The Idea of a God Is Not So Crazy

[Metalogos]

To the person who states he is an atheist but then says that he finds the idea of a god or God acceptable, I would simply say that you have to change your stated definition for yourself from atheist to non-religious theist. Unlike some people who
have posted their opinions on this forum, I find it perfectly acceptable to reject religion but accept the idea that the universe must have begun vis a vis a Prime Mover or Unmoved Mover. Rational thinking will reject all forms of religion that claim to know the ultimate truth of our existence or the existence of the universe and that advocate any kind of worship to any kind of being. Likewise, rational thinking and observant discernment will agree that the world about us is one in where all things have a beginning and an end. I can imagine a universe like ours that may be just one in a myriad of successive universes or just one amongst countless other universes in parallel existence but I cannot imagine that all of this existence has no beginning. This does not mean that I am right but it does mean that I find it much more acceptable to explain the observable universe with all its inherent order and wisdom the result of a Prime Mover's initial action rather than the atheistic posit that no such being is necessary to account for existence.

When the Earth was formed did it come with common dirt? Or did the magic comets that brought all of the water also bring the dirt?

Sorry, Mr. Gawd, but methinks you think I am not what I am. I am not a fundamentalist Christian. I don't even live in a western country. And I am certainly not an apologist for any kind of religion or religious belief. Saying that, I wonder if you are interested in having a serious discussion or just throwing dirt in my face. Methinks you are above the later so I welcome you to ask me a more serious question like perhaps, "Why, Metalogos, do you find it necessary to posit a Prime Mover for the existence of the universe?" Back to you!