2007-03-22 16:22:16 · 34 answers · asked by NHBaritone 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
"I only believe it if I can see it"
--- seek and you shall find, my friend.
2007-03-22 16:25:11 · answer #1 · answered by poweranni 7 · 4⤊ 5⤋
I'm an atheist because I look at the facts but I do hate when people just talk about how bad he is in the bible. Alot of people use propaganda to make others looks just as bad. This is used by everyone though such as saying Hitler and Stalin were atheist's. And they use them for examples of how atheists are all immoral. And the same thing is done to Christians by talking about how bad there past is. Because just because Hitler was bad doesn’t mean he wasn’t real. There is no god though any argument should be compelling enough to not believe in him. And I apologize to Hitler and Stalin supporters because it was unfair to compare there genocidal sadistic doctrine to god the father of murdering children.
2007-03-22 16:37:22 · answer #2 · answered by Beaverscanttalk 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
In order for this to happen I would have to first encounter a compelling argument for the existence of god for the purposes of comparison
2007-03-22 16:28:05 · answer #3 · answered by hate 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That since bad things happen, God, or at least a good God, could not exist. Because one can simply say that because good things happen, a God, or good God, does exist. The arguments cancel each other out, because both premises are equally founded and so are both conclusions.
2007-03-22 16:25:49 · answer #4 · answered by RYAN P C 2 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Not a compelling argument but false comments to despise our belief on God and religion.
jtm
2007-03-22 16:28:48 · answer #5 · answered by Jesus M 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I'd have to say that the lease compelling argument agaisnt the existence of god is that because evil exists, there must be no God.
While I don't believe in the God of the Bible, the Bible itself declares that evil exists and gives a reason for it. One can't disprove the Bible while ignoring it.
2007-03-22 16:27:02 · answer #6 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Man's interpretation of the evidence in God's created universe should never supercede the Word of God
2007-03-22 16:47:38 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Every single one I have ever heard. Because I can challenge any one ever given to me and prove the lack of proof in their argument without even mentioning religion in my argument.
2007-03-22 16:34:25 · answer #8 · answered by Jay 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
The THEORY of evolution as fact. While Darwin and others made some good observations that make some sense there is no more evidence that a big bang was the cause of the many carbon based life forms no more than their is solid evidence that God lit the fuse that created the big bang.
2007-03-22 16:27:47 · answer #9 · answered by mohayrix 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋
Years ago, when I was a teenager, someone said a drunk person wrote the entire Bible in one night. It was the least compelling, made the least sense, and is not feasible.
2007-03-22 16:25:08 · answer #10 · answered by txofficer2005 6 · 8⤊ 1⤋
That science hasn't found Him yet.
Not a knock against science just a conditioned response against presumptive reasoning.
"If I do not see Him, He must not exist."
2007-03-23 03:12:24 · answer #11 · answered by thankyou "iana" 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋