Why do so many theists think they can back up their faith?

Status
Not open for further replies.
On a more serious note, know what I've never fully understood? Consciousness.

The feeling of, well, being. Inhabiting your body. Like, why am I me, and not that person over there? Why did I inhabit my body?

And why am I human? Why are YOU human? Why are you not a cell in your own body? After all, there are billions of individual cells in your body, and only one you. So why do you get to control you, and not one of your cells? I mean, there's a billions to one ratio here...

Or heck, why didn't you become one of the hundreds of trillions of bacteria in the ocean? That would have been far more likely, given random chance, than being the sole owner of a human body.

Here's some things to consider:

First, our ability to be self aware has clear evolutionary self-preservation benefits. Knowing where we are and what we're doing and predict the future can save our lives. Thus, natural selection prefers complex brains that develop the ability to abstract as a powerful survival tactic. Like so many genetically inherited mechanisms, we often use these mental tools in other ways that aren't particularly beneficial to our survival. Postuating our position in the universe isn't going to save us from being eaten by a tiger but we have that skill so we use it. Another example is recognizing faces. We're all born with the simple ability to recognize faces. You might wonder why we often see faces in things that are not faces (clouds, wood-grain, grilled cheese sandwiches). It's because knowing a face is a survival technique and is hardwired into our brain because it's a survival tactic. The more a face looks like your own, the safer you are with beings with such a face. The more "alien" the face is from your pre-programmed pattern of safety, the more we fear it.

Second, we are all made of star stuff. Do you really need a supernatural selection process to explain why anything is anything? Shit happens, dude.

I think about these odds, and can only believe that we're here, inhabiting these bodies, because God put us here

As any atheist would be quick to point out, using "God" to explain what we currently don't understand about ourselves (where in this case at least I feel like we're at the beginning of grasping it) isn't really an answer. It's a scape-goat. It's a non-answer. You'd be much wiser to simply say "It is yet to be explained" than to take the less logical and more cowardly route to invoke the non-answer that "God did it". Since God is not itself explained you've not answered the question you set out to answer. Humanity needs more humility to just admit we simply don't know. We may never know.
 
/agree, I am a christian myself and really dislike the mindset of most church going christians. Not all mind you, but a lot.

How does the christian god have anything to do with the matrix? I am not seeing how either has anything to do with each other. One is a deep personal belief (or should be) in a supernatural being, also when did I ever say I believed in the christian outlook on god? If I did say this then I apologize as that is not my view on god at all..

Ok, sorry for misreading you.

Using the Matrix was a thought experiment to get a rise out of your critical thinking skills that failed horribly. I am sorry if it confused you.
 
I'm going to repost something I posted in "Atheism vs Theism" that addresses my thoughts on "science can't disprove God, so therefore he's possible"



Basically yes, God's existence is possible, but there are other claims about reality that have more evidence to support them, and so they are more likely accurate.

That is an interesting view, but to ridicule others for their beliefs is not acceptable.

Ok, sorry for misreading you.

Using the Matrix was a thought experiment to get a rise out of your critical thinking skills that failed horribly. I am sorry if it confused you.

My mistake, must have got carried away with the argument at hand. I do not prescribe to christian views on god. As most of them would heavily disagree with my view on god (as it is now). I was a christian, but have started to question many views and am slowly changing away from that stance on god.
 
People agree Jesus was a man and a philosopher. Only Christians think he was God taking human form (something that Zeus used to do a lot too).
 
You're just plain wrong about that, unless you also give equal credibility to the notion of a Pantheon of Godly Care Bears lording over us since it is equally impossible to disprove.

As for those "evidence is everywhere" arguments you made, none of those require a God to explain, and therefore inserting a God makes no sense unless you just irrationally already believe a God is micromanaging your life.

There are no historical/tradition texts pointing to Godly Care Bears existing. If there were some texts out there, I'm sure there would be people to have "faith" in it. Otherwise, your comparison is rather obtuse.

As to your other paragraph, THAT IS THE POINT. Your attributing your own belief that there is no God (which is equally irrational to someone who is strong in their religious faith) to claim that those things require a God. You are on equal footing as someone who claims that God is indeed required to explain those things. Unfortunately science has not answered all questions, so it's not like you can use it to prove someone wrong.

You've opened yourself up to a can of worms I don't have the energy to respond to, but I will say this one thing - when you really don't believe, you're not really afraid of judgement - because you stop giving the moral system of whatever religion you are/were closest too any weight, all that matters is your own system of ethics.

I wholeheartedly agree, which does not seem to apply to atheist hellbent on proving the other side wrong.
 
So to answer question #2, some mystery that alludes you:

"And also, why do they often claim that their own magical beliefs are more sophisticated than the magical beliefs of others?"

So, to answer question 2, I'd say it's both human psychology and internal consistency.

Your argument that it is "human psychology" can be applied to any secular belief system. The need for social glue goes further than religion, so that doesn't necessarily justify it's legitimacy.

And your second argument is just a overdrawn appeal to tradition, which does not cut it.
 
You've opened yourself up to a can of worms I don't have the energy to respond to, but I will say this one thing - when you really don't believe, you're not really afraid of judgement - because you stop giving the moral system of whatever religion you are/were closest too any weight, all that matters is your own system of ethics.
Personally, I'm no more afraid of divine judgement than I am that the flying spaghetti monster will curse me for not eating enough spaghetti.

Also, I accept that I don't know what I don't know.
 
In that case, no, but I'd say that's a rare case. Even if the parents aren't interested, there are other sources. This is something I struggle with in my own life. I don't press any kind of spiritual philosophy or theology on my daughter. Ever. It is up to her, when she reaches adolescence, to decide what belief system she wishes to identify with. She has not been baptized and won't be unless she chooses that.

But I'll tell ya, she comes home all the fucking time from my parents' or my in-laws' talking about Jesus and God. I have spoken to them about it and we've reached a compromise of sorts, allowing them to share certain limited material as long as all theological questions are redirected to us (i.e. me as my wife is an extremely apathetic atheist). It still bothers me, though. It would be very difficult to avoid entirely without cutting all of her grandparents out of her life, which is practically impossible for us because of my disability.

Well, the fact that a default lack of religious belief can exist shows that it's not something that needs to be struggled with innately, but its simply a product of society that has been ingrained in a lot of people to the point of irrational support for the idea. I know atheists who were raised atheist, and really don't give the idea of a god being around any real thought - actually when I was 13 years old, one such atheist accidentally converted me. I had been struggling trying to understand my feelings about God, and I talked to him and asked him if he was going to church on Sunday - he said no, his family doesn't go to church, that they didn't believe in a God actually. And I was like WOAH, that's what I am! I didn't know you could do that!

While social pressure exists, I think it's important to understand that what you're struggling against is an irrational idea implanted in you at a young age when you are susceptible - to a lot of people who haven't had that happen (not all people), it's really super easy not believing in God. And to me, I sort of never believed, even as a young child - but I never knew that I didn't have to. Knowing about the possibility of Atheism is all I needed.
 
While social pressure exists, I think it's important to understand that what you're struggling against is an irrational idea implanted in you at a young age when you are susceptible - to a lot of people who haven't had that happen (not all people), it's really super easy not believing in God. And to me, I sort of never believed, even as a young child - but I never knew that I didn't have to. Knowing about the possibility of Atheism is all I needed.

Yes, I'm very interested to see what happens with my daughter. We are doing our best to keep her a blank slate until she's a teenager. I'm in total agreement with atheists everywhere when it comes to indoctrination.
 
No, it's not. Do you actually know what a straw man is? In a formal argument I'd ask for a [CITATION NEEDED] for "so many" religious people believing in this or that, but since he's talking informally about a non-specific percentage of religious people making assertions that I have plenty of personal anecdotes about, not a major concern. Poorly framed, sure.

Straw men, at their essence, are a misrepresentation of an opposing viewpoint; building people who supposedly exist, but in a misrepresented way, to then tear down their supposed viewpoint. So, does this all boil down to formalities then? Somehow, my post is more formal than the OPs? Why, because I used complete sentences or spoke from personal experience, or didn't frame everything in some asinine analogy to my sister playing with care bears? Regardless of formalities, the OP missed the point about "so many theists thinking they can back up their faith." At least in regard to Christianity, the only actual religion that is really mentioned by name, the majority of Christian denominations base their belief on faith, it's why Catholic's have 'the Creed,' and a major reason for the Protestant reformation. That is a strawman, saying "why do so many Christians believe that they can back up their faith," when that isn't even true: read the replies in this thread from Christians, and apologetic non-Christians (like myself) who say, "Well, no, not really, that's the point of faith."

Don't read the news, then, concerning insipid intelligent design textbooks attempting to trojan horse their way into state education systems? Don't see politicians using biblical mandates to inform policy decisions? Hell, don't have Jehovah's Witnesses ringing the doorbell?

I do see the intelligent design nonsense working its way into some education systems, I think its an abomination, and I don't see it in my home state. I see many politicians using their faith to inform their policy, but I'm not always against that, there have been many political movements that were motivated in large part by faith beliefs that i agree very strongly with, like Civil Rights, anti-slavery, suffrage, and much more. I don't agree with my state treating one sexual orientation less fairly than another, which is why I live in a state that recognizes same-sex marriage, and supported it. But, in truth, my support wasn't entirely empiracle or social; while I justified my support of same-sex marriage with legal reasons, part of it was simply a belief that it's unfair for my gay friends to not receive the same rights as I could... Was my belief religious, spiritual, purely based on constitutional law? I could certainly justify it based on conlaw, but I don't think that I could convincingly say one way or another that I got the belief because of conlaw. And in the case of Jehovahs, they do ring my doorbell -- I think three times in the last three years since living here. They're really nice people. I don't agree with them, and I think that many of their viewpoints about the end of the world are way out there, but they're really nice. But then again, I don't let somebody like the Jehovas Witnesses, one of the most obscure and tiny religious organizations in the entire world, jade my view of religious believers en masse.

(edit, on this note, I'm going to bed. the little pooch is going to wake me up in ~4 hours to go out. Peace out Gaf)
 
Yes, I'm very interested to see what happens with my daughter. We are doing our best to keep her a blank slate until she's a teenager. I'm in total agreement with atheists everywhere when it comes to indoctrination.

We must not forget some Atheists will indoctrinate Atheism into their child, which could cause backlash at teenage years if the child decides to rebel and become a theist. In some kind of bizzaro world Bible Belt. Norway?

I think the most important part is to encourage skepticism, and the rest will come along naturally. Unless your kid turns out to be a shitty skeptic.
 
I wholeheartedly agree, which does not seem to apply to atheist hellbent on proving the other side wrong.

You are looking at this in a way that is way too simplistic. I'll give you my personal story quick, and why I fight against and am 'hell bent' on proving the other side wrong.

Raised Muslim, was always really skeptical even at a young age - my first experiment was saying "w'allahe" (I swear to god) when I was lying, to see if anything would happen. It didn't, and I was around 9 at the time. Fast forward to 13, I find out that Atheism is a thing, and realize that's what I was.

Now - if I told my family I was Atheist, shit would go very poorly for me - it's exhausting and mentally taxing hearing about how sinful and evil and disappointing and horrible not believing is from your family all the while pretending to be religious and participating in exhausting ritual just to keep the peace. I would love to be 'out' I would love it if being atheist didn't mean a damn thing to them. But during Ramadan, I have to be super careful about where I eat and who I eat in front of unless it gets back to them. I can never be seen in public eating like... bacon.

The Muslims that do find out I am Atheist - well I am met with a whole rainbow of different reactions, and those are exhausting too, sometimes even frightening. In general, I have to decide whether I want to constantly fight and hold my ground and defend my position of disbelief, or constantly lie and sing and dance to keep the peace.

Obviously, I don't like religion, and I want it as far away as possible - and ideally, I would want everyone to be non-religious. If I could convince people to be not religious, I would do it. I know - shocking that I would say that, atheists and religious people alike are probably gasping.

But think about it - we go our entire lives trying to push our ideologies, our desires and make them reality. If we have power over something, we change it to make ourselves happy - we don't do it to make people who hold contrary opinions as to how this object I hold power over should be used, happy. This is no different, I'm not ashamed to say that if I could, I would have everyone be secular humanist atheists.
 
Karen Armstrong's The Case for God addresses this issue really well. She'd agree with you; she posits that radical atheism and fundamentalism are parallel reactions to our heavily damaged perception and experience of religion, and that both are equally destructive forces in modern society.

I fail to see how fundamentalism and "militant" atheism are remotely equal. We got any people bombing churches or mutilating genitals in the name of atheism, secularism or even antitheism?
 
It's just defensive Christians with a persecution complex. "Oh woe is me, belonging to the most politically powerful majority religious group in America, I'm so oppressed by these heathens who won't let me spread the word of God in public schools."
 
I fail to see how fundamentalism and "militant" atheism are remotely equal. We got any people bombing churches or mutilating genitals in the name of atheism, secularism or even antitheism?

We are talking about different things. If you read the passage I put up further down, Armstrong actually points out that the atrocities you speak of is one of the most valid criticisms of fundamentalism and theism in general.

The passage is specifically addressing the negative spiritual environment sweeping the world right now, and is ultimately a plea for more peaceful communication, and deeper respect for one another. But I'm not putting the whole damn thing up!
 
I currently feel as I am agnostic but as I read up more and more its pushing it towards atheism. But one thing that I cannot understand is the extreme "Hi, look at me I am atheist, here is more facebook posts of how stupid these theists are". I am really getting sick of it, as its the "in" thing on here, reddit, etc.

I am sure I'll get crucified for this, but I really do not care what you believe as long as you are a dencent human being.

Nearly all atheists are agnostic. Gnostic atheism is just as irrational as theism.
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.
 
We are talking about different things. If you read the passage I put up further down, Armstrong actually points out that the atrocities you speak of is one of the most valid criticisms of fundamentalism and theism in general.

The passage is specifically addressing the negative spiritual environment sweeping the world right now, and is ultimately a plea for more peaceful communication, and deeper respect for one another. But I'm not putting the whole damn thing up!

What negative spiritual environment? That's a weird thing to say is happening. There is more support for everyone else's religion now than ever, and the fight for secularism, and particularly secular humanism, has arguably had a very positive impact in a lot of places world wide. Furthering that, I don't see how a militant atheist could hurt that push, and if anything, they could only have a positive effect. I'll read the passage though.
 
We are talking about different things. If you read the passage I put up further down, Armstrong actually points out that the atrocities you speak of is one of the most valid criticisms of fundamentalism and theism in general.

The passage is specifically addressing the negative spiritual environment sweeping the world right now, and is ultimately a plea for more peaceful communication, and deeper respect for one another. But I'm not putting the whole damn thing up!

I wonder if thats in large part due to fundamentalism being observably far more detrimental. i dont believe in r/atheism levels of ego stroking and vitrol, but I do believe a lot of criticism is taken as far harsher than it is cause religion thinks it deserves special treatment in the realm of beliefs and values. The same criticisms brought up about any other personal belief are much more open to scrutiny.
 
So, does this all boil down to formalities then? Somehow, my post is more formal than the OPs? Why, because I used complete sentences or spoke from personal experience, or didn't frame everything in some asinine analogy to my sister playing with care bears? Regardless of formalities, the OP missed the point about "so many theists thinking they can back up their faith." At least in regard to Christianity, the only actual religion that is really mentioned by name, the majority of Christian denominations base their belief on faith, it's why Catholic's have 'the Creed,' and a major reason for the Protestant reformation. That is a strawman, saying "why do so many Christians believe that they can back up their faith," when that isn't even true: read the replies in this thread from Christians, and apologetic non-Christians (like myself) who say, "Well, no, not really, that's the point of faith."
I'm rather amused with how upset you are with me lol

And are you seriously trying to say that all (or nearly all) the Christian friends you've ever had freely admitted all their religious beliefs were completely illogical or were only held cause they made them happy? I don't buy it.
 
I'm going to have to bow out at this juncture, but I just wanted to say thanks for the good-natured debate, gents. It's been nicer than anticipated.

Yes, I'm being sincere!
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.

It's hard to explain what I want to say, but I'll try.

The question in reverse doesn't make sense. You don't have to back up a lack of something - if someone made that thread, that's what everyone would be saying, essentially "I'm not convinced". And I doubt it's something GAF as a community experiences and understands.

The 'god bashing' you speak of is simply people not believing or giving a deity any particular respect - and the issue is that some people think that respect is due. I do not. You give respect to individuals, and you avoid personal attacks when you can (saying someone is delusional for believing in a God seems like a personal attack, but it's a point with a real argument. If someone said you're a fuckwad for believing in God, that's a different story).

There's no double standard - if someone made that thread independent of it trying to be some satire of this thread, people would argue the same in that thread as they do in this thread - no different.
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.

I dont have to back up why I dont believe in other things that have no evidence of existence, like unicorns or fairies. Its up to the one asserting the claim to provide the evidence. the funny thing is, atheists would be in a far better mindset to accept a god being if it is proven to exist over religious believers. they'd just accept the new evidence, where as religion would have to twist or outright abandon doctrine and belief systems unless the happen to be the one religion who somehow got everything about said being right. Which is pretty much a chance set against an infinity of possible god concepts.
 
Yes, I'm very interested to see what happens with my daughter. We are doing our best to keep her a blank slate until she's a teenager. I'm in total agreement with atheists everywhere when it comes to indoctrination.

Indoctrinate her... as a skeptic.

If she can still become religious, I'll be all. "AW SHIBS"

"Aw shibs, that sucks.
 
Is she cute (obviously subjective) and respectable? If so, yes I would. Why should I have the power to judge her for something she believes in? As long as she isn't murdering innocents and trying to convert me I have no problem.

I guess things like rational thought are things I find attractive in a female. Something like believing in the care bears is just so disconcerting, I wouldn't be able to leave it alone.
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.

Because there is no hypocrisy. The two sides are not on even footing.

Replace "God" with "unicorns" and "religious folk" with "unicorn believers".

Now imagine if everyone you met in real life believed in unicorns, only elected unicorn believers to political office, and made laws based on what the Head Unicorn supposedly decreed 4000 years ago (when unicorns still communicated with humans).

GAF is a discussion forum, where people talk about their opinions and share their thoughts, and it happens that the internet is heavily atheist-leaning. If real life were a discussion forum it would be the complete opposite x100.
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.

So OP = all of GAF?

Seriously yo, most of us don't mind pushy theists - the conversations are fun, and the exercise is to sharpen your argumentative and communication skills.

Every so often, we get guys like you that are all "why you guys bully?!"

And it only looks like that, because we have many more cogent rational answers than the opposing team!

Also, because GAF does convert - like each new set of juniors are proportionally not so disimilar to the population of people that have access to the internet in terms of their beliefs... but over time on GAF; we have a much higher proportion of atheists than theists; and it's not because we ban all of them (although the more strident and defensive theists that resort to bullshit argumentative techniques do get turfed pretty quickly). It's because they either bow out of these threads, or they get converted.
 
So OP = all of GAF?

Seriously yo, most of us don't mind pushy theists - the conversations are fun, and the exercise is to sharpen your argumentative and communication skills.

Every so often, we get guys like you that are all "why you guys bully?!"

And it only looks like that, because we have many more cogent rational answers than the opposing team!

Also, because GAF does convert - like each new set of juniors are proportionally not so disimilar to the population of people that have access to the internet in terms of their beliefs... but over time on GAF; we have a much higher proportion of atheists than theists; and it's not because we ban all of them (although the more strident and defensive theists that resort to bullshit argumentative techniques do get turfed pretty quickly). It's because they either bow out of these threads, or they get converted.

Or they realize not to take anything personally and that this is just a message board.
 
Or they realize not to take anything personally and that this is just a message board.

Yeah, I was talking about the ones that left these sorts of discussions. I'm quite aware that there's a large contingent of GAFfers that don't step into these sorts of threads... even though they're tempted to from time to time.

"Nerp! Those damned atheists are at it again! ... " *vague recollections of past experiences* *walks away*
 
And this is why it's never worth it to discuss religion on GAF.

But he's right. There is just as much evidence for the existence of unicorns (zero) so they are on equal footing with gods.

Also, what's with the Abrahamic religions being Monotheistic? Almost every other religion has multiple gods. Is there any more evidence for there only being one than there is for there being 25? No. Maybe the name/rituals for one is easier to remember than for 25. Does that mean the Abrahamic god is more popular simply because you can be lazier and still believe?
 
Yeah, I was talking about the ones that left these sorts of discussions. I'm quite aware that there's a large contingent of GAFfers that don't step into these sorts of threads... even though they're tempted to from time to time.

"Nerp! Those damned atheists are at it again! ... " *vague recollections of past experiences* *walks away*

lol true enough. I get bashed in many of these threads since I'm a vocal theist (Catholic) on GAF, yet I find them to be some of the more interesting threads I participate in. If you're getting swayed to one side or another after some posts on a message board then you (not you but you in general) clearly didn't have any strength of conviction.


But he's right. There is just as much evidence for the existence of unicorns (zero) so they are on equal footing with gods.

Come on man, they're in the Forbidden Forest.
 
Why is there such a huge double standard for threads like this here?

I guarantee if someone made a thread titled; "Why do so many atheists think they can back up their lack of faith?" Every one would go into that thread and call the guy a jesusfreak and things of the like.

Yet someone makes a thread like this and the majority of posters join in on the God bashing.

It seems like most of you push the "there is no god" on others more so than the religious folk push god upon you.

I'm not even religious or anything, I just think the hypocrisy most of you exhibit is laughable.

Theists believe in something, and they're secure in their belief(s). Maybe atheists are insecure and feel the need to push the "No God" agenda so they'll feel better about their lack of?
 
Just use a USB stick. That always works as a back-up for my believes.

For the backing: it is a hella lot cheaper than opium ;)
 
But the question "back up your faith with proof" does?

The OP was referencing theists who attempted to back up their faith with proof, not asking theists to back their faith up with proof.

Faith by definition is belief without evidence. And trying to back up such faith is a very different proposition that asserting and supporting a rejection of such a belief.
 
But he's right. There is just as much evidence for the existence of unicorns (zero) so they are on equal footing with gods.

Ridiculous argument. You can debate the accuracy of the Bible or other texts, but one is referenced in what many consider to be historical texts, the other isn't. They are not the same at all.
 
Religion came about because back then, humanity was not yet capable of understanding our world and its many phenomena.

Humans, like most life here on Earth, are an intrinsically curious race.
They want to know.
They yearn to understand.

And so we wove tales.
Different civilizations all over the world came up with their own explanations for all manner of things.

Now we are advanced enough to forgo these ancient explanations. But because they have become so prevalent, there are still many who believe today.

It's only a matter of time before religion is a thing of the past.

drunk post
 
But the question "back up your faith with proof" does?
I'm not sure who was asking that question, but sure. If someone says their religious belief is empirical, you ask "how". If someone says it isn't empirical, and you still want to fight them, you ask "why believe in the non empirical".
 
But he's right. There is just as much evidence for the existence of unicorns (zero) so they are on equal footing with gods.

The unicorn argument is as stupid as it is insulting. Of all the possible arguments an atheist could use I can't think of one less likely to convince someone. It's a false equivalency that can only be argued dishonestly and is, like I said, why I usually avoid religion threads here.
 
Theists believe in something, and they're secure in their belief(s). Maybe atheists are insecure and feel the need to push the "No God" agenda so they'll feel better about their lack of?

Not at all. Atheists don't want religion in school and government. Theists do. This conflict has resulted in general bad feelings on both sides, but the conflict is still important.

Atheists just want to live a pocket of the world without religion if they so choose, but theists trying to sneak religion into schools and government refuse to allow them that choice.
 
The unicorn argument is as stupid as it is insulting. Of all the possible arguments an atheist could use I can't think of one less likely to convince someone. It's a false equivalency that can only be argued dishonestly and is, like I said, why I usually avoid religion threads here.

Explain to me why it's not equivalent. Because the Bible exists? There have been stories about unicorns for ages as well, ascribing magical properties to them, many even written down too.
 
Not at all. Atheists don't want religion in school and government. Theists do. This conflict has resulted in general bad feelings on both sides, but the conflict is still important.

Atheists just want to live a pocket of the world without religion if they so choose, but theists trying to sneak religion into schools and government refuse to allow them that choice.
No, fundamentalists do. Those loons that believe the earth is 6,000 years old do.

I'm a Catholic and think Catholic teachings should stay out of public schools. Catholic Schools are fine, but not in public schools.
 
Theists believe in something, and they're secure in their belief(s). Maybe atheists are insecure and feel the need to push the "No God" agenda so they'll feel better about their lack of?

Its harder to live with a belief that there is no personal god watching out for you, no afterlife, no intrinsic fairness in the universe.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom