(September 28, 2011 at 9:05 am)ElDinero Wrote: You are possibly being obtuse with regards Russell's Teapot, but if you're being sincere, you've missed the point completely. The point is you are asking people to disprove God, but that isn't how the burden of proof works. Otherwise I could ask you to disprove anything (like the teapot). The burden of proof rests with the claimant.
God is exempt from the burden of proof - he exists in the very fabric of reality.
Can you prove to me what your thoughts are at this very moment? You can only tell me and expect me to believe - does this mean you don't have thoughts?
(September 28, 2011 at 9:12 am)Cinjin Wrote: When you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better.
There are two theories explaining the creation of the universes and the force which animates it.
Theory one:
The universe existed in a space the size of an atom which expanded rapidly. The contents of the universe exist by chance, including humans.
Theory two:
The universe was created by an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent force. This force shaped the universe and everything in it, humans are a part of this 'design'.
