|
Not Ranked
:
+0 / -0
0 score
RE: What would it take to prove the existence of a God?
That's a good point, sanctus.
I can't think of a single person that rejects gravity, but there are many that reject God.
And the difference between objective and subjective proof is only too true. What may be enough proof for me is not enough, or definitive, or the right type, of proof for you. I agree with 'chaos'... what type of 'proof' would it take? i mean, handwriting on the wall? a voice from nowhere? your computer going nuts and then the blue screen of death appearing with the words "I AM" hovering in red (of course, that would only happen if you were running MS, not LINUX, right?)?
Also, for some, disproving science will lead to God. For others, disproving God will lead to science. Where is the middle ground?
I know of people that totally believe in God/creation, and people that believe totally in evolution/science, and people that believe in a mix of God/Creation AND evolution/science. I think all of those three types are represented here in this forum.
However, i don't think I've ever run into a person that believes neither in evolution nor creation. Most think it has to be one or the other, right? That just fosters the right/wrong attitude. Someone is right, anoher is wrong.
My 'proof' isn't good enough for you, but yours isn't good enough for me either. It's all in the mind/heart of the individual.
----------------
"Lucky in love, well maybe so. there's still a lot of things you'll never know...
like why each time the sky begins to snow - you cry..." - Dan Fogelberg
|