No.13609461 ViewReplyOriginalReport
Is trying to prove the existence of God the ultimate midwit pursuit ? Seems like there's a resurgence of that nowadays.

Fucking midwits want to have the legetimacy that comes with "muh science" "muh facts and logic", they are not capable of faith. But they are not capable of understanding what an actual proof is, either. They cannot believe in God unless it's all laid out and they're 100% certain.

Which is not actually possible. Most of the great minds (Pascal etc) they like to namedrop as "muh scientists who believed in God" knew that the "proofs" were bullshit from a purely "logical" point of view.
I understand the ontological argument, Descartes' argument, etc. They are valid to me, but that is because I believe in God. They are not proof. They do not compel the mind. I know that these people like to say they're "metaphysical proofs" but then again, when did they PROVE that that framework is valid ? They are "scientific" about it when it suits them. I don't understand this need to "le epic proof" the existence of God, it's obviously not possible. To me this is as midwitted as reddit atheism.

>t. fideist