Wednesday, April 4, 2012

That Christians try to get out from under the burden of proof...

It's honestly disgusting.  I'll use the teapot argument, it would then be my job to prove it's existence.  To disprove it would be impossible because it's so very unlikely as to be deemed impossible.  When presenting a pseudo-impossible argument it is to the party which presents that argument to prove it.  I'm not saying that God can currently be proven, if he could I'd be writing tales of his love (or hate).  But if I say that I reject the teapot, I do not have to prove the teapot non-existent, because the "evidence" for the teapot is so very scanty.  Maybe there's an old book about the all-powerful teapot.  But the teapot still cannot be proven, only alluded to.  I'd even take compelling evidence instead of all-out proof.  That's all the evolution has, yet I largely agree with that. There is, however, no evidence for God, teapots orbiting planets, fairies or the like, and I'm sure you don't believe in the invisible pink dog next to me which no one can see, touch, hear, smell, or even (god forbid) taste.  But hey, it's there, it tells me how to live my life, has written an erroneous book, and it helps me with all aspects of my otherwise meaning life.  I tell you it's there damn it!  Stop doubting...  Oh yeah, poochie says that if you don't believe that it exists, it'll chew on your balls for eternity.  So yeah, believe in spot here.

No comments: