Once again, somebody posted something in our Facebook page that I just had to address. Darn it, am I making a habit of this?
Here’s the post:
the Religious keep trying to convince me there is a god
the Atheist keep trying to convince me there is no god
i see both sides presenting their opinions as FACTS
i dont see any difference between these factions ~_~
Basically, he’s saying that atheism and theism are equally viable, thus he has a hard time discerning which one to believe. Well let me point out where he went wrong.
Firstly, he says that “the Atheist keeps trying to convince me there is no god”. REALLY? Which atheist is specifically trying to convince you that “there is no god”? In fact, has anyone ever encountered an atheist on the street preaching “No god!”, or knocking on your door and saying “Have you heard the good news? There is no god!”. The vast majority of atheists hardly ever talk about religion. It’s just not that important to us. The only time we start talking about religion is when it tries to impose it’s own narrow worldviews upon everyone else. Otherwise, we are perfectly happy to leave theists alone.
Besides, the great majority of atheists are “weak” or “passive” atheists, meaning we are not 100% certain that there is no god, but choose to live our lives as if there is none. We are willing to believe in your god, as long as you can provide us with solid proof. Even the so called “militant” atheists like Dawkins, Dennet, Hitchens, and Harris allow for the tiny possibility that there might be a god. “Strong” atheists (those who assert 100% that there is no god) are few and far in between. And even these people won’t just suddenly approach you on the street to tell you there is no god.
Now, compare and contrast that to theists, who feel the need to proselytize and spread their religion, whether other people want it or not. These people are absolutely certain that their god, and ONLY their god, exists. Which brings us to the next point of contention: FACTS.
He says that “both sides present their opinions as facts”. I’m sorry but when we point out that the bible says that the Earth is flat, that the Sun goes around the Earth, that Pi=3, that the bat is a bird, that the mustard seed is the smallest seed there is, and that rain is caused by God opening the floodgates of heaven, buddy that is not opinion. That is FACT, and you can read it for yourself in the Bible.
When we point out that the Theory of Evolution is supported by multiple lines of evidence from across diverse fields of science, that is FACT, not an opinion. Again, you can check out countless scientific papers ,and do your own experiments if you wish to do so, for that is the beauty of science.
Again, compare and contrast that to the theists, who claim inerrancy of their holy scriptures, on the basis that “Because God said so”. Now that, my friend, is OPINION. And when your religion has no evidence to support it other than… drum roll… PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, that, my friend, is the epitome of OPINION.
Besides, it’s not like facts and evidence are held in high regard by the devout theists. How many times have we heard them declare that “even if their god were proven to be false, they’ll still have faith in their religion.”. Facts and evidence just doesn’t matter. For many of them, it’s all about FAITH.
Now if after this, you still can’t tell the difference between someone arriving at atheism because of skepticism and science, and someone arriving at theism because of personal experience, then there’s really not much else I can tell you.
And frankly, I don’t really care much which way you want to go. It’s your life, and it’s your decision. I wouldn’t presume to tell you how to live your life. And in my opinion (hehe) the world would be a much better place if everyone just let other people live their lives, and not try to control or dictate how others should live, so long as they do no harm.
No one can prove God's existence neither can anyone prove he is non existent.
I am a theist agnostic. I don't shove to anybody's throat what I believe in.
I simply speak out when it is the discussion. Theistic agnosticism is more on the side of that there is a possibility that there is a god. But leaves out also the possibility that there is no god.
Or there maybe something else. Unless proven, no one really knows.
But on the matter of God's existence, I believe no one can really know.
Just because you can't explain something doesn't mean it is not true or real.
It simply means the lack of capability to reason.
I don't know anyone who has got better reasoning in explaining God's existence. Do you?
I can't explain God to anyone. I can't even explain it to myself.
So I would rather not comment on it. But if hoping is ignorance, what a sad sad reality it is.
Well said.
"We can be as honest as we are ignorant. If we are, when asked what is beyond the horizon of the known, we must say that we do not know."
– Ingersol
Thank you. 😉
That is a very nice quotation.
Because, really, no one knows everything how ever good your reasoning is.
There will always come to a point where you will have a dead end in trying to explain something you do not really understand in the first place. Just like what the author said, there will always be boundaries in reality.
"Besides, the great majority of atheists are “weak” or “passive” atheists, meaning we are not 100% certain that there is no god, but choose to live our lives as if there is none…. “Strong” atheists (those who assert 100% that there is no god) are few and far in between…"
— look around you…one doesn't need to do an academic research to find out that the so called Strong Atheists" represents the attitude of the majority.
Can you handle the Truth ?
Introduction;
Around the year 1600, or when science and scientists; proved clearly that there is no (gods) everybody relaxed because an issue was resolved and people had learned to take care of themselves .
In the twentieth century , however , some “entities” thought differently ; they “re- introduce” the idea of the (god) in evil or mysterious way this time ; using same science and engineering technology , those entities spied on everybody and knew every details about everybody , surprising people; nations fell victims for such entities , this partial abilities on spying gave them the power to control the minds of so many people all over the world . An advantage from this is blaming every evil accidents on the (God) so people can accept without questioning those criminals , at the same time ; distributing wealth (as gifts from the gods) among crime syndicates and their net members also without people questioning them .
Now; logical and reasonable conclusion;
all those who are (net members (and /or ) those people with knowledge ) but also still have religion are either ; morons (brain damaged, idiots , stupid) , corrupts , criminals , or simply ; overpowered , it is very obvious and very clear that (modern spying equipments had been invented) and was useful to those nets pretending to be what people have imagined to be the perfect “caretakers” ; the (Gods); but those (gods) are (partially ; gods ), since they do not have the ability yet to read minds.
Decision;
Atheists, scientific, free thinkers , human rights organizations and or any other similar organizations should take over and enforced , partially or completely, start to inform the public to these facts ; a)spying equipment had been invented and can know the details about each and every one but they can not read minds ,those equipments are used by nets operating secretly to threat, blackmail ,murder ,embezzle and control , instead of using these equipments ; for example ;to prevent crimes and harms they are used by these nets to commit crimes and harms ,these equipments are not yet made public , b) such equipments, however ;while very effective on spying on armies, those equipments are not effective at all in spying on civilians (causing only miserable unhappy over restricted over controlled way of living), this is because armies have specific plans and orders, they move in groups and very much predictable , while civilians are more individual in character ,independents and change minds often ,so ;those spying agencies are forcing the civilians to behave like soldiers ,they force them to make groups , they force them to make organizations ,they restrict their movements to control them in a similar way that they control the armies .It is obvious that such process had been programmed and this is the reason why those nets require similar behaviors, activities and style of living from all members worldwide, wealth distribution, for example; is based on those programs. c) Members of these secret organizations are mostly; ignorant, those who do not want to think, those who can not think, corrupts, schools drops , people with no morals , thieves , gangsters ,etc. d) These organizations and agencies ,after years and years of working secretly in the world, those agencies have created new species of humans ; species who are twisted minded , brain damaged ,morons ,idiots, criminal minded, humans with no morals, such humans should be taught again the safety measures, measures such as causing accidents deliberately is a crime even if it was done intelligently .
The example drawing of the two sides of the coin is completely wrong , better example is two circles seen from top view , one is much lower than the other and they seems to form partial conjunction, the viewer think they have something in common but they don't , if you look at them from different view then you may realize the difference better.
People get confused when atheism demands morals in the society , although atheism morality is much stronger , more effective , more accurate since it doesn't discriminate have more common sense because it is based on science and society demands
I was trying to depict Janus, the two-faced god of Roman mythology.
And since when did atheism "demand" anything? Atheism is nothing but a declaration of unbelief. It has no dogma, no doctrine and no rulebook that says we need to demand something.
Another problem is when a majority believes in something to be true, others automatically see it as a fact.
“”i see both sides presenting their opinions as FACTS “”
Well many people don’t know the meaning of facts and evidence – and not the meaning of faith (believe despite total lack of any evidence and often contra to any evidence).
And the whole misconception seems to start even with the term atheist e.g. absence in the believe of any deity in the wider sense, and narrower the absence of any evidence for (and often tons of counter facts) for the existence a daily in human affairs interfering very specific deity (for example the Judean fertility god YHWH, ‘the Lord’ one of the 70 sons of the most high godfather Elyon).
To rephrase the often mentioned “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence of god” into “The absence of believe/faith in a god is not the believe/faith of gods absence “….