English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Aren't they just as dogmatic as those who profess to KNOW a God exists?

2007-07-22 05:36:20 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

Aren't they just as dogmatic as those who profess to KNOW a God exists?
And doesn't the burden of proof exist for both those who profess that something exists - AND for those who profess to KNOW that something doesn't exist?

2007-07-22 05:42:37 · update #1

I'm not the one stating that pink elephants don't exist - or God - for that matter. If I were, then I would expect to have to prove that they don't exist. It's clear I don't know - so I don't state emphatically they don't exist.

2007-07-22 07:09:48 · update #2

27 answers

Well what you don't realize about Atheists is this. We feel Based on the evidence provided we do not believe in any GOD. That means Zeus, Ra,Allah Buddha, Yahweh ect. do not exist because there is not one single shred of proof to prove it. We have our own answers for things that we continue to study. We aren't acting self righteous about it. And it's not like we aren't searching for things. But none of the Gods presented currently on earth Exist....Why because they cannot be proven. And faith is not evidence.

2007-07-22 05:38:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

There's more proof against it than there is for it. I don't profess to know whether he does or doesn't exist, because nobody truly knows, but I'm not so credulous to think that just because the Bible was supposedly written by God, he's automatically a realistic being.

Here are some other things which I can't disprove:
- Thor
- Poseidon
- The Invisible Flying Pink Unicorn
- Russel's Celestial Teapot
- Santa Claus
- My being abducted by aliens every night while I sleep
- etc.

Even though they can't be disproved, it is reasonable not to believe in these things because there is no evidence for them, other than fairy tales.

2007-07-22 05:41:29 · answer #2 · answered by Alley S. 6 · 4 0

It's not dogmatic to believe that the God of the Bible is imaginary, with the same margin of doubt as that the centre of the moon is made of cheese.
Just like Christians, and even more so, there is no such thing as a typical atheist.
I think everone here knows about the difficulty of proving a negative.
Can you prove that God isn't a liar, for instance.

2007-07-22 05:46:09 · answer #3 · answered by hog b 6 · 1 0

It's easy when there is no evidence to suggest god does exist. It's like trying to prove unicorns don't exist. They are not dogmatic because that word means indoctrinated or following prior opinions, so dogmatic better describes religious people, not atheists who are open to change.

2007-07-22 05:41:46 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Well, to start with, atheists DO NOT proclaim that there absolutely no god. Atheism is defined as the ABSENSE of a belief in god. Atheists simply find that the so-called 'evidence' that purports to support the idea that magical, all-powerful, invisible sky-fairies (gods) actually exist is not compelling, and is therefore insufficient to initiate and/or sustain a mental state of 'belief'... for EXACTLY the same reasons that you do not believe in Thor, Garden Gnomes, Bridge Trolls, monsters under your bed or an invisible herd of pink unicorns that cavort in your back yard under the light of the full moon, atheists do not believe in god.

*** "I contend that we are both atheists.  I just believe in one fewer god than you do.  When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." ~ Stephen Roberts ***

In other words, atheists just think that all religious belief is droolingly stupid... and that people who HAVE religious beliefs are foolish and gullible.

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." ~ Christopher Hitchens, Journalist

"Atheism can be considered to be a 'belief', or a 'religion', only in the same sense that one might regard NOT collecting stamps to be a 'hobby'." ~ Unknown

2007-07-22 05:42:28 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Why do you want to prove a negative? We are all different. Can we all live a peaceful life without questioning why some people do or do not believe in some things? For me, I just mind my own business. I believe in God. Have I seen God? No, I haven't. But I do believe that God exists. Have you ever seen the air that you breathe in? How do you know that it is air and not something else? I am not going to preach to other people with different religions and tell them my religion is better. All of us have our own right to choose what we want to believe in.

2007-07-22 05:48:19 · answer #6 · answered by Caitlyn 4 · 0 0

I know there is no god, without any doubt. The burden of proof lies with the person making the most outlandish claim that, despite no physical or historical evidence, there is indeed a god of any kind. It is not a matter of being dogmatic, it is simply a matter of accepting reality.

2007-07-22 05:42:33 · answer #7 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 2 0

Proof in such a case is not possible. Nor is it necessary.

How convinced are you that Zeus, Santa and the Tooth Fairy don't exist? There is no more or less poof of these, but we manage to have a strong opinion based on circumstantial evidence.

And the circumstantial evidence that there is no god is overwhelming. Coupled with the fact that no solid evidence FOR it exists.

CD

2007-07-22 05:42:28 · answer #8 · answered by Super Atheist 7 · 2 0

I know of no Atheists who would ever attempt, or even care to prove that there is no god. Most Atheists are quite inrelligent, and know that non-existance is un-proveable.
On the other hand, existance is proveable. However the existance of a god has never been, or can be proven.

2007-07-22 05:43:31 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

the responsibility of proving god exists is with those making the claim. If I tell you there are little green men living in the center of the earth you have every right not to believe unless I can prove it. And, you'd be well within your rights to be angry and resistant if I then said everyone who doesn't believe me goes to jail - you would be horrified - would you not? And what if I told you there would be no proof given and you must accept what I'm telling you on faith only - would you be willing to do that - I think not.

2007-07-22 05:43:06 · answer #10 · answered by Jack 5 · 3 0

fedest.com, questions and answers