{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
8/24/2015 7:59:23 PM
1
The burden of proof only applies to positive claims because proving a negative is impossible.
Until proven, it shouldn't be regarded as true.
English
-
You are the one making the claim that there is no God, so please, present the evidence you have that shows that there is no way a higher being could have made this world and your life. Any claim should have evidence, not "they can't prove their side so I'm right". Just because we can't prove who or what created the universe doesn't mean that there is no God.
-
I can't disprove God's existence. Based on that statement, what conclusion can we come to?
-
A* It means that we obviously don't know enough about life or the universe to make any baseless assumptions. My point? Live and let live.
-
We do know that God is logically impossible. Doesn't that disprove him?
-
[quote] (in certain other religions) a superhuman being or spirit worshiped as having power over nature or human fortunes; a deity.[/quote] So you're saying there's nothing in this universe that has control over nature? That's a bold assertion.
-
Something might be in control but we don't know.
-
That's the definition of a god
-
"We don't know" is the definition of a god?
