Most of us would, I think, agree that if creatures such as the Loch Ness Monster or Bigfoot ought to leave behind empirical evidence by which we might discover their existence. If no such evidence (or at least, no such convincing evidence) exists, one can reasonably conclude that the creatures themselves do not exist.
What about God? Although there is little or no satisfactory evidence for a Creator's existence (such evidence as would satisfy atheists, I mean), should we also assume that a Creator does not exist? In other words, does an absence of evidence constitute evidence of absence?
Or could God create a universe and leave no evidence of himself of it (perhaps deliberately? Another question...)? Leaving room, at least, for the possibility of a divine being?
I'm agnostic myself, in case anybody assumes that I'm trying to bash one "side" or the other. I suppose this question is directed mostly at atheists, but I'm looking for questions from all sides.
2006-11-06
15:34:07
·
14 answers
·
asked by
?
4
in
Religion & Spirituality