If i tell you I have a dragon in my garden that flies, and I can't provide evidence, you'd call me mad.
If I tell you there's an omnipotent being in the sky that oversee's everything we do, and don't provide evidence, a lot of people would agree and believe me.
So on that basis, how come the more believable of the two is the less believable option? One a mere lizard with wings, the other an omnipotent being. Neither of which having any material to substantiate them?
2006-07-17
03:37:35
·
19 answers
·
asked by
Steven N
4
in
Religion & Spirituality