(January 12, 2009 at 11:43 am)EvidenceVsFaith Wrote: You could correct the title very slightly (to look from a slightly different perspective - just another way of looking at it, not an improvement. Just another view), I got the idea by accident when I slightly misread it lol. Like this: "There is no God, or God's plain and simple."
Meaning if there is a God he's just a practically infinitely simple physical constant at the beginning of the universe. With no intelligence or power - completely impotent. So why call him God?
And if he's complex he almost certainly doesn't exist. And in practice there's no reason to believe he does.
This is how Dawkins puts it:
[youtube]oP8LpS90lH8[/youtube]
Should I change the title?
