>>5743897I don’t beleive I such a teapot. Does such a teapot require its own existence for us to exist? No in several ways.
You can not explain existence with It a creator. This has been understood for a minimum of hundreds of years, likely thousands or even millions.
Pop quiz, fucko: can you postulate a naturalistic explanation of ANYTHING without a supernatural cause without invalidating the foundational terms of discovery through science?
>you can’t. 