The Bible is an example of a confused mind. Consider all of it's confusing ideas and solutions to be within your own mind. Salvation is for the mind...for the healing of the confused mind. If you are at all confused, you are still in need of salvation. Jesus
I am stunned, nay, shocked and dismayed, nay, thunderstruck, that Jesus Himself has committed an unquestionable error in grammar. It is expected of us mortals, but for a deity to make such an simple mistake has shaken my belief to the core.
You mean according to either what you have conceptualized or the conceptulization of god you have adopted, we are insignificant and need to disprove the existence of that god everywhere? If the concept of God you adopted is that it is omnipresent, then if you can PROVE it exists in one area, it should hold true everywhere you check. Sort of like the laws of physics. But again, since you speak confidently about a being which you haven't defined in a testable way, the burden of proof rests squarely on you. As you would expect that the burden of proof rest squarely on me if I go around claiming that faires heal the cuts and bruises of little children and also give them something of value when children lose their teeth as they grow. Now imagine if I went around also saying that since you can't seem to disprove it, you have to allow at least for the possibility of it. You know, you can always just say, "I believe." But to say God exists with surety without proof is just crazy-talk. See, if you say you believe or even really, really believe, you leave it open-ended and maybe one day you will be proven to be right.
Pasting and copying does not mean you know what you are talking about. You are confused (if what your copied and pasted definitions ever went through your head). How do you suppose those scientific theories are discovered? Certainly not by looking up in the Bible. I repeat here for your benefit: All scientific hypotheses can be proven false. Science starts by assuming that everything and anything can be questioned and be proven wrong. If you don't understand these points, ask nicely and someone here might explain them to you. Just don't parade your ignorance here any more.
If we can't disprove fairies then we would have to allow for them as a possibility - just an extremely remote possibility given that we have more credible explanations available. In the God case, though, the alternative explanations are equally fantastical so we have no criterion to help us determine its likelihood.
Ok, granted. So without evidence for God can we say that the possibility of its existence is extremely remote? Like with fairies? I don't think those that believe in God would be willing to state that. Where as an atheist would be more likely to state that given that atheists are atheists because of a lack of evidence other than the fact that most people believe in the supernatural. What I'm saying is, the atheist has to be bothered by that fact and should attempt to address why that's the case. So far it seems that thoughts of the supernatural are a part of our evolutionary development as intelligent and creative species. But there could be more to it than that. The other problem is that Gods appear to be self contradictory as described by the books or stories that detail them.
What gives you that idea? I see no logical basis for that statement. Nor am I bothered by the fact that people believe in ghosts and goblins. As I have said here, the majority of people are actively fooling themselves about many thing, choosing to believe that which causes them the least cognitive dissonance. I believe there have been quite a few controlled studies that show that this is the case - most people will tend to believe whatever causes them the least grief. So it's no surprise to me that people believe in fairly tales. I have no need to ask why they do. (The whole idea that belief in God is 'genetic' is pure assertion at this point - there is no evidence to support it in any way).