And as so who or what made that equation? An accident? I do believe on accidents... but too many accidents at once is betting far too much on luck.
You insist however in to follow a theological chat, pushing and pulling God. Me, or you, are unable to reach or understand God and therefore proof or disproof His existence. But also if He comes to be a God He has to have cognitive intelligence, and also maybe He can achieve a status of intelligence we're simply too dumb to understand.
As an Agnostic to religion, I do not care much about theological and dogmatic stuff, all I do care on religions is their reflection on society. For me all of them are men made in order to get power and control over others, however some reflect more on society than others also some are more hazardous than others. Apart from that, the subject whether there's a God or not is not essential to me.
I'm not an Atheist (means I've no evidence which can support He does not exist) neither a Theist (I also have no evidence to support He does). I tend to believe He does, thus I can't describe Him or even believe anyone does. Also I do not believe any atheist can support on evidence their belief that there's no God, be their mathematical, scientific, theological or whatever. As so both, Theists and Atheists stands over Dogmatic ground. |