God Part N....

[Quietus]

...Continued from another thread.

If there`s ever something as futile as arguing against/for the existance of a God/Jesus/you-name-it, then someone better show it to me.
There`s nothing to discuss, it is no proof/disproof to either side, it`s all futile. It might be a mighty force out there, or it might not, but frankly, I don`t care. People should not care about others faith/lack of fate, either, please!

With regards to God, there's no proof that a God exists, that's the proof.

If I accuse you of killing 10 people, what proof do I have? I have none, that's your proof you didn't kill anyone. You won't say "I may or may have killed people" because there's no proof on either side.

Nope, that`s a fact.

No, but no one knows whether there is a God or not, it`s a matter of belief, no matter if you are religious or an atheist.

The burden of proof lies upon the one that makes a claim, but that`s not the same as that the claim is false if there is no proof. Then you either believe in what that person said, or you don`t. It`s a matter of a faith, and faith only.

Where's the proof?

Does the Flying Spaghetti Monster exist? Yes? No? Or You can't make the determination?

Right, if you wipe the slate clean, there's no God, because there's no proof. You start from Zero. Claiming God means going right to 1. Claiming 1 is not true (no God doesn't mean going left to -1) you simply stay at Zero where the slate is clean.

Ok, it isn`t a fact, but it isn`t a proof either.

Maybe, maybe not. A such monster would be easily observable, I imagine, thus its existance is unlikely because of lack of observations. I do not know, however.

No. Then you have made a claim, and the burdon of proof is now upon you, too.
If I claim that I have made cold fusion and tell you how, you might claim that it isn`t possible. Then, you will have to prove that, if I refuse to prove anything. You cannot know if you don`t disprove it.
Same if I claim that I am a god. If you say that I am not, then you`ll have to prove it.

Leprechauns, Unicorns, Chupacabra, Loch Ness monster, Dragons, Yeti, Chimera, Gargoyles, Minotaurs, et al?

Ok. Start from Nothing (clean slate).

I say there's earth and there's proof of earth.
I say there's the moon and there's proof of the moon.
I say there's God, where's the proof? None. It doesn't exist.

I say there's earth 2, where's the proof? None. It doesn't exist.
You say cold fusion, where's the proof? None. It doesn't exist.

Yes. If you make claim that there is a monster under my bed, then I can just go and have a look and see that it indeed isn`t.
Claim that Yeti exist, and I`ll go and have a look. Himalay is however huge, and to conclude that Yeti doesn`t exist is close to impossible. I could be be lucky and find him if he exist, so proving existance is easier than disproving. But the lack of real evidences when they should have been easily seen, makes their existance unlikely.
Dragons can be disproved by scientifically method, I believe.

No proof does not equal non-existant. If I claim that there is a black stone on the Moon without having a proof for it, it could still easily exist.

I don`t see where you are going.

In short, Yes or No? Or Maybe?

Or better yet, what's the difference between a Leprechaun and God?

But you have some proof. The moon is a rock. A black rock is only a rock that absorbs all the visible spectrum, hence dark according to your eyes.

Secondly, black stones do exist. It's only a matter of probability.

What's your proof in god? God doesn't even have a physical property. God is metaphysical or Supernatural.

You're starting from a positive (1) not a neutral position (0). So, if you say God, that's already a positive. If I say Earth, that's a positive.

If I say Earth 2, that's a positive. What Earth 2? It doesn't exist.