Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicholas
Why do Atheists have to disprove your beliefs and thoughts?
There is no evidence of a god, and therefore if you want to make up a god in your mind then fine, who cares. However once people start acting like it's a fact, then you have to prove it. I don't have to disprove YOUR imaginary friend, that would be ridiculous. If I ran around telling everyone I could fly, and when questioned answered "Well you can't prove I can't" everyone would laugh at the ridiculousness of it. When it comes to religion people act like this is a good argument, it's not it's ridiculous. It's your theory therefore it's your responsibility to prove it, not anyone else's to disprove it.
Secondly, just because something hasn't been proven to not exist does not mean that it does. If I say that the Hulk from the Marvel characters does exist, then as there is no evidence to suggest he doesn't does not prove that he does.
There is not a scrap of evidence that there is a god, none whatsoever. There is a staggering amount of evidence for evolution amongst other things that contradict lots of your beliefs. Why would you expect me to take the view of the people who provide no evidence?
AND evolution does not state we come from monkeys, it states we have a common ancestor with apes. If you thought that evolution stated we come from monkeys then perhaps you should reflect upon your knowledge on evolution and do some reading and then make your mind up on the theory. Many of you won't do that, you worry that it's blasphemy or just want to avoid something that might shatter your beliefs. Well as an Atheist I can read anything, holy scriptures or science and anything in between, when we draw our conclusions I can see the full picture whilst you subject yourself to only one small portion.
EDIT:
Those last two paragraphs aren't so much in reply to Noble, I realise he didn't state we evolved from monkeys etc.
|
I agree that there isn't a single shred of evidence to prove the existence of a god as defined by most religions. Keep in mind that I'm not saying there is a god or coming from a theist's perspective. I am not saying that someone who says "I haven't seen any evidence or proof of god" or "I don't believe or accept the so-called proofs of god as evidence" has the burden of proof. I am saying someone who says conclusively that "THERE IS NO GOD"
does have the burden of proving that claim because it is an absolute statement on reality.
It is perfectly sane and reasonable to doubt something when you have been presented no credible evidence of its existence.
If you told me there's a million dollars worth of gold under your bed and you present me with no evidence, I, not having made any declarations but merely doubting due to your lack of proof am under no burden of proving anything. However, if I said "there ISN'T a million dollars worth of gold under your bed," that statement warrants proving. And for me to say there isn't a million dollars worth of gold solely because of your lack of proof to the contrary could be foolish. Unless I've went and searched underneath your bed myself or otherwise collected information that positively disproves the existence of the million dollars worth of gold, I am within my rights to doubt but I am not in a (tenable) position to say there absolutely isn't a million dollars in gold.
Lastly, I agree with you about people acting like their religion is fact. Religion, especially without clear conclusive evidence, is belief, not fact. However, I feel the same way about certain forms of atheism. I see it as a belief that there is no god, which without any proof or evidence, isn't any more factual than the religions they speak against.
Threaded Mode