You seem to be saying that only certain beliefs can be held without (or with) proof. One can insist anything in the world without proof, and really believe in what you are saying. But to say that there is more reason to believe in a god simply because there is no proof is absurd, the fact is that non-belief in god is only a disbelief in an unproved belief in the first place. I "believe" you are thinking backwards.
non-belief is the default of there being no proof, not to mention that the whole idea and meaning of god as well as the definition of the word does contradict the reality of the experiances found in daily living. I keep hearing these new definitions of what god may be... this seems to arise out of the wish that even if god is not a reality, that the thought of it be preserved by labeling any new concept which explains our existance with "god", so we might as well call the big bang the creation of god or the endless universe the body of god, or evolution the growth of god, or materialism the economics of god, or harmonics the voice of god, or natural disasters the fury of god, or seperate the deaths of good and bad men by saying the lord called him home or god took his life and gave him what he deserves...
Or we can just accept whatever the tide brings in.

• Looks like you have your own religion - jake - April 18, 2000 - 03:49 UTC
  • RE: Looks like you have your own religion - phil.O.Sofir - April 19, 2000 - 01:42 UTC
    • RE: RE: Looks like you have your own religion - fair enuf - April 19, 2000 - 01:46 UTC