@XXSpadeMasterXX,
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:Why must something be proven (scientifically, or mathematically) to exist?
There must be a way, there HAS to be a method. If there is no method then you would HAVE to accept anything and everything regardless of how silly or absurd it is. To be intellectually honest you would HAVE to accept everything. I know you will try to wedge in that you do, but you honestly don't.
You don't believe Zeus is real, yet by your very argument here, you would HAVE to accept the possiblity that Zeus is real and Yaweh is not. You will refuse to accept that because this argument you are trying to use here is actually absurd itself. You are only trying to promote your idealistic concept of your god existing yet not requiring any evidence to base it on.
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
Have you ever heard somethings are better off unknown?
Yep and I call it a cop out. Sure there might be some information we learn that is not very appealing or isn't very productive. Yet I would much rather know the truth even if I don't like it, than to blindly turn away and just say, "It doesn't matter because something are better off unknown..."
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
There are thousands who suffer traumatically from these "experiences" that are false...Is that bullshit to you as well?
I would say many of these people who are suffering from experiences that are false are people of faith when they realize that theology is nonsense. They realize the vale they were under was causing a huge majority of their misery in life.
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
How you guys can justify that something is not real, because you have not seen it, and science and math can't explain it is irrational...
Easy. If there is no supporting evidence for something, then I can say at that moment it is not real or worthy of changing my life style over. I won't lose any sleep over it until it can be proven to effect my life in some way. Just like I don't have trouble falling asleep because monsters are not living in my closet who will come out at night to feed on me.
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
There are thousands who hold the same regard, but now believe, because they have witnessed it...
If someone else says they have had an exprience, I say to them, good for them. However; that does NOTHING to help me. I will not accept someone's testimony of their experience because I know how fickle the human experience is. So until these things start happening to me, I willl remain skeptical of them. Till this day, nothing has happened to me and I must ask why not?
Why do all these people have these so called experiences and I don't? It leads me to believe that they are actually in error and what they thought was happening really didn't happen. Also there have been many theists turned atheist who support this idea. They confess that their past experiences they had were them projecting these ideas because they really wanted them to be true.
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
It would be like me saying, everything I see must be real...and everything I do not see is false...
You could live that way, and in fact it would be a rational way to live. I call it being a skeptic. There is nothing that says you MUST believe something that someone tells you. Until you experience it first hand you don't have to accept anything anyone says to be factual. However; I must also ask what you mean by seeing? Because there is ways of seeing that don't exactly use our direct senses. Such as infared spectrum. We can use tools that help us see things that we couldn't normally. There is testible ways of knowing things without directly experiencing them.
XXSpadeMasterXX wrote:
If science can predict everything real, tell me when I am going to die, because I would like to know...I will tell you my physique, and health...and you can equate it for me...
Absolutely silly expectation of science. However; I must say that perhaps one day we will have the capiblity of this. But as of right now there are so many factors involved and perhaps some things we don't know yet that would allow us to make such a prediction. It is not outside the realm of science to do so, but it IS right now. So are you saying that scince science can't predict your death then it is in some way less valid? That is absurd.
Also where would accidents come into play? How would we predict that you would die in, let's say, an airplane crash? How would we be able to extract that result from physical things? We would have to collect so much data that in fact the plane would never then crash because we would be aware of the faulty problem that caused the crash in the first place.
So really your question is unreasonable but I am also not surprised you asked it because you are unreasonable.