Is atheism just as foolish and blind as christianity (more detailed)?

Question

So I just asked this question without adding my own details and got a bunch of half-*** answers. So Christians believe there is a god, atheists do not. I think it is just as rediculous for somebody to claim there is no god as it is to claim there is a god. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EITHER WAY. Sure there is a gigantic amount of improbability working against believers, but how can anybody claim there is no god. It doesn't make sense. In The God Delusion, Dawkins explains this by using varying degrees of belief (google it.) If I remember correctly, Dawkins would tend to agree with me. As a raional, scientific person (like most atheists claim to be) how can you claim something without evidence? You do know there is no evidence to suggest there isn't a god, right? Just as there's no evidence to support the existence of a god. It makes about as much sense as a Muslim and Christian trying to proove their way is the right way, the true way.

Answer 1

I think your logic is flawed. You can't lump all atheists together, just as you can't lump all Christians together. In Christianity there are some massive differences in belief system ranging for the hard core crazy fundamentalist who thinks the Earth is about 6,000 years old, right up to the liberal Christian who doesn't even go to church.

By the same token I believe there are a lot of different kinds of atheist. There are hard core religion hating active atheists. There are those who simply don't care.

But back to my opening statement where I said your logic is flawed. You stated, "I think it is just as rediculous [sic] for somebody to claim there is no god as it is to claim there is a god. THERE IS NO EVIDENCE EITHER WAY."

The issue here is that one never has to prove a negative. If I tell you that I can levitate for real like Criss Angel does, you would probably ask me to prove it. If I gave the response, "Prove that I can't." You would probably think I was a moron. And rightly so.

When someone makes a bold and absurd claim of the supernatural, the onus is not on the non-believers to prove that the assertion is wrong. The onus is on the claimer to prove they are right.

Christians make certain assertions about a perfect immortal being who is all knowing, all powerful, but also happens to be hidden and invisible. When asked about proof, they talk about miracles and things they can't explain another way, yet can't explain why God won't heal amputees.

So the essential difference that you appear to be confused over is the answer to your question, "how can you claim something without evidence?"

See, I am not making any claims as an atheist. Most atheists don't. All I am saying is that I hear what people are claiming about the Christian God, and it sounds like a children's fairy tale. Beyond that I don't much care. I don't want the Christian delusion rammed down my throat, or laws made to impose Christian 'values' on me.

It is not my duty as an atheist to disprove Christian doctrine. If they have any real evidence to support their claims, I'll be happy to look at it. Until that time I disbelieve what they say, since I am a rational logical person.

Answer 2

I agree, at least it is true for some atheists. Atheists claim to be logical and intelligent however the answes they give here show anything but logic and intelligence. They will state with complete conviction that there is no God and dismiss all belief as fairytales, yet the only argument they can come up with is 'I can't see God therefore there is no God.' If they knew half as much about science as they like to think they do then they would know that much of what we know supports the existence of a God.

Answer 3

First of all, there are certain definitions of god which are self-contradictive and/or incompatible with physical reality. As a scientific and analytical thinker, I can reject the existence of such a god 100%.

For the rest, I cannot say 100% that such a god might exist or not, but I can estimate probabilities, and I personally think that the probability of a god is infinitely small, therefore I feel that I have the full right to call myself an atheist.

Answer 4

We can spend all day arguing the same thing about Zeus and Odin, but you aren't going to sit here calling me blind and foolish because I don't believe in odin, right?

Restating my previous answer. I DO NOT KNOW 100% for certain that god(s) do not exist. There is no evidence that god(s) exist, let alone any specific god(s). The only logical choice is to dismiss such notions until new evidence is presented.

I have no proof either way. I have no proof of the Flying Spagetti Monster either way. Lack of proof seems to be a good reason to not believe in something silly.

Answer 5

"As a raional, scientific person (like most atheists claim to be) how can you claim something without evidence?"

A hypothesis is claiming something without evidence, that's a basic part of science. You make a claim, then you do experiments and research to test that.

I consider myself an apathetic atheist. I don't think there is a god, and I don't care if there is, and that's as far as my belief on god goes.

Answer 6

You equate Christianity with "there is a god"That is the flaw in your reasoning. There is a god,can mean deism,of which NO ONE can present an argument against. Christianity doesn't simply proclaim "there is a god" They proclaim so much more. A heaven,a hell, a judgment,suspension of physical laws,belief in an afterlife,talking snakes/donkeys. People so dead they stank coming back to life. Do not equate Christianity with deism. With deism,there is no difference really. Christianity IS NOT deism,and the evidence IS NOT equal. You may have been correct with "belief in a god" but when you threw Christianity in there,you blew it

Answer 7

Atheism, defined as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism.
So it's OR OR.
And there are is a lot of (scientific) evidence that Christianity is a mix of so many religions that you can't be sure what it really is.
But there is also a psychological reason for religion, such as a the fear of death.

Answer 8

There's no evidence to support the non-existance on Santa either, yet people know he's not real. It's generally the lack of evidence FOR the existance of god that is convincing to me.

However, I concede I do not know with 100% certainty that there is no god, so I generally refer to myself as an atheistic agnostic.

Answer 9

Blind atheism? Making up words does no longer make you seem clever. extremely while it extremely is mindless. people who have not got self belief in different human beings's deities have concept this out and understand precisely why they have not got self belief it to be actual. that's the precise opposite of believing something blindly. If somebody says "it is actual, have self belief it!" and you're saying "ok!" then you extremely are blind. yet an atheist, and a clever theist, needs to weight this suggestion first, of their very own opinion and judgment and choose in basic terms why they could purchase this or no longer, they do no longer take it in basic terms because of fact somebody informed them to.

Answer 10

Atheists are very wise ones,They believe in themselves and in their own abilities.They do things in conformity to nature.Such people are very practical. but what has been revealed in religious book is provened by science which can be an evidence to be adduced the existence of God