A) That all atheists have a detailed scientific explanation for every event in our daily lives, and throughout human history,
OR
B) That all believers have a detailed biblical explanation for every event in our daily lives, and throughout human history.
2007-08-07 01:38:11 · 14 answers · asked by Deke 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Both are unfair as written.
It's easy to say A is less fair than B, because of what the answerer above me said, combined with the fact that science does not have an explanation for everything as it different hypotheses are constantly being tested and new facts are constantly being learned.
Upon reconsideration, though, one could as easily favor B as less fair simply because "believers" would, on worldwide scale, imply a Christian minority. Even if "believers" were changed to "Christians," one could still argue that B is less fair simply because most Christians have never read the bible throughout and simultaneously understood the archaic language being used (and many who have have subsequently left Christianity if not religion in its entirety).
2007-08-07 01:41:27 · answer #1 · answered by SayDoYouWantToGoSeeAMovie 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I think both are unfair assumptions. I would say most atheists don't know every single scientific explanation and that some may have reasons for events that don't have to be scientific but also aren't theistic. I would say that most Christians can't give a quote for everything that happens in their lives nor explain it away with solely the bible. I don't think either group is that narrow minded. (Buddhist Yogini)
2007-08-07 08:44:21 · answer #2 · answered by Yogini 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think I would use the word "innacurate" instead of unfair. And surprisingly, I would use that term for BOTH A and B.
It is innacurate to assume or conclude that either science OR the Bible explains *everything* about our daily lives and history. For example, science has not produced an iron-clad explanation to support evolution. On the other hand, many believers conclude the Bible's creation account is metaphorical, allowing for the possibility that evolution occured at God's direction.
Science has also failed to explain how order arose out of chaos (i.e. the "big bang" theory) or how life arose out of inanimate substances. Creationists believe this failure bolsters their beliefs; but to an unbeliever, these beliefs are without substantive proof.
2007-08-07 10:16:04 · answer #3 · answered by Suzanne: YPA 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well "A" contains incorrect assumptions for a start..!
How very misleading and dishonest..
Modern mainstrean science does NOT claim to have the answers for everything, but what it can SO FAR describe about the natural world is verifiable, clear, unambigious and compelling..
"B" would be a correct description of the arrogance, ignorance, and bigotry of christianity..
2007-08-07 08:45:45 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Both are obviously unfair assumptions, however, if an individual in either of these groups pretends to have all the answers, then the assumption is not unfair.
(Neither ALL atheists nor ALL Christians make that pretension)
2007-08-07 08:43:51 · answer #5 · answered by Bay 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
A. The scope of science is much more broad than the Bible.
2007-08-07 08:44:46 · answer #6 · answered by Sookie 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't like the options because neither is completely true, both are unfair assumptions.
2007-08-07 08:42:08 · answer #7 · answered by arewethereyet 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
They are both wrong assumptions.
It would be a little hard for anyone to know every thing
2007-08-07 08:44:24 · answer #8 · answered by pestie58 the spider hunter 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
a) Because the whole of scientific knowledge is virtually impossible for one person to know down to the very nitty gritty.
2007-08-07 08:41:19 · answer #9 · answered by John C 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Probably B.
It's really easier to "make things up" then have defined proof.
2007-08-07 08:41:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋