(July 18, 2013 at 8:10 am)fr0d0 Wrote: The Maelstrom conundrum:
1. There cannot be proof of God
2. We cannot believe in God without proof
3. 1 defeats 2
Technically, she said she didn't think it possible to prove God's existence. If she thought it was possible to prove, I would be interested in hearing her proof of why.
2. enforces her confidence in 1, although she did not claim it WAS impossible, only that it is clearly beyond her faculties. I think that's where the confusion is coming in at.