Rationality & Christianity: Mutually Exclusive?

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

That's silly, you watch the new Starwars and you don't believe in the force, and got a keen interest in Science fiction. Same time, you probably got an interest in mythology and fantasy. In short, you don't need to "believe" to have an interest in something, I always have found the arguments interesting and the political power games at stake when the authority of the church being sole provenance with reaching divinity through priests, or that there was a divine connection through prayer without the priests, for example.

I am sure there is a difference between us though, I might not possess the same zeal for the difference views that you might have.

The thing is, burden of proof is on the 'believer', not the null hypothesis.

Actually, that's not true.

Depending on the probability of the hypothesis it may be necessary to prove the null. In the case of "God" it is recorded that the majority of people throughout the majority of history have believed in some form of "God". In this instance you have a lot of circumstantial evidence that God exists, so if you can't prove the Null (God does not exists) then it's not unreasonable to think he does.

The problem here is that you're trying to use probability and logic to prove or disprove something unquantifiable and the lack of quantifiable data means you can't say either way how likely it is God exists or not. Despite that you are left with the fact (and it is a fact) that huge quantities of people believe in Him.

Idaho would have you write those millions of people off as irrational.