Rationalist needs more than belief
Peter Anderson, in his letter ("God's existence not disproved", Mailbox, July 16) seems to have misread or misinterpreted my letter of July 3 regarding the questionable existence of a supreme deity.
He writes of a sweeping statment I allegedly made about science disproving the Bible and Christianity.
I never used the word science in any sentence or paragraph in the whole of my letter.
Also, Mr Anderson has completely side-stepped the challenge which I made.
I asked for absolutely irrefutable evidence of God's existence but this issue seems to have been evaded.
No such proof will ever be forthcoming. Why? Because no one can prove the existence of an incorporeal and imaginary being - quite simply, a non-entity.
Any god is a product of man's imagination, an easy way of explaining the wonders of the Earth and the universe.
However, any person who is capable of truly rational thinking will need much more than ill-founded traditional beliefs to rely on.
FO Hipwell, Wigston