Why Do They Question The Existence Of God?

[goodlife]

One leading cause of atheism is religion.
Or they may proclaim, ‘I only believe what I see, and I can’t see any invisible Creator.

[modeller]

goodlife I will believe in your invisible god if you will believe in mine , the Invisible Pink Unicorn , or tell me logically why I am wrong. You haven't answered me before , so I assume you can't prove the IPU , doesn't exist. Millions of us believe it exists so it must be true. As you say the universe didn't just happen , so it was created and the creator was the IPU. That is the true genesis.

Don't waste time quoting your Genesis that proves nothing . My IPU genesis is the only logical means of creation.
If I am wrong please tell me why .

LG .//Its true, your alleged creator is invisible; thats because he is not there.... // No LG You have got it wrong , that proves it is there , that's logical ! Isn't it ?

[LazyGun]

@steg "" Everyone likes a good fairytale... "
yes i like the one about the big bang, its a doozy"

Thats very nearly funny....

[jim360]

It would be if it weren't so tragic.

[Peter Pedant]

Goodlife you have missed Christopher Howse's religious articles in the Daily Telegraph.

[birdie1971]

Goodlife - “... At One time a editor of a newspaper in the British Isles wanted to carry a regular religious article in his paper... One of Jehovah’s witnesses got to hear of the editor’s problem... Now every week the local paper has an uplifting article for the benefit of its 42,000 readers, under the heading “The Bible Says, so what a contrast...”

What's the name of the newspaper? Please provide evidence for your above story because right now I simply do not believe it since the phrase, “local newspaper” and a readership of 42,000 do not add up.

[birdie1971]

Goodlife - “... One leading cause of atheism is religion. Or they may proclaim, ‘I only believe what I see, and I can’t see any invisible Creator...”

If you believe in this guff then you have my sympathies. Your (and I use the word 'your' in its loosest possible sense) tragically simplistic argument is so ridiculous that a child could counter it. I only refrain from doing so because it would take a thousand words in order to get you up to speed with the most basic refutation and even then I'm not sure you'd really grasp it.

[birdie1971]

Steg -

Oh dear.

[WaldoMcFroog]

I don't believe I've ever seen a local newspaper that didn't contain the inane wittering of some sort of minister. It's easy copy, isn't it?

They feel like they're ministering to the sheep, the newspaper fills half a page, normally for free or very little. The idea that a newspaper couldn't find a willing cleric to oblige seems highly unlikely to me, so I'll add to the clamour for the name of the newspaper before I accept this unlikely tale.

[naomi24]

//The idea that a newspaper couldn't find a willing cleric to oblige seems highly unlikely to me//

I can guarantee it's unlikely!!

[jim360]

That stuff does seem highly unlikely to me. The Times has its Credo" section in the Saturday edition. Always some religious figure, be it the Chief Rabbi or some senior bishop. Most papers would publish religious sections without much fuss I'd have thought.

[LazyGun]

I have access to 4 local newspapers from around the UK. In none of them can I find a section called "The Bible Says".

So, is this an actual event, or an imaginary one, dreamt up by the "Lying for Jesus" activists?

I conclude that your anecdote is implausible and probably imaginary Goodlife, so is unbelievable,unless you can provide evidence in the form of the name of the publication.
Come to think of it, I reach the same conclusion about your god, for exactly the same reasons! :)

[mibn2cweus]

//Why Do They Question The Existence Of God?//

How else is one going to come to the rational conclusion . . . that He doesn't. :o/

[naomi24]

Actually, thinking about it, that's a really silly question.

[steg]

nearly funny? tragic? oh dear? lol cause i don't believe in a theory that every time they test it they come up with results so far off what they expected, that they need to make up more theories to cover them lol

[LazyGun]

@steg - Good for you! Your refusal to be taken in by those pesky scientists and the observations and evidence ( which may very well change over time - thats what evidence can do) Is heartening.

Presumably the certainty of "Goddunnit", with a bit of magic hand-waving -maybe even a muttered "abracadabra!" is far more certain, far more compelling, far more likely, and helps you sleep at night.

Good to know that you refuse to engage with the idea that theories can change over time, as new observations and evidence comes in- Damn those pesky theories with their need to update when new evidence arrives! - Even though the basic premise of the theory is still thought to be the best model for describing the universe.

We should put you in charge of science.....

[steg]

you mock me? bad show
wave hands, magic, help me sleep at night lol priceless

[naomi24]

steg, do you think God dunnit then? And if so, why do you think that? Serious question.

[steg]

dunnit ?

[jake-the-peg]

There are two very very strong pieces of evidence for the big bang.

The expansion of the Universe - measured so many times it's just ridiculous and the prediction of a background 'echo' from it some years before it was discovered.

Now the precise details may be open for debate but the evidence for an expanding universe that began if a point is pretty overwhelming.

There are respectable people putting about oscillating Universe Theories but they all start with our Universe at a point and expanding out.

It kinda depends what you mean by 'The big Bang Theory'

[jim360]

I do try and be respectful in times like this steg but the fact is you haven't a clue what you are talking about. If the evidence really didn't fit the theory then it would have been abandoned already. The truth is that you've been taken in by sceptics who also don't have the foggiest what they are talking about either.