Q about arguments for God's existence.

[Catholic_Lady]

Of course not.

But we don't know, still means we don't know.

Meaning someone who doesn't know and has no evidence or proof of how anything happened, shouldn't call me out on my own theory.

We can all be equals here in the sense that we have no proof and choose to believe the path that makes most sense to us. In that, we are all the same. And that's fine.

It's a weak theory. And it's not exactly yours, only in the sense that you believe in it.

You're jumping to the most improbable explanation that doesn't explain anything....
Except you're not. You already believed that. That's the thing with believers: everything is presupposed.

I'll put it this way: you were already taught the conclusion without going along any line of reasoning. That's what religion does. It doesn't examine the evidence. It trots out a conclusion and then tries to fit evidence to support it.

Kalam is just wrong upon wrong upon more fucking wrong.

I don't know. And I accept that I don't know. We can fantasize all day, but we don't know. But you believe. That's the difference.

Well, the notion that it's a weak theory is still your opinion. I respect your opinion, but of course, I disagree. I think your theory is a weak theory.

But that's fine.

That's why each of us believes what we do, and at the end of the day it is still something that science and our natural laws have not been able to explain or find proof of, so we are left to each respect the other's theories.

---

Two explanations for something unknown are only equal in that each is an explanation. It doesn't mean they are both equally valid or reasonable. I can give plenty of examples of this.

"We don't know". That is the answer, the only honest answer. Anything else is speculation, and some speculation is more reasonable than others.

Exactly. And since we have no proof, whatever explanation "is more valid" lies solely on individual opinion.