Atheists/Christians How come we use the same arguements to show proof of our beliefs?

Question

Honestly, this is why I think its a communication issue. We both use the same points, only we use them for our side. Ex. Prove to me that God exists, okay Well prove he doesn't. Which makes more sense God created everything or we evolved from other primates? how can you look at the night sky and think we are not children of god, how can you look at the night sky and think that a god created us?

Answer 1

You are incorrect.

Atheists you logic and facts.

Theists use rhetoric and fallacies.

Answer 2

There was once a belief that man couldn't fly. Although it was widely accepted, the Wright brothers choose not to go along. Instead they held on to the foolish notion that it was possible. Their faith and belief, in something not seen, led them to uncover the truth about flight.

As it stands today, we take the given of what is known, to look beyond what we can explain and see; to reach into that which we cannot. Christians and atheists alike, start at the same point. Both sides construct their arguments from what is known. If you are atheists and refuse to go beyond your own understanding, you limit the expansion of that same ability to understand. That puts a damper on what you insist is logic. For the Christian, Faith is an admission that our understanding is limited. That there are some truths that we just don't know, have not as yet uncovered or explained; is just a given and logical fact.

Being a Christian, I choose to exercise faith and belief. It is the only logical choice if one is to progress to new levels of discovery and understanding. I would also suggest that those who are atheists also open and expand their acceptance of the things that are unknown and unseen. God is the unknown and the unseen. Each and everyday, some new fact is uncovered. With every new piece of information that comes to light, God is revealing more and more of Himself to us. With each revelation we move closer to His existence, and our understanding of Him.

It is not a question of who is right or wrong, but rather a question of what is. We may never know in our lifetime, but that doesn't stop what is from being.

Matt.

Answer 3

Evolution is a theory this is accpeted among many. it is not a regulation. besides the incontrovertible fact that that's a theory that became made by utilising guy and Creationist have self assurance in memories and documentation from others that have been giving. in addition they use technology for discoveries as nicely as evolutionist. I comprehend that that's a theory too. there's a regulation that states that a "device of interacting debris this is left undisturbed by utilising outdoors impacts. by utilising interacting, they'll proportion potential/momentum between themselves and attain a state the place the worldwide information are Unchanging in time." there's a project with evolution from what I see right here by way of fact meaning how became that first particle to alter and evolve without something else interacting? in the time of thermolization "while a molecule absorbs potential, as interior the technique of molecular fluorescence, the existence of the excited state is ~10 raised to -12 sec. Then it rapidly loses potential to the backside point of the backside excited state." So now and back we are De-evolving? to adapt skill to strengthen or 'gain' (key notice) progressively and that may no longer what's happening. And so far as human beings argueing that the bible is 2000 years previous...nicely there are a lot of human beings and historic references we've that are even older than that. What approximately chinese language history? Dates that flow decrease back even further than that. Julius Ceasar, Aristotle, Joan of Arc, and a great variety of Kings we settle for unquestionably lived and that they flow decrease back that far. What? Are we basically gonna %. favorites?

Answer 4

It's not the same argument, because one of the arguments (prove that god doesn't exist) is faulty. The rules of logical reasoning place the burden of evidence on the one making the claim that something exists, not the one who rejects that claim. You can't have proper communication unless both parties are capable of logical and rational discourse. The minute you bring personal beliefs into it, it's no longer an intelligent discussion, it's a waste of time.

Answer 5

The night sky is lovely. And yes yes...so is a baby's smile. But it does nothing to prove the existence of a god.

Answer 6

I do see some of the posts at that level of illogic, but mostly not. And let's be completely forthright. For theists, the argument is not really about the existence of A god or gods, but about the exclusive existence of a god as their mythology imagines god to be as opposed to any other kind. Arguing that there must bee a creator is one level of bald assertion. Arguing that it must be Yahweh of the Hebrews is another. Arguing that we must worship a dead Jewish carpenter who came back to life and ascended to heaven or we will burn in hell should require many more detailed proofs, should it not?

Answer 7

I believe in God. My father was a Pentecostal preacher when my brothers and I were younger but has since retired. There are so many things in this world that happen for them to be coincidence or "just because". Personally, I believe that people who won't even consider a greater being are scared to believe that there is someone greater than them.

Answer 8

We don't use the same arguments.

You sound very ignorant - please show me an atheist who says 'go look at the night sky and tell me a god made that?'

We have better arguments because we use logic and reason - tools beyond the ken of the average theist.

Answer 9

It's human nature to think we are right.
The truth is, both can be "logically" proven. Each makes sense to whoever is trying to persuade others to see from their point of view. It's a matter of which makes more sense to us personally. And until we are at a point where we really do know everything, these debates will continue. Which is as it should be.

Answer 10

It's the excitement of a good 'ol debate
A lot of us are adults, so we just have different views, and debate.
Now the fighting comes from teh debating adults with a sense of humor , trying to joke with a pesomistic religiouse FANATIC


I think people just need to learn to laugh a little more, you'd be suprised by how much LESS fighting happens.

Answer 11

I think it is in part because the theists use the arguments against their god as proof of their god.

We ask how can God exist if there is evil. So they come up with an elaborate story to explain the existence of evil and why god allows it.

We ask why we can't see evidence of God, they say because he lives on Mt. Sinai. We look on Mt. Sinai and they say he lives in the clouds. We fly to the clouds and they say he lives outside of earth in space. We go to space and they say he is outside the solar system.....

That is why.