Subsequent truths

[Godscreated]

With no evidence, surely it is more like Schrodinger's cat? He both exists and doesn't exist at the same time...

I respect your atheist opinion and if I ever feel I have evidence contrary to it, I will publish it in a peer reviewed paper! I assume you would do the same. Until then we can both hold our beliefs, just as the cat is both dead and alive.

I don't have any beliefs.

You do.

There is your critical difference right there.

A theist can never try and lump the two viewpoints together in a box marked "equally as valid as one another" as you have tried to now do several times because one is a belief and the other one isn't.

My view "I do not believe there is a god because there is no evidence" IS completely logical AND valid.

Your view "I believe in god even though there is no evidence" ISN'T valid. Sure you can hold that belief, but it'll never be valid until you can back it up.

What is your take on dark matter and dark energy, mine is that science claims that it exists, yet there is no valid evidence for either, it is no more than primitive man trying to explain something they do not understand, that would be God. So what kind of logic is it that would believe in dark matter and energy.

---

GS. I neither said you committed atrocities nor that you believed the Earth to be flat. Strawman-tastic! Re-read my post and see the correct context.
I firmly believe the Bible to be divinely inspired but that is VERY different from believing it to be the ABSOLUTE word of God. Can you not see the difference?

E.g. If I say to you that I am Welsh and all the other Welsh people I know are nice people, you could say:
1)"Chadster says all the Welsh people he knows are nice" - my direct word;
2)"All the Welsh people Chadster knows are nice" - an interpretation of my words;
"All Welsh people are nice" - an extrapolated interpretation of my words;
"People of Wales ARE nice, thus is the word of Chadster" - an extrapolated interpretation describing authority to my words.
All 4 statements are inspired by my original words but only 1 correctly conveys the original message. That is why it is dangerous to rely entirely upon a flawed text (flawed because of man's translations and selective editing) and ignore the common sense and intellectual abilities God gave you. Ignoring the skills God gave you is a bit of a slap in the face to the almighty.

See The Bold #'s above. Though 1 may be stated differently, how does it's meaning differ from 2.