> MoJo wrote: > >> How do you know God isn't an invisible pink unicorn > then? > > Maybe he is.
Doesn't that statement conflict with the following one then? "So to say that believing in God is no different than believing in pink unicorns is simply a bad argument, because it is only addressing *one* aspect of what that belief is based on." I think the issue is faith versus what is scientifically provable with today's technology. There are many things that we can't prove with science, but that people have a belief in - maybe a well placed one. Global Warming is one such example. And then, of course, there are things discovered by science that science can't explain. For example it's known that if you magnify matter to exponentially smaller levels eventually it doesn't exist. In other words if you look at something from a distance it's there, but as you zoom in it disappears as well as the laws that appears to govern its macro nature. Maybe that vaporous nature of reality is God at work? That's why for me spiritual study is looking at the nature of reality and the historical and biological record of the universe rather than anything that is studied in any mainstream Christian church. But this is also where Christian churches are spiritually discriminating: in matters of individual spirituality they require you to conform to their method of study. Doesn't that seem fundamentally ridiculous? For example, are Buddhism and Christianity mutually exclusive? If so, why? If not, why not? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Want to reach the ColdFusion community with something they want? Let them know on the House of Fusion mailing lists Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:306407 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
