This statement indirectly asserts as true that 'God' exists, and there is no
evidence to date supporting such assertion. Sorry, but to be taken as
anything beyond fiction, the assertion has to supported by fact.
Well I worded it that way to indirectly assert that God exists because the person was referring to Christians telling people not to doubt God. So that goes on their belief of God being real so I worded it with them in mind.
But as for what you said, that's kind of the point. Since we don't know anything about God, we don't even know if he exists period. Having no knowledge of is the same as not existing, outside of faith. What can you doubt about God since he's made nothing known of himself? And even assuming there is a God, one still can't doubt God due to everything that was said about God is man's thoughts on him so they would be doubting that person's thoughts, not God him/her/itself. Only man has defined God. So anything one reads or hears about him is all out of the mouth of man, not God.
If one doubts God's omnipotence, that's because man said God was omnipotent. If one doubts God's existance, that's because man said God exists, etc. Nothing can produce the knowledge of an object but the object itself. And well, I've yet to read an autobiographical book written by God or hear a speech given by him. Doubting God is doubting man, not God.
But as for God existing or not, we have no proof either way. The atheists nor the thiests know if they're correct. It's merely a 50/50 choice, so just go ahead and pick which side of the fence ya wanna sit on, believing there is a God or not believing. No point in arguing for or against since neither side has any proof to back their claims. So just have your beliefs, be humble about them, and live your life. Pretty simple.
And yes, Matrix, you are correct in using my words. Go ahead and substitute "God" for anything else as silly as you want, and there will be no way to refute that or prove its existance. Just because something may be silly does not mean it does not exist, it only makes it that much harder for someone else to believe it. But this is about personal belief so the opinions of others don't really matter since there is nothing one can say or do that will sway a person's opinion when it comes to not being able to prove or disprove the existance of something other than just believing the person.
Who knows, God could be an invisible pink unicorn and while I wouldn't believe it, it doesn't mean it might not be possible. In that sense, I would choose not to believe in it and if I was sent to Hell or something else, it'd suck big time but hey, I made the choice.
And just so you know, you're making a tragic error in trying to use my argument against me. Every person that likes to substitute a whacky phrase in the place of God to make it sound silly and unbelievable, it doesn't work. Not because you're not changing my, or others, opinion on the matter but because your argument is flawed by actually defining "invisible pink unicorns". When "God" it used, it is a totally generic blank word as to what it could be since we have no idea what the creation of all is. If we find out that God is the universe or something, then we know. But you do not know what the begining of all creation is, I don't know, so a generic "blank" term is used, as opposed to trying to define it which you're doing.
- N