How come only Atheists, Agnostics, and a few of the smart Theists understand the Presumption of Atheism?

Question

For example, some Christians apply the Presumption of Atheism to the belief that Zeus is God. They don't have any proof Zeus is God, and therefor do not belief.

But when every non-Christian applies the Presumption of Atheism to the belief that Jesus is God (or son of God or whatever) these same Christians don't understand.

I am saying some, and not all Theists, and Christianity is the best example since they are in the majority in America where I live.

But about 100% of Atheists, 100% of Agnostics, and I'd say maybe 10 to 20% of Theists, understand and maybe even relate, to the presumption of atheism.

What is the explanation for the 80%'s uncomfortability and inability to understand when the presumption of atheism is applied to their "faith".

Answer 1

Perhaps it's because there is quite a bit of credible evidence that Jesus is indeed God. That makes your "Presumption" seem presumptuous.

Answer 2

I think it all begins with the belief that the Bible is the word of God.

Here goes the argument (Don't tell me it's flawed, folks... I know that).

1. Mom, Dad, and Pastor Jim have told me since birth that he Bible is the word of God.

2. Mom, Dad and Pastor Jim have also told me a lot of stuff that is true, therefore I believe them about the Bible.

3. I read the Bible and it SAYS it's from God.

<<>>

4. Since the Bible is the word of God, and it says in the Bible that it is the word of God, it must be.

Now lets "prove" some stuff.

1. The Bible says that man came from clay.

2. Scientists have found the primary components of DNA in clay.

3. Science has proven that man came from clay.

4. The Bible says Soddom and Gommorah were destroyed.

5. Archaeologists have found the ruins of Soddom & Gammorah.

6. Science has proven that Soddom & Gammorah were destroyed.

7. The Bible was right about clay and about Soddom & Gammorah, so I believe it about Jesus rising from the dead.







Aaaaaarrrrgh.

Answer 3

God doesn't have wife,or son.God can create anything.IF they say Jesus is GOD son and then,explain to me how eve and Adam creation.GOD is not feeble like human being,who need oxygen,food and whatever...God just said "happen"and it will be.OK now tell me about the first plant on the earth.how it growth...from seed.OK if you say it from seed where the seed come from cause it was the first plant on the earth.GOD generate all the thing in universe from not exist to exist.You can try discover Muslims Holy Book"Qurran".You not wasting your time to discover about it cause at least you will find the answer about the truth.I HAD READ what creatrix write.I suggest all oy you read the novel with tittle"ISABELLA"BY MAULANA MOHAMMAD SAEDD(the writer)a novel based on a comparative study of Islam and Christianity it contain about "Qurran"and a lot of Bible "Mark,Mathew,Jonah".first copyright 15 August 1974.ISBN number 983-831-034-04.it was the true story in the Cordova town in SPANIEL(Spanish/spaniel).ISABELLA IS THE daughter of archbishop in the Cordova town.It was the best novel that I had ever read.I really hope that all of you can read it.

Answer 4

People are animals. Animals are chemical robots that are programmed to reproduce. Consciousness is scary as hell, and we need ignorant delusions to function and keep from killing ourselves. Atheists may be closer to the edge, but we are hurtling through space and anything could happen to us tomorrow. If we ABSORBED the freak-a55 situation that we woke up into, we would melt down. It's actually very intense, all the time, we just don't play with that fact on the table most of the time, and usually get away with it. You know, same old, get hit by a truck, everyone is going to die, nothing you do matters, girls don't like boys...girls like cars and money.

Answer 5

I have no clue what you are talking about with the "Presumption of Atheism".
If I were to give my own opinion of what those words mean I would say that Atheism presumes there should be evidence that God exists if we are going to believe in him.
Personally, I'm still searching for it.

Answer 6

I get weary of answering the same question over and over again, so I'll just cut&past fro a couple of good rebuttal articles written on this subject:

.......................................................................
...Second, the "presumption of atheism" demonstrates a rigging of the rules of philosophical debate in order to play into the hands of the atheist, who himself makes a truth claim. Alvin Plantinga correctly argues that the atheist does not treat the statements "God exists" and "God does not exist" in the same manner. The atheist assumes that if one has no evidence for God’s existence, then one is obligated to believe that God does not exist — whether or not one has evidence against God’s existence. What the atheist fails to see is that atheism is just as much a claim to know something ("God does not exist") as theism ("God exists"). Therefore, the atheist’s denial of God’s existence needs just as much substantiation as does the theist’s claim; the atheist must give plausible reasons for rejecting God’s existence....
.............................................

...Fourth, his resurrection is the most crucial factor in establishing the exceptionality of Jesus Christ. The resurrection of Christ was the legitimate climax to his unique life and death. He foretold his resurrection to his disciples directly (Mt.16:21) and to others through parables (Mt. 12:40).

Frank Morrison, a British lawyer of the 1930s, undertook an expedition to collect circumstantial evidence to disprove the resurrection. Such evidence, of course, is admissible in all courts of law in civilised countries to prove or disprove events of which there are no living eyewitnesses. When he analysed the evidence, he reached a stunning conclusion: The resurrection had actually taken place! Morrison presented his case in his book, "Who Moved the Stone?"

Another factor worth considering is the character of the disciples. They were eleven cowardly men who shut themselves in a room after the crucifixion because they were afraid. Yet what galvanized them into action so that within their own lifetime, much of the thenknown world could hear the message of Christ? Some of them paid for this message with their lives. Would they have done so if the resurrection were a hoax? ...

Answer 7

The question is difficult. For some reason they see Christianity as being different from other religions. All religions are like this. Muslims think they are somehow different and so do Jews. All are equally unsupported by evidence. I think that it's in human nature not to admit that you were wrong. Also, a lot of the peoples' lives are based entirely on their religion and have been for years. This is a lot of reason not to question what you believe. You might not like the answer you find. It may make you believe that your life up to this point has been a waste. No one wants to feel like that.

Answer 8

Well... Alright, let's suppose that your statement is correct.

"Presumption of atheism"?

What's this?

"Atheism" is a hollow concept. "Agnosticism" is a kind of movement - "atheism" is not.

I am an unbeliever, and I don't really see what kind of presumption "atheism" would have.

And I don't see what kind of presumption unbeleivers would have either.

But I see what presumption agnostics would have, instead.


I sincerely feel that even agnostics cannot understand unbelievers. Maybe it is simply because agnostics are believers themselves.

In my view: only unbelievers can truly understand unbelievers.
Many non-unbelievers claim to understand them though...

Answer 9

I'll freely admit I don't even know what you're talking about. If you would be willing to explain it, however, I'd be glad to learn more. It doesn't mean it would change my mind--atheism is as much a belief as belief in Jesus is. But I believe in respecting other people's right to hold other opinions/ beliefs, even enough to learn about them. Ignorance is not always a sign of unwillingness to learn, or uncomfortableness. Sometimes it's just that it never occurred to anyone to explain it to us.

Answer 10

It's not that we can't handle a lack of proof. There's an over abundance of evidence for the judeo-christian God. It's just not of the nature of evidence you want, empirical. The atheist only claims to see that which is empirically proven, and disavows anything that can't be. Ignoring the fact that if something were not of the physical realm empiricism couldn't even detect, it's like closing your eyes and saying you don't see anything, so nothing must exist. I don't believe Zeus is God not because I don't see any evidence for it, but because of the fact that it's truth claims are undone upon examination. Faith without reason is not Biblical Faith.

Answer 11

What Protestants do no longer comprehend is that the Pope's pointy hat includes religious communication units. they could't confirm how he retains in precise touch with Jesus continuously. it extremely is driving them loopy. Your question brings to a minimum of one's interest the incontrovertible fact that Christianity has one thousand sects, all and sundry claiming to be holier than the others. whilst in fact all and sundry is extra stupid than the others. .