Of course it isn't a proof. My goodness if it was a proof then there wouldn't be anything to discuss. Obviously it's a belief that one chooses to accept or not, and I think I made that clear. I seem to recall saying that believing or not isn't the point and it was just the exercise of the "learning". The logic was just showing the tie between the two. Despite being an agnostic I still enjoy the learning aspect and the gleanings that come from it.
Law expanding definition of terrorist activity passes first Knesset reading (Haaretz)
from the article: Ah, where are those Arabs?