They both say they are positive they have the truth, but neither can prove it.
2006-07-08 08:42:16 · 11 answers · asked by bc_munkee 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
The basic issue is that theists believe the burden of proof rests with those who deny the existence of the divine, while atheists believe the burden of proof rests with those who affirm it.
The problem is, theism and atheism both suffer from a lack of evidence. Theists will heap their dogma and purpose-driven lives on you as evidence, and athetists will bring up the Problem of Evil, but neither qualifies. This could be the universe of a silent God (or gods) or of a Deist God. God's personality could still be vegetating. Or we could be the gods, the sparks of the divine left when the divine imploded and the universe began. Our fate could be one of diminishing spiritual returns, or we could play a role in recreating or reassembling the godhead. Unless we can resolve any of these issues definitively (and that much seems to be ruled out from the start), we're stuck in a world where the honest answer is agnosticism; suspicions about theism or atheism left to intuition and faith.
2006-07-08 08:57:47 · answer #1 · answered by fishphinder 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Actually the definition of atheist is just anyone who lacks a belief in gods. Many atheists do not claim they have the truth they just find the christian arguments for one unconvincing. When you think about all the claims made by christians throughout history which have turned to be wrong, the atheist position, which is basically just "Show me the evidence." makes a lot of sense.
2006-07-08 08:50:59 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Can anyone ever absolutely prove anything?
Ok, so the best bet, then is to go with the probabilities.
A) If the Atheist is right, then there is an eternity of nothing. (assume high probability * no benefits = no upside)
B) If the Christian is right, then there is an eternity of something (assume low probability * benefits = eternal upside)
In all cases B > A. If that is the case, perhaps exploring the identity of God warrants a little more priority.
2006-07-08 08:49:05 · answer #3 · answered by TheSlayor 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The atheists that say they have a positive knowledge that god doesn't exist are the "strong atheists", a very rare kind.
Anyone else who just lack the "theist" belief is an atheist, weak atheist if that helps to make the difference. This is the one that can be used as synonymous of some kind of agnosticism.
If I have no evidence that there aren't intelligent evil life forms living in Mars, observing us and preparing their invasion to exterminate us, what would be the most pragmatic position in this case.
a) To believe there are such living forms and live in fear.
b) Not to believe that there are such living forms and keep your life trying to solve our daily life problems (verifiable problems).
Personally, I say I'm an atheist just because the pragmatic value of the position, not because I reached such conclusion through a cognitive process, there is no point in considering the probability of things that can't be verified, in other words, you can't determine a probability of something that can't be known, measured and verified, such proposal is plain silly. I wonder if those who think we should worry about hell are worrying about Hades, reincarnation, deadly sirens, evil leprechauns, the wrath of Zeus, the evil deeds of Loki and the coming of Ragnarok, if they aren't, why are they telling non-believers about god and hell in the form of the Pascal Wager? It's getting old already.
Being afraid of hell is as childish as being afraid of chimeras.
2006-07-08 11:57:10 · answer #4 · answered by Oedipus Schmoedipus 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Think about this for a minute. If Christians are right and you are a good person then you die and go to heaven. If Atheists are right and you are a good person, then you just die and nothing happens but at least you lived a good life. If you just say Christians are wrong and live your life as a total ****** and you die and Christians were right you're just screwed. So isn't it worth being nice no matter who is right?
2006-07-08 09:04:59 · answer #5 · answered by royal_fryer 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
atheists in the main don't go around telling BS stories, unlike many Xian's do. Atheist's in the main like to rely on objective evidence.
2006-07-08 08:57:40 · answer #6 · answered by meta-morph-in-oz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, I guess it can be. In a way, unproven scientific theories are just as delusional as religious stories.
2006-07-08 08:48:56 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Atheist=promises eternity in HELL FIRE.
Christian=promises eternity in Heaven.
How foolish are you?
2006-07-08 11:07:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes but afeists dont tawk to me about rerigion , and there is no rerigion in my country and rook we are doing great. ROOK!
2006-07-08 08:45:56 · answer #9 · answered by Kimpossibrr 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
Christians can't prove that god exists
just because some fairy tale book tells them.
2006-07-08 08:59:17 · answer #10 · answered by ☆BadNews☆® 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋