[Kartazion (OP)]

Back on topic. The promised land of the chosen people is more than just land. There is a world where a whole new world is possible. If not, what is the difference between Zion and Jerusalem (Israel)?

[alancalverd]

As every rugby fan knows, Jerusalem was built somewhere in the north of England, between the mountains, pastures and mills. Although many of my tribe have settled in Manchester and Leeds, we know that Zion is completely different. And as the name suggests, Marazion was a bit of a disappointment.

[Kartazion (OP)]

I am impressed by the quality of response. On the other hand, we can clearly see the restraint and the shyness of what seems to me to be a taboo.

[Bored chemist]

You will have no evidence to give of what you are advancing. Even less proof of your assertion as a bluff. You didn't know.

Actually, I do have evidence of the idea which I advanced.
The idea is that God does not exist.
The reason for this is, of course, Colin the God-eating caterpillar.
Colin's defining feature is that he eats and thereby destroys any God in the universe.
For any God to exist, you have to prove the non-existence of Colin.

Can you do that?

[Colin2B]

On the other hand, we can clearly see the restraint and the shyness of what seems to me to be a taboo.

What taboo? I don’t see anything in the replies that could be considered a taboo

By the way @Bored chemist I exist

[alancalverd]

Careful, BC!

There are no surviving dinosaurs, but the plants they ate are still around. The absence of a species does not imply the absence of whatever it might have eaten.

However the apparent absence of a god clearly implies that any god-eating caterpillars are at least very hungry and almost certainly extinct.

Except that caterpillars are the leaf-eating larvae of jaw-less butterflies. So if you come across a theophagic papilionoid, there clearly is a god, all Colin's siblings have completed their metamorphosis, and god is a nectar-bearing vegetable. 

Which is half of what you need to create a land flowing with milk and honey, the remainder being a Holy Cow. 

Face it, if 80,000 zombies can choose a prime minister from a bucket of slime, I'm definitely Papal material, or maybe Chief Rabbi. 

[Bored chemist]

The defining characteristic of CTGEC is that he eats all gods immediately.
He has no siblings and is immortal.
In many ways, he resembles a God.
This leads to an interesting paradox.

If someone does think they have a proof of the non existence of Colin, I will go through it, crossing out the word "Colin" and inserting the word "God".
In doing so, I will produce a proof of the non existence of God.
One way or another, Colin proves that there is no God.

[alancalverd]

Er, no.

The existence of Colin proves that there is, or at least once was, enough god to sustain him.

The nonexistence of Colin has no bearing on the existence or otherwise of whatever he might eat.

Most gods have siblings.

[Colin2B]

Most gods have siblings.

I have never eaten a sibling (knowingly)

[alancalverd]

I feel a song coming on. Possibly channeling Tom Lehrer, in praise of cannibalism.

Chorus:
If you're like me
It's great to be
Nibbling
a sibbling
and may the Lord have mercy on your soul.

[Bored chemist]

The existence of Colin proves that there is, or at least once was, enough god to sustain him.

No, it doesn't.
The use of  the word "eat" is a metaphor; not sustenance.

[Bored chemist]

The nonexistence of Colin has no bearing on the existence or otherwise of whatever he might eat.

Yes he does, you can not have your God and let Colin eat it.

[alancalverd]

Tripped over your own logic, my friend.

X always destroys (eats, if you will) Y

Therefore X => NOT(Y), obviously

But NOT(X) => POSSIBLE (Y)

and we have no evidence of X.

Occam demands minimal assumption, thus allows for the existence of a god, edible or otherwise. But then he would, wouldn't he?

[Kartazion (OP)]

Let me ask you for a source of what you are talking about. Otherwise it would be to moderated by you.

Is it a problem to talk about Zionism and the promised land?

[Colin2B]

I feel a song coming on. Possibly channeling Tom Lehrer, in praise of cannibalism.

I prefer to poison pigeons in the park!

[Bored chemist]

Tripped over your own logic, my friend.

X always destroys (eats, if you will) Y

Therefore X => NOT(Y), obviously

But NOT(X) => POSSIBLE (Y)

and we have no evidence of X.

Occam demands minimal assumption, thus allows for the existence of a god, edible or otherwise. But then he would, wouldn't he?

So, before you can say "there is a God" (or even "there might be a God") you have to prove that Colin doesn't exist.
Because, if Colin exists, God can't.

Colin is much simpler than God and thus intrinsically more probable.
If you can't have both, Occam says you have to assume the simple one is "right"..

[alancalverd]

you have to prove that Colin doesn't exist.

No. I merely stated that you have provided no evidence of Colin's existence, so I have to resort to Occam. Or at least Bayes, which gives the Almighty a 50-50 a priori probability of existing. Not good odds for a hardline atheist.

Colin is much simpler than God

You can't infer that from your stated characteristic of eating god. A virus is a lot simpler than its host, but a predator is usually at least more intelligent than its prey.

[alancalverd]

Is it a problem to talk about Zionism and the promised land?

Not for me, but it would be irrelevant to the majority of our correspondents and certainly inappropriate to a science forum.

[Bored chemist]

Quote
Colin is much simpler than God
You can't infer that from your stated characteristic of eating god. A virus is a lot simpler than its host, but a predator is usually at least more intelligent than its prey.

You are failing to grasp the fact that these are defining characteristics of Colin and are therefore true by definition.

[Bored chemist]

No. I merely stated that you have provided no evidence of Colin's existence, so I have to resort to Occam. Or at least Bayes, which gives the Almighty a 50-50 a priori probability of existing. Not good odds for a hardline atheist.

The "50:50" argument  also applies to Colin.
And to George, the God eating spider.
And so , for God to exist, you must have neither Colin nor George.
So God is a 1 in 4 shot.
And then, there's Susan...