tj

joined 1 year ago
[–] tj@fedia.io 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Not at all. There is a huge difference in proving a positive (i.e. that God exists) than prooving a negative (i.e. that God is IMPOSSIBLE).

EXAMPLE: Could Trump be a lizard alien in a skin suit as some might believe? Absolutely. Am I gnostic by stating in a matter of fact tone that he isn't (and thus dependant on "faith" by extension of your argument? Probably not.

Just because someone once made a wild claim about God existing, doesn't make me require "faith" to call out he obviously made up story with absolutely zero facts to back it as such.

[–] tj@fedia.io 4 points 8 months ago (15 children)

That logic is flawed. Just because we don't understand why there is something rather than nothing, there is no logical implication that there could be a higher being. "Coincidence" would seem to be a much more likely reason (until/if we understand why) - much like coincidence being the reason for most (all?) observed miracles

[–] tj@fedia.io 10 points 1 year ago

Also,

  • What is your mother's maiden name?
  • What is the name of the street you grew up on?
  • What was the name of your first pet?