It is more logical to conclude that there is no God than to conclude that there is one or that we don't know.

A large part of me saying this has to do with a conversation I had a with a friend recently that went like this:

"I am telling you there is an invisible and undetectable purple elephant in this room"

"I don't believe you prove it!"

"No, you have to prove it is not there"

Now in this scenario does it seem more logical for me to say there is no evidence of the elephant existing and I have reason to believe the elephant does not exist, therefore it does not exist. Or for me to say there is no logical reason to believe that the elephant does exist but I can't prove it does or doesn't exist through testing therefore it might exist.

I am not saying I would refuse to believe something were there evidence, so if it were proven today that God exists then of course I would accept the fact. But no such evidence exists.

/r/unpopularopinion Thread Parent