Is this the main argument between atheists and Christians?
2007-08-30 06:57:35 · 23 answers · asked by JWill 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
pretty much ... atheists limit themselves to the physical ...
2007-08-30 07:01:40 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋
Well i dont know if its the main argument but i know its something that comes up alot. But i honestly think the advantage that christians have over atheists is that they have already experienced both point of views lol. In that they have seen a need or reasons to believe and after believing they only saw more..... lol
2007-08-30 14:07:00 · answer #2 · answered by Spirited 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Atheists clearly believe that seeing is believing But Christians interestingly enough don't actually believe that believing is seeing. Christians restrict the validity of the idea that believing is seeing to their god only.
If a person believes in their god then he is fine and mentally all there.
If that same person believes in Zeus orThor then he is not fine and may not mentally be all there
What drives atheists crazy is the question of how does one determine why one fantasy creature is valid and the other isn't ?
Just because a lot of people believe something to be true doen't make it so.
2007-08-30 14:32:47 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Atheist must have this one wrong, because I'm typing this answer on a computer that no one else can see, and I have never purchased a computer.
I don't know how the damn thing got here, but I'm having a good ole time playing with it.
Only problem I've had is the key for letter 'G' always comes out capitalized.----but it's O.K. because I'm the only one who can see it.
However, I wish the computer would allow me to go to other sites besides R&S all the time.---But I can't trade it in, since nobody else can see it.
2007-08-30 14:22:08 · answer #4 · answered by nand 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What the phrase "believing is seeing" is saying is that what we believe interprets how we see things. It seems to me that this is true not just of religious people, but of everybody. Two different people may see the same thing, but interpret it in different ways, depending on their cultural, religious, political and ideological presuppositions.
The real problem is people who believe that "seeing is believing" and think that how they see things is the correct, or only way, failing to see their own cultural bias and the importance of context. I see evidence of Christians and atheists who make this mistake.
2007-08-30 14:15:25 · answer #5 · answered by apollonius 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I understand perfectly what faith means; that you assume I don't merely because I do not believe as you is merely hubris on your part.
I can have faith that my electric bill will get paid, or I can write out a check to the electric company. Care to take a bet on which action will keep the lights on?
I knew a man who was sent to Death Row; he was innocent of his crime (and a court later agreed and overturned the decision). He was a God-fearing man before, went to church, tithed regularly, etc. Then he had to spend eight years on death row for a crime he didn't commit, had nothing to do with.
He managed to keep his faith; I guess "hooray for him" but what kind of God would do that to one of his children, eh? Oh, I know "God works in mysterious ways." Yeah, right. It wasn't faith that got him out but a dedicated family who finally got in touch with the right people. His name is Clarence Lee Bradley, in Texas. Look it up.
And let's not forget the 6million people massacred in the 40's. Yeah, I guess God was really asleep at the wheel there.
Starvation, child abuse, murders, etc, etc. Goes on every day no matter what. God?
1. If there is a God, he's either an absentee landlord or he's really mean
2. There is no God.
Take your pick. Or don't as your faith wills you. I choose to leave in the real world instead of one that believes in some mythical big-daddy figure in the Heavens who cares for us yet smites us at the same time. That's not a God that deserves my faith.
2007-08-30 14:07:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not to my way of thinking. I don't know of any kind of certainty and are not convinced that humans are even able to secure any. Even things that can be seen are open to interpretation. However, in day to day life, I accept that certain things have so high a probability of being correct as to safely assume that they are and to call them facts to facilitate useful communication. I don't buy absolutism because I don't have faith that a person can know the unknowable. I think both of the statements you posit can be considered religious frankly and are not adversarial.
2007-08-30 14:23:36 · answer #7 · answered by zero 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's seems to be the crux of the argument, and the difference is this:
Seeing is believing = A rational thought process
Believing is seeing = A delusional thought process
2007-08-30 14:02:36 · answer #8 · answered by Subconsciousless 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Could be Im not sure. Some people do say how can you believe something you can't see while others believe in things (like God) they can't see but they have faith.
2007-08-30 14:03:00 · answer #9 · answered by Sarah 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pretty much,Christians limit themselves to an unprovable concept that has absolutely no basis in reality and totally ignore the physical..
2007-08-30 14:05:42 · answer #10 · answered by Shawn B 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
christians have never seen god... They believe in something they think is real... Atheists do not believe in something they cannot conceive an idea of.
But I never understood why they argue over something they know they cannot change, it's useless and immature
2007-08-30 14:01:42 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋