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.
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
Answer by KelleyP77 at 2:50 PM on Mar. 23, 2011
Answer by sahmamax2 at 7:35 PM on Mar. 23, 2011
Answer by Shaneagle777 at 9:08 PM on Mar. 23, 2011
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
Answer by sahmamax2 at 8:09 PM on Mar. 23, 2011
Answer by soyousay at 11:12 PM on Mar. 23, 2011
Answer by LovingSAHMommy at 12:39 AM on Mar. 24, 2011
Answer by LovingSAHMommy at 1:26 AM on Mar. 24, 2011