http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060803113206AADa0BV&cp=2&tp=2#all-answers
Since I am neither a vocal proponent nor a vocal opponent of the existence of bollywoks, I am not under any particular obligation to study them.
But you do raise an interesting point. If the Bible is not trustworthy as a source of information, as many atheists seem to be arguing today, then how can anyone be sure God doesn't exist? In other words, you might be able to say that the Biblical God doesn't exist, but what about non-Biblical conceptions of God?
2006-08-03 08:13:35 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
I am an atheist and i dont think there is a god. However if he does exist i do not believe him to be the father figure the bible makes him out to be.
2006-08-03 08:18:03 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Well, of course god does exist as a conception. There is no doubt about it. Since many people feel the existence of god, they can conceive him somehow or other. So god does exist as a conception. But this is not what atheists (or unbelievers in general) argue against. What we claim is that we do not accept the existence of a god as a REAL being. It may be a myth, a product of social imagination, a being created to manipulate the world, etc. But not a real being with physical existence.
2006-08-03 08:22:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, you have probably figured out that I just made up the term bollywoks. That is evidence that bollywoks don't really exist as a real thing.
The same can be said of the Bible. It was made up by men. There's a history of how the Bible came about. You can show how many parts of the Bible were plagerized from other writings. This is evidence that the "god" referenced in the Bible does not really exist as a real thing.
2006-08-03 08:21:26 · answer #3 · answered by nondescript 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We also don't know that some kind of deity exists.. there is no empirical evidence either way. Believers use the evidence set before them to believe. I have seen the same evidence and I have chosen not to believe. Either side may be wrong. However, usually only the non-believers are really asked to defend their views (on serious questions here.. not talking about trollish questions done from any belief). How is my choice more wrong than the choice a believer has made to believe when I have looked at the same evidence.
2006-08-03 08:28:11 · answer #4 · answered by genaddt 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
When it boils down to it, I do not care if any form of a god exists. I refuse to be a slave to any god. If one of the gods wants to change my mind, it needs to show up and say so. Not a warm feeling, or a near miss by a train as a hint. By being brave, and not afraid of me, and stopping by and saying hello. I cannot stand cowards.
2006-08-03 08:19:55 · answer #5 · answered by Arcturus R 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Pretty simple. There is NO empirical evidence WHATSOEVER of God/Allah/Zeus/whatever anywhere. Until such evidence, scientific and verifible comes up, then there's no reasont to assume the existance of God/Allah/Zeus/whatever exists except as a convient fiction for those who believe in them.
2006-08-03 08:18:17 · answer #6 · answered by mike_castaldo 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
B asic
I nstructions
B erfore
L eaving
E arth
=)
2006-08-03 08:26:16 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
you are free to believe in any fiction you like.
but to insist that every one else should follow your delusion is just wrong.
2006-08-03 08:22:05 · answer #8 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋