Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Is Matt Dillahunty's "Big Jar of GUMBALLS" a good way to get theists from demanding that we PROVE that GODS & GODDESSES do NOT exist?
IMAGINE a big jar of gumballs. Two possibilities. Either there is an ODD number of pieces, or an EVEN number. Since nobody has counted them, IF IF IF we do not AGREE with the people who have FAITH that it is an even number, that does NOT mean that we DO agree with those who have FAITH that it is an odd number.
All we have to say is that we have not seen convincing evidence, either way.
In the same manner, IF IF IF we do not agree that THESE Gods and Goddesses exist, we are not obligated to believe that those OTHER Gods and Goddesses must therefore be REAL.
Just trot out some testable, repeatable, consistent evidence, and let us examine it.
1.Not one of NORINE'S accounts. If I was, wouldn't I be all caps, & spouting Bible verses?
2. No analogy is perfect. My POINT is, let's see some testable, repeatable, consistent EVIDENCE.
3. If NCWJ is right, and "everybody knows" that his favourite Divine Being exists, how did they come up with any of the others?
4 Answers
- jpopelishLv 74 months ago
My big problem with Matt's analogy
is that the probability of odd
is exactly the same as the probability of even.
Using this analogy implies
that the probability of the existence
of exactly the particular hypothetical God,
that someone is imagining,
is the same as the probability of it not existing.
That, one is just as likely as the other.
And that completely misuses
the concept of probability.
Just being able to state
two distinct possibilities
does not mean
the probabilities of those two possibilities
are the same.
--
Regards,
John Popelish
- 4 months ago
Just another take on Schrodinger's cat... but the bottom line, is that despite what we know, there is one truth. And God has made us aware of that truth so no one is flying blind. The assumption that no one knows, is bogus
- Anonymous4 months ago
Matt needs to lay off the candy.
That's actually a really good analogy to explain agnostic atheism. What you said at the end--that if we don't believe, for example, that the Hindu gods exist, then we're tacitly admitting that Jesus is a god--I don’t know that anyone makes that argument.
