I'll just say to fr0d0...
@Fr0d0: I'll just say that there's no good discussing: "Who is God; what we need to do to live healthily spiritually etc."--as you say-- if there's no evidence he even exists yet! That's why theology is nonsense. It's totally premature - they discuss God but there isn't even any reason to believe he bloody exists! They take the first page on genesis as an axiom it seems! - But that doesn't work because that's entirely circular logic!
And as I've said before...if God is indeed 'outside the realm of science' and there just cannot be evidence (at least empirical anyway) it's not rational to simply go ahead and believe anyway! Having no evidence for something isn't a good thing! That makes it irrational to believe not rational - despite whether it's possible or not...sounds to me like an attitude like this: "Oh damn...there can be no scientific evidence for God because he is 'Unfalsifiable'...oh well I guess my only hope is to just believe anyway 'On Faith' if there can't be any evidence it means I don't need it I guess
".
What, so if there can be no evidence then you should just believe anyway? Because the point here is that if there is no evidence that God exists then in other words there's no rational reason to believe that God exists - because that's what evidence is for. If you had rational reasons to believe that God actually exists then that would in other words...be evidence!
So if can justify believing without evidence - then what about other Gods? They offer no more or less rational reasons to believe (no more or less evidence IOW - still 0 just like yours!) than your God does!...so what about 'Allah'? What about 'Zeus'? What about 'Thor'? What about...the FSM? - there's no reason to believe the FSM isn't just as unfalsifiable and 'unprovable' as your "God" is - so how come you've cherry-picked out your God that is without evidence? I have no reason to believe it isn't simply personal irrational bias and totally non-objective...because there's no evidence of any objectivity in it...you have just cherry picked it out - hidden in your 'reasons' that you admit do not give reason to believe he actually exists because if they did they'd be a form of evidence...and if they are - how come you can't give me any(?) - Because it's non-objective per chance?
...So what's wrong with the FSM then? Embrace pastarfarianism! Embrace pasta, fr0d0, embrace.
EvF
@Fr0d0: I'll just say that there's no good discussing: "Who is God; what we need to do to live healthily spiritually etc."--as you say-- if there's no evidence he even exists yet! That's why theology is nonsense. It's totally premature - they discuss God but there isn't even any reason to believe he bloody exists! They take the first page on genesis as an axiom it seems! - But that doesn't work because that's entirely circular logic!
And as I've said before...if God is indeed 'outside the realm of science' and there just cannot be evidence (at least empirical anyway) it's not rational to simply go ahead and believe anyway! Having no evidence for something isn't a good thing! That makes it irrational to believe not rational - despite whether it's possible or not...sounds to me like an attitude like this: "Oh damn...there can be no scientific evidence for God because he is 'Unfalsifiable'...oh well I guess my only hope is to just believe anyway 'On Faith' if there can't be any evidence it means I don't need it I guess
".What, so if there can be no evidence then you should just believe anyway? Because the point here is that if there is no evidence that God exists then in other words there's no rational reason to believe that God exists - because that's what evidence is for. If you had rational reasons to believe that God actually exists then that would in other words...be evidence!
So if can justify believing without evidence - then what about other Gods? They offer no more or less rational reasons to believe (no more or less evidence IOW - still 0 just like yours!) than your God does!...so what about 'Allah'? What about 'Zeus'? What about 'Thor'? What about...the FSM? - there's no reason to believe the FSM isn't just as unfalsifiable and 'unprovable' as your "God" is - so how come you've cherry-picked out your God that is without evidence? I have no reason to believe it isn't simply personal irrational bias and totally non-objective...because there's no evidence of any objectivity in it...you have just cherry picked it out - hidden in your 'reasons' that you admit do not give reason to believe he actually exists because if they did they'd be a form of evidence...and if they are - how come you can't give me any(?) - Because it's non-objective per chance?
...So what's wrong with the FSM then? Embrace pastarfarianism! Embrace pasta, fr0d0, embrace.
EvF
