Quote Originally Posted by Philippus Flavius Homovallumus View Post
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.
And these accounts vary greatly in their telling and they are discussing various different 'gods' and not the same one. After all, the Emperor of Rome was a god, but I think he was a mortal with a superiority complex. Similar with the Pharaohs of Egypt.

I have to be honest though, it would suck to be a catholic for example, then find out Mormons were right all along. Or to simply discover it was actually some died off faith from the antiquity thus we are all doomed to the eternal hell fires for not being true believers..

Problem rises is not only do you have to some how come up with evidence that there is something there, but you have to also support that you are correct and all these other ones are wrong. Then you have to come up with a definition which isn't unambiguous to what is actually the case.

I will put my hand up and say I don't know the answer, I haven't got the slightest clue what the truth is, and I don't think I will ever find out. However, I don't feel I am wrong in being honest about it, but it always could be worse and be a supporter of the Goa'uld or Ori.

Idaho would have you write those millions of people off as irrational.
It isn't irrational, but it doesn't make it the truth. There are many reasons why religion exist, I put it this way, did your grandmother say things like break a mirror for 7 years bad luck? This isn't part of any organised religion, but it is the basic principle of why religion exists, people believe in things which are not true, they pass on their beliefs, sometimes effective, sometimes not, but these meme's pass through our society. Now you get these beliefs organised, you set up a few temples, and now you have a religion. In history, this is either used as a way to justify an unfair system, or to justify oppression, and in other cases, these are also sometimes used to justify altruistic behaviour.

I have no inherent problem with people who follow a religion, it only becomes a problem when it is used to justify things which are plainly wrong. Then again on the other hand, you have the Salvation Army is going out their way to help the homeless? Give them a few quid, it goes to a good cause.

I am more interested in the person, not the religious identity they belong to.