I appreciate that but must propose caution, I usually have something stupid to say lurking nearby. I don't think I mean the active stance that everything has to be considered possible. I mean more the passive stance that "anything is possible". Sure, many, many things are improbable, and whacky stuff does get us into trouble occasionally. I just like the open minded approach. Call it "freedom". Besides, considering the infinitude of things that could be imagined possible, theists through history, and other whack jobs, have really only proposed a comparatively small number of variations on a theme. There are not enough human brains, nor will there ever be, to contain infinite imaginings.
ANY theiset.. how can you negate omnipotence? is there ANY observation/fact/evidence/proof? if NOTHING could possibly present itself as refutation to an idea then how can you any rational being accept it
Exactly. Further, I think the giveaway is the mental gymnastics that theists engage in to convince themselves and others of an omnipresent, omnipotent, supernatural god. If such a god actually existed, then how could anyone doubt or dismiss it? Would we really need microscopes or mental gymnastics to detect such an elephant in the room? As for a simple "creator," we all know that the world's finest minds have already determined that the universe didn't need one. Should that collective leading edge view change, I'm sure we'll hear about it. But until then...
Once upon a time there was nothing...you are free to fill in the blanks from this point forward towards whatever your heart desires. Can't be said enough, Pot, meet Kettle.
That ain't the point! One theory is as unbelievable as the other. For one group to pass judgement on the other is intellectual elitism taken to it's most absurd extreme.
Intellectual Elitism is at the core of the atheist's religion as opposed to living life according to certain precepts that is at the core of the Believers religion.
the universe. god created the universe.. you don't see the extra step BACKWARD? at the very LEAST, you must explain your "rational" need to step back, for the extra "level"