, you'd have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

 

[Jericho]

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

utility * probabilityIf I believe the probability to be zero, then the utility becomes irrelevant.

See, this I just cannot buy. Do you agree than humans are fallable? As such current scientific theories are fallable? I just don't see how you can reach 100% confidence without an instruction manual of the entire universe.

Christians are 100% confident that Thor does not exist. However they do that, I do it the same way.

 

[1586]

If you have even the slightest doubt, wouldn't it be pragmatic to just pick some faith, throw a "thank you" out every once in a while, to gain access to the afterlife?

Why would that be pragmatic? What if the One True God sends Baptists to Hell, Methodists to The Fire Swamp, and gives everyone else 71 virgin brides? By picking a faith at random, you'd have nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Well if you hit the right one you win the eternal lottery, if you hit the wrong one, you are no worse off than not believing.Unless you believe that by picking the wrong one you will be worse off. But, of course, if you believe that, you'd have to believe that there is a right one, and you'd be back to square one of deciding which one to pick.

 

[1586]

depends on how much value (utility) you can derive from ever-lasting life.

utility * probabilityIf I believe the probability to be zero, then the utility becomes irrelevant.

See, this I just cannot buy. Do you agree than humans are fallable? As such current scientific theories are fallable? I just don't see how you can reach 100% confidence without an instruction manual of the entire universe.

Christians are 100% confident that Thor does not exist. However they do that, I do it the same way.

That covers Christians, which isn't really my issue. Thor might be the one and only God, there may be many god(s). I don't believe that, but I'm in no position to say for sure.

 

[Jericho]

That covers Christians, which isn't really my issue. Thor might be the one and only God, there may be many god(s). I don't believe that, but I'm in no position to say for sure.

The point is that there are a large number of gods that various people in the world 100% do not believe in. That number is merely one higher for me than it is for, say, a Christian. Or a Muslim. Or a Hindu. Or a Jew. You were just asking how it is possible to believe 100% that a god doesn't exist. That's all I'm demonstrating.

 

[water]

Christians are 100% confident that Thor does not exist. However they do that, I do it the same way.

Wait a minute, you mean I've been carrying around this stupid F###ing hammer for three years for NOTHING?

 

[1586]

To me and I really don't mean this as an insult.People 100% convinced they are right, be it Atheists, Muslims, Christians, whatever are being a little arrogant as to the comprehensive abilities of man.Some groups just have a little more emperical evidence. None can get me to 100% though.

 

[1586]

That covers Christians, which isn't really my issue.  Thor might be the one and only God, there may be many god(s).  I don't believe that, but I'm in no position to say for sure.

The point is that there are a large number of gods that various people in the world 100% do not believe in. That number is merely one higher for me than it is for, say, a Christian. Or a Muslim. Or a Hindu. Or a Jew. You were just asking how it is possible to believe 100% that a god doesn't exist. That's all I'm demonstrating.

ok but the difference is, in most cases, that these people are ruling out the others through faith.you have faith in science? seems a bit contradictory to me? or maybe you just have faith that it will all be explained through science one day?