Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

Who Knows?

When debating with Christians ( since that's mostly what we're doing in here), they will often claim to know that their interpretation of god is right, that he exists, and that their subjective "evidence" and the bible is all they need, to trust their stance.

In truth, liberal Christianity could be right, or Mormonism, or Pantheism, or Scientology, or Orthodox Judaism, Islam, or the belief in Zeus might be resurrected one day in a culture and be considered right. Agnosticism might be the only epistemological stance to take!

Do you notice the black or white thinking of the person who claims to know they're right?

Atheism acknowledges that a deity is not probable, given the lack of evidence for a deity, and also given that much of what the bible claims, has been refuted and found illogical and inaccurate. Atheism does not however, say that it is impossible for a deity to exist.

Christians seem to think that until they're proven wrong, then they are right. Why must we prove something is the case before someone will consider it to be improbable? That's delusional thinking, is it not? In no other area do we demand proof of something before we will consider what the probabilities are for a belief. Probabilities supersede possibilities. So what if one's faith is possible? Then it's possible that there is a monster in your closet at night, too.

If as a Christian, you were instead a Muslim living in a Muslim culture, you would still think in black or white terms, either Islam or atheism is correct. Christianity does not get a seat at the table just because it's the dominant religion in our culture. It must earn the right to be there, and that means it must defeat all other religious contenders by showing them false before being able to claim they are "right."

Note too, in neuroscience,  that feeling of being certain, feeling that we know something, is a mental sensation, rather than evidence of fact. An increasing body of evidence suggests that feelings such as certainty stem from primitive areas of the brain and are independent of active, conscious reflection and reasoning.

If you travel around the world, you will find that religious people all over the globe feel certain about their religious convictions. 

Besides the freedom to think what you want, WHAT gives any religious person the right to claim they know, when they have zero objective evidence to show for their beliefs, and when there are numerous other interpretations of deity's that have an equal amount of possibility, yet an equal lack of probability?

I think the answer is purely psychological and the results of the psychology are illogical/delusional. Please, if you can, provide evidence to the contrary.


Asked by clarity333 at 2:41 PM on Mar. 23, 2011 in Religious Debate

Level 22 (13,098 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (50)
  • I agree. Anyone who says they know for a FACT that there is or is not a God is a delusional liar. I'm an Atheist but if the evidence showed beyond a shadow of a doubt that there was a god, I'd accept it- that doesn't mean I'd worship it though because my heart wouldn't be in it.


    Answer by IhartU at 8:35 AM on Mar. 24, 2011

  • You aren't going to be presented with any evidence, which I'm certain you are aware of. Because there is none. I've had my own personal spiritual experiences that I can not present evidence for nor can I adequately explain. Does it mean it's all in my delusional head? Maybe. Do I really believe that I'm delusional? Not even a little bit.

    I do see where you are coming from in that those who state they "know the truth" really are making unfounded statements. I never would say that I "know" anything regarding spirituality to be truth. I can only believe in what I've experienced and what makes sense to me. I also do consider myself to me agnostic in that, although I hold my beliefs, I know that proof for those beliefs in ultimately unknowable. I also practice a faith that isn't so black and white in its thinking and is more inclusive of all other faiths.

    Answer by KelleyP77 at 2:50 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • Thats what I would call the difference between THE truth, and personal "MY" truth.
    My personal truth is simply that...mine(and let's remember I am an atheist) But I do not declare my truth to be others' truth....nor the absolute truth of the Universe.

    Answer by sahmamax2 at 7:35 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • In truth, liberal Christianity could be right, or Mormonism, or Pantheism, or Scientology, or Orthodox Judaism, Islam, or the belief in Zeus might be resurrected one day in a culture and be considered right. Agnosticism might be the only epistemological stance to take!

    The first two words of your paragraph above is the key. In truth... who's truth? yours?
    Its still you claiming a truth that you believe in but to me it is a lie. Because the truth I believe in is different than yours. I perfer to use the word reality instead. There is only one reality but many "truths"

    Answer by Shaneagle777 at 9:08 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • I'm not pissed. I'm just letting you know that you're being insulting. *shrugs* I do need to ask, how can one being unconsciously lying but also have the intent to deceive? If one is aiming to accomplish something doesn't that indicate a conscious effort?

    Answer by KelleyP77 at 12:42 AM on Mar. 24, 2011

  • You make a good point, OP. Knowing and believing are entirely different things. People can have all the faith in the world, but that is not the same as knowing something to be a fact.


    Answer by jsbenkert at 7:15 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • "When it comes to truth regarding what is objectively natural though, like the laws of physics, do you think a term like "MY" truth can logically apply? "

    Oh no....there is universal truth in something like that. Anyone who says otherwise, I'd say is in a state of denial.

    Answer by sahmamax2 at 8:09 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • Maybe this answer on another one of her/his questions will help you all- this is not about debate or understanding its about this:

    "As I've said in the past, I'll attack religious beliefs all day long, if I so choose"


    Answer by soyousay at 11:12 PM on Mar. 23, 2011

  • Everything I believe has been verified through science. It's stuff you believe too, I'm sure. They're called objective facts. Your belief in a deity is not an objective fact. It's a belief, based on nothing but a book and feelings, and they do not equal evidence."

    Ok...well how has your belief that God does not exist been verified? I never claimed that my belief in a deity was a fact. If you had the entire thread, including my post, you'd see that. You kind of contradict yourself. But hey, you're free to believe what you'd like. :)

    Answer by LovingSAHMommy at 12:39 AM on Mar. 24, 2011

  • Loving, you come into the thread I created, and you complain about my lack of tact, yet you continue to come back for more. Are you a masochist, or do you honestly not belive that I am the things you accuse me of being? I'll link the details to the studies about humans lying unconsciously, but other than that, all the answers to your questions are throughout this thread and in the OP. "

    I'll be sure to read those. I'm not complaining about your lack of tact, I was pointing it out. It doesn't bother me personally. I'm not sure what I've accused you of being, either. I agree, people don't usually know when they're lying to themselves. There are certain people of ALL beliefs that lie to themselves.

    Answer by LovingSAHMommy at 1:26 AM on Mar. 24, 2011