Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jetty3
I see science lacking definitive answers to the origin question the way you see personal belief as lacking merit in answering the same question. It may feel more real to cling to what you can see but ultimately it does come down to personal belief whichever side you come down on.
|
Which means very little when someone with a personal belief claims that they can prove their belief, or that their belief is provable in the same sense that something scientific is. Thats' where the problem lies. When someone makes that claim, or makes the claim that their belief is true, in the same way that a used car salesman makes a claim concerning the mileage, performance or quality of a used car, I expect proof, or at the very least, evidence.
I have no problem with personal beliefs. Well . . . not entirely. I have problems with the rampant paranoia, narcissism and self-worship that charaterizes some personal beliefs (especially the Abrahamic personal beliefs), but above all else, I have a problem with liars.
Liars that say there is evidence for their belief in an invisible man in the sky when there is none whatsoever.
Quote:
|
You're using the wrong yardstick.
|
How is that?
Especially when said adherents make the claim that their god CAN be measured with said yardstick, and apply the same principles of buying a used car to their god, and not the other way around?
Quote:
|
A god that could be fully measured within the finite bounds of time and space would be no god at all.
|
Why not?
What's so wrong with expecting something to show itself if it's really there?