| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Michael" |
| Date: |
25 Nov 2007 08:16:37 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Evidence for the Existence of God |
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 11:40:14 -0800, J Forbes wrote:
2. Mankind has a collective opinion about the existence of
God based partly on observation, partly on reasoning, and
partly on assumption.
I think you might be mistaken....the collective opinion about the
existence of god is more likely based on man's tendency to pass on
interesting stories.
Well of course you think he's mistaken; but I appreciate that you take a
more civil tone in your disagreement. Every scrap of evidence *can* be
given alternate meanings, the question is whether that is a wise thing to
do, to discard possibilities "a priori"
.
|
|
| User: "Michael" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence for the Existence of God |
01 Dec 2007 11:58:18 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 25 Nov 2007 18:25:10 -0800, J Forbes wrote:
Exactly, which is why I brought up the fact that people can't resist
passing on interesting stories. There are thousands of stories about
gods....and they have very large variation....does this imply that
they are all truthful? or that they are all made up? really, which
is more likely? Why discard the possiblity a priori that this simple
explanation accounts for the "evidence"?
Jim
As you have by now doubtless seen in other parts of this discussion, I
discard no possibility except the ones that outright declare that what I
have experienced I have not experienced. These declarations are not
factual. But apart from that, I entertain many possibilities. I do not
have time (or interest) to locate and entertain all possibilities.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
