Why isn't DNA and Human Consciousness Enough For Some Christians?

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Two comments:

1. Can we please stop using the phrases "religious people" and "theists" as blanket terms like they describe everyone who believes in any kind of God? It's really lame to argue against some literal fundamentalist version of a religion and then claim to have disprove 'God' for everybody. There is vast diversity within people who we would call 'theists', so let's not pretend that they all believe the same thing.

2. I think one reason why it's a little dishonest to compare God to a spaghetti monster is because people have felt 'God's presence'. I know a lot of us believe that this feeling is little more than a psychological phenomenon, but people use the term God to describe this phenomenon. Nobody use the term 'flying spaghetti monster' in this way.

So basically, people think God (whatever this term means) exists because they have direct personal interaction with some entity/force/neuronal firing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats not the point of the FSM. Also, FSM isn't a replacement term for God, it is a TYPE of God. This isn't exactly the same as the celestial teapot, IOW, its slightly more powerful than that.

I defy you to tell me I haven't experienced the FSM's noodly appendage in exactly the same way that txag has experienced the Lord in his heart.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's fine with me if you want to believe in the FSM. The problem is that we have thousands of years of history chock full of people who claim to have felt the Judeo-Christian God. Even if I don't believe in either God, this seems to make it more likely that the Judeo-Christian God exists. If you have no other information, I would contend that the more people who believe something the more likely it is to be true.