(June 3, 2015 at 12:02 pm)Esquilax Wrote: The beliefs are largely the same, in terms of evidentiary support. The only real difference is that, where parents own up and admit that Santa isn't real when their kids start questioning, there is a large and committed apparatus in place to keep people believing in god, in the church. There's whole segments of community extolling the virtues of taking this god claim on faith and never questioning it. Parent's don't just admit that they have no reason to believe in god, and they back that up with horrible threats of hell. That's the difference.
Were you abused as a child? Man...my parents never threatened me with "horrible threats of hell". Instead, they explained why God had sent his Son Jesus to die on the cross so that none who believe in Him might perish but have everlasting life.
What kind of a warped caricature do you envision when you think of a group of Christians getting together on a Sunday morning for services? Are people there out of fear, out of obedience, or out of love?
Quote:And can you find evidence of god? Can Norad track god?
No?
No. And this is why most of what is argued in this forum fails miserably. Science can say nothing about God.
Nothing.
Because God is immaterial, and science deals only with the physical, material world.
Quote:Then why the hell are you asking these questions as though there's some significant deviation in the level of evidence available for either claim?
Because there is a huge difference between the two (and deep down, you know it). But hey, this forum exists for the entertainment of its members...not their enlightenment. I get that now.
