Why can't Atheists open their minds? They may be right but their logic is backwards...?

Question

As an atheist/agnostic please atheist stop using the argument "if god existed there would be evidence." This is useless and can be refuted in any debate by a religious person by making this argument:

If the earth was created as a test by god to judge who was good and who was bad why would he let people know he exists.

If everyone was sure of god than everyone would be good.

The essence of determining whether people are morally good or bad is to give them free will and create doubt on whether they will be accountable for their actions.

Would a theif rob the bank if he knew he were 100% for sure going to hell?


The fact is there will never be evidence (unless a judgment day) god does or does not exist. What evolution and the big bang theory do is prove the likelyhood of a god is highly unrealistic and atheism is warranted. But to say the lack of evidence for gods existance proves he does not exist is a lie.

What??
I am an atheist. I don't believe there is a god. All I am saying is that my reason for believing there is not a god is because he didn't come down and tap me on the shoulder.
My question is not meant to prove or disprove anything. It only shows some of the failures with saying "god does not exist because there is no evidence".

Atheist should openly admit. Yes god could exist but we believe he doesn't for x,y, and z.

This makes a much stronger argument against a religious person.

Answer 1

not all atheists mock the idea of religon. i for one see religon as a philosophy. i'm very aware that i could be wrong about there being no god. keep in mind scientific reasoning is the basis of athesism so the lack of proof could mean a lot for a atheist. also keep in mind that humans are stubborn and hate being wrong.

Answer 2

Agreed. There's no more evidence against God than there is FOR God.

(note, coz this might get confusing: I'm not religious)...

If God (or some sort of god or gods - I'll use the Judeo-Christian "God" for the sake of this) does exit, and is truly all-powerful, then if He didn't want to be found out then He wouldn't be. If He truly is all powerful (according to religion), then He would have the power to evade our realm of knowledge/science. Obviously He created the natural laws and phenomena which we collectively call "science", so He has to power to evade them. He gave us our capacity for knowledge, so he obviously has more, and thus anything we could ever know can't match what he knows. EX: I doubt a moth or an inch worm can understand quantum physics... but that doesn't mean quantum physics doesn't exist.

Likewise, by that logic, who's to say that what we call "science" (which many Atheists use to debunk the existance of God) isn't the way God manifests Himself in our world. Maybe all of this evidence that Atheists use to disprove God are actually God's actions... however, we can't quite understand them on that level.

Remember... science isn't eternal. It changes constantly. 2000 years ago Darwin's theory of evolution didn't exist. Now it's science. Does that mean evolution didn't exist until someone said it did? Disease was once caused by demons... germs? What germs? Just because something isn't yet known doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Likewise, science is based on previous scientific theories, which are often proved wrong by new ones, which means, frankly, our very notion of "science" and that our knowledge is actually right is actually a pretty big leap of faith. Besides, phase 1 of all science is an "outlandish theory" (the first step in the scientific process is to ask a question, then give a hypothesis... you work on the proof later).

Frankly, the Big Bang (which IS just a theory, afterall) doesn't disprove God... Maybe God *caused* the Big Bang... maybe that's the physical act He used to create everything. And prior to any scientific theories about the beginning of the world/universe... then what disproved God? Even the current theories have some missing pieces... so maybe that's evidence FOR God.

Whatever. Point being, there's no logical way to prove God exists and there's no logical way to prove God doesn't exist. Religious people give "proof" which defies science. Scientific people give "proof" which defies religion. Both science and religion started off as the same thing. Frankly, Atheism is as big a leap of faith as Christianity, Hinduism, Judaism, etc... So just believe whatever you want and stop trying to disprove anyone else's beliefs. Simple!

Once again, I'm not religious, not atheist. Closest to a pantheist, but even that is structuring it a bit much for my taste.

Answer 3

The absence of truth is not the truth of absence, is basically what you want to say, and I totally agree.

But as an editorial note:

Every side has its flaws, every side can improve its arguments, and any piece of logic put down on the table can be rebutted.

For example, the evolutionary and Big Bang theories do not prove the likelihood of God's inexistence as being unrealistic --- they merely offer an explanation of how the world has come to be as it is today. Both theories also carry major holes and flaws that could also be used to make atheism seem unrealistic and unwarranted, and a good rebuttal could move to say that evolution or the Big Bang theory are two of many different ways that God could have operated.

There is absolutely no irrefutable evidence that we have today that can prove, without a doubt, either the existence or inexistence of God. Logic used by either sides can go both ways.

Another example: would a thief rob a bank if he were 100% sure that he'd go to jail for it? The answer depends on how sure he is that he'll get caught, and also on how desperate he may be. Even with knowing that smoking causes cancer, people still do it. Even with knowing that nuclear weapons can wipe out all of humanity and completely destroy the planet, people still make them. I'm afraid human nature is just not as simple as you make it out to be.

People will be free to choose as they believe, and life continues to move on. I can only hope that they will not choose something cheap and empty as the basis behind their whole belief system.

Answer 4

I am a believer, and the only thing I will say about my belief is that I agree it is irrational. Not absurd; irrational. Why? Because as I said before, we live in a generation where the prevailing attitude is that if you can't take a bite out of it (whatever it may be-I don't want to know), it doesn't exist. OK, fine. I can accept that. But if someone were to ask me to sit down with them and explain to them why I believe in God, I'd ask them to clear their calendar for a few hours on a certain day agreeable to both of us so that I could present my case. I may not convince them, but I would have at least been given the chance. All the analogies given by most people involve highly improbable comparisons, but the one I always liked was how would you conclusively prove the existence of your love for your mother? No physical examples allowed such as I visit her, I hug her, I buy her gifts, etc, etc. Anyone would be over a barrel with this one. How would you do it? Are we supposed to believe you just because you say so? And don't bring up any letters or books in which you claim that you do, because after all- you're "just a man/woman". How would this do it? See what I mean? That's why I say I agree my faith and belief in God is irrational. But it is real.

Answer 5

Let's put it this way: there is no more evidence for the existence of a god than for the existence of goblins.

Either could exist; but with no evidence whatsoever, it's extremely unlikely.

And the existence of a specific god can be refuted. Even if there is a god, what makes you think it's the kind that has a heaven and hell?

Of course, the judeo-christian god didn't have a problem allegedly proving his existence to hundreds of people - what made him change his strategy?

Answer 6

"If the earth was created as a test by god to judge who was good and who was bad why would he let people know he exists."

Ok, let's say this scenario is true and remember god gave people free will.

1) Why is believing in a god necessarily good? If a serial killer believed in god, then by those standards he's good.
2) Why would god punish those that never knew anything other than their own religion (the supposed "wrong" religion)? Why would god reward those that never knew anything other than their own religion(the supposed "correct" religion)?
3) Why would god punish those who made their own decision that there was no god, not out of ill will towards a supreme being, but by using the logic god provided humans with?

Answer 7

You're so not getting it. We say "prove there's a god" because the theists say "prove evolution". We just put their own question back at them. However...

"But to say the lack of evidence for gods existance proves he does not exist is a lie." is preposterous. It's not a lie. It does mean that as there is no proof, there is no reason to believe what is essentially an outlandish story.

Answer 8

To say that atheists like Thomas Jefferson, Susan B Anthony, Mark Twain and Thomas Edison Don't have open minds is silly.
If you want fortified arguments for atheism and against God go read The God Delusion.

And there is no such thing as an "atheist/agnostic" you either don't believe or you don't KNOW if you believe.

Answer 9

I think you yourself are using "backwards logic" in this question. It seems like this is just a manner of twisting Pascal's Wager in that you're asking why people don't just assume God exists in an effort to scare themselves into behaving morally.

It is impossible to prove a negative. So while it cannot be proven with 100% certainly that God does not exist, there is a marked is a lack of evidence in favor of God existing as well as a wealth of evidence indicating God does not exist. As such, it's illogical to live one's life as if there is a God.

Your statement also seems to be operating on the assumption that there is only one God and one can choose to believe or not believe in him, period. There are many, many religions and many different denominations of these religions which all basically preach that one will suffer for all eternity if he or she believes anything else. They can't all be right.

I strongly disagree with your idea that everyone would be good if they were sure of God. There's plenty of people who are sure of God now, and they do horrible things like commit suicide bombings, murder doctors who perform abortions and circumsize women against their will. Your argument is only valid if people are all believing in one very specific God with no room for stepping out of line according to his rules. I don't think I'd want to live in a world like that.

Answer 10

Your argument could be used to basically justify a Universe where we are all a part of your imagination. A universe created by many gods. This argument could be used to justify any god there is: Allah, Poseidon, etc. And so on... Instead we embrace the most realistic point of view given our information. See, unlike Christians, we don't have faith in our position. We are willing to change our minds to evidence.