Whose Faith is Blind - Theists or Atheists?

[LuisDantas]

The question asked in the thread title is Whose faith is blind. It is not a completely proper question, because it assumes an agreed-upon definition of faith and that there are some sorts of typical varieties for both theists and atheists. Both are IMO dangerous assumptions.

Leaving that aside for a moment:

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.

That might well be a good reason to respect others' faith (and it often is). But I thought we were talking about blind faith?

Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.

I'm not sure what you mean here. In which way do religious texts point to God?

General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.

Uh, sorry, I don't. I guess I would be a theist if I did.

I don't mind people believing in God. It is perfectly fine to be inspired by the idea of God, and to believe in His existence. But it is not a trait that I have.

Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.

I must disagree. Miracles are hardly evidence of God, even if they happened to be proven occurrences. They are, far as I know, simply unexplained occurrences that some people believe to be evidence of a supernatural will. By their very nature they are rare, elusive and inconclusive.

Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

Many people do. Many others simply don't.

It is not that much different from being left-handed or blond-haired: it happens naturally even if it might be surprising for some.

Atheists see all of the same things

Not all, as noted above.

yet they choose not to believe

Actually, it is only a sizeable subset (apparently a minority) of atheists that choose not to believe.

Many or most seem to be "born that way", and a few in fact fight their own atheism for years before finally accepting their own (lack of) beliefs.

which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

We will be happy to provide you with evidence for our lack of faith, ranging from personal stories to the very existence of, shall we say, "counter-miracles" such as diseases like anaencephaly and progeria.

 

[BucephalusBB]

The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.
Yep and as many of those testimonies contradict or make no sense and nobody can back them up, it would be madness to follow those opinions. What? make an avarage out of everything and follow that?
And hold on, does that mean that the avarage opinion is suddenly equal to the truth?

Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.
In the mean while there are many books talking about the non-existance of God. Does that mean that over 1000 years those books must turn people into atheists because they point away from God?
Or should we follow them even though they are so obviously written by a humans mind?

General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.
Now you are using something we created to explain that which we did not/can not create. I really dislike using the "Who created god?" just to show them that everybody can think of at least 1 thing that does not need to be created. But, there you have it!..
You recognise the things in that painting and therefor you want to give it a creator. If it were just a spot on a white sheet you wouldn't think there was a creator, but a bucket of paint fell on it. That's what we are, a white sheet with some paint on it.

Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.
If 9 members of RF would sit around the table and I would whisper a sentence in the ear of the person next to me and he would then whisper what he heard to the person next to him... by the time the sentence gets back to me, I am pretty sure it was not the same sentence I gave.
Now try a million of people with loads of time to change this sentence..

Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.
I don't even want to worship myself, why would I want to worship a concept?

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.
This thread will be stuffed with people telling you that you got it all wrong.
So this is your time to evaluate your first point

 

[Man of Faith]

Frankly, MOF that is a cop out. And I think you well KNOW it. You are most vociferous in pushing your belief in a specific god and you have openly rejected ANY other god but yours.

But now that your position is uncomfortable you wish to hide under the blanket of theism. The same blanket you were willing to burn in defense of YOUR god.

However stooping to your level lets arguendo accept that you make no such distinction and that you really are questioning the atheist position.

I'm sure it can be clearly seen that I am not pushing Christianity in this post. I refer to "other religious texts", "other religious leaders", general spiritual cravings, the earth which is neutral to religion, and testimony of others which would include others of all religions that are theists. There is a distinction between different religions and I have my reasons for accepting Christianity, but this post is referring to theists in general. Some people believe that all religions point to the same God so this shouldn’t be such a far out idea.

Even given that your argument fails because atheism is simply the lack of belief in god(s). Nothing more. And that position is based on the lack of verifiable, testable, empirical falsifiable EVIDENCE for them.
When you have such evidence present it. Pointing to all the actions of individuals based on THEIR personal experience is NOT evidence of anything. Except that they report having had such experiences.

What you are trying to do is show that the lack of evidence for God is scientific, which it cannot be because science is neutral on God. And I disagree that personal experiences is not evidence of anything. Humans operate on personal experiences. If you get mugged in the park, you tend to not go there anymore under the same circumstances. Also atheists have said repeatedly that if they got a personal experience from God they would believe.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm sure it can be clearly seen that I am not pushing Christianity in this post.

I agree. Instead, you're glossing over the important differences between religions to falsely portray them as some sort of single position. They're not.

What you are trying to do is show that the lack of evidence for God is scientific, which it cannot be because science is neutral on God.

Yes and no. Science might be neutral about some contrived god who is careful not to leave any testable traces, but such a god also has the problem that there would be no way for any human being to actually know about him.

When it comes to the gods that people actually believe in, most of them have characteristics that imply testable, physical signs.

And I disagree that personal experiences is not evidence of anything. Humans operate on personal experiences. If you get mugged in the park, you tend to not go there anymore under the same circumstances. Also atheists have said repeatedly that if they got a personal experience from God they would believe.

Personal experiences are also subject to significant error. I can't count how many times I've been given eyewitness reports of horrible speeding on a street (everyone goes double the speed limit!) only to look at the data and find that there's no problem at all.

And when it comes to religious experiences, there's another problem: it's a two-step process. There's the experience itself ("I saw/heard/felt _____"), and then there's the attribution of the experience ("_____ was God/from God"). Not only do you have to justify that you really did see/feel/hear what you think you did, you have to justify that you attributed it correctly.

Edit - however, here's one example of a personal religious experience. There's even video: http://www.milkmiracle.com/

Do you accept it as given? Is this actually a sign of Ganesh?

 

[Reverend Rick]

I'm not telling anybody what to believe, I am pointing out evidence that needs to be ignored or not accepted in order to not believe in God to show theist faith is not blind. I guess you can consider this a theist apologetics post.

No you misunderstood me completely. I considered it an Atheist proselytizing objection post actually.

 

[Willamena]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.
Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.
General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.
Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.
Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

Putting faith in the words of others is more blind than trusting your own perceptions.

 

[Man of Faith]

No you misunderstood me completely. I considered it an Atheist proselytizing objection post actually.

Stating ones beliefs or position is not considered proselytizing.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Stating ones beliefs or position is not considered proselytizing.

It is when you state it as fact.

 

[gnomon]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.
Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.
General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.
Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.
Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

And what makes these particular concepts any more valid for you particular view of God any different than say those native tribes of America and their views of gods.

Which has more validity? The fact that one culture was able to nearly obliterate another?

Or what of the myriad other versions of gods out there? They are not the same. They are not all compatible.

I don't think you even know what the word faith even means.

 

[waitasec]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.

in other words being indoctrinated

Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.

isn't that blind faith?

General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.

we all believed the world was flat too...

Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.

isn't that blind faith too?

Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

tell that to that to the victims of the jim jones massacre
...and speak for yourself

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

if you consider not believing in an unseen being because
1. you can't see it
2. your logic can't acknowledge it
3. you don't need to

what's wrong with that?
where is your faith when you choose to judge others for not believing?

 

[Eliot Wild]

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

Forgive me, but I really don't understand the point of such threads. I realize that debating can be entertaining. Hell, that's why I frequent RF. But all the OP has done is assert 'evidence' for God. None of the 'evidence' presented amounts to proof, and certainly not conclusive proof.

I don't see why this is so hard to understand: If individuals find the evidence presented to be substantive enough to form a belief that God exists, then so be it. However, why do some theists insists that their particular standards for 'convincing evidence' must be everyone else's standards as well?

I also don't see why it is so hard to understand that the burden of proof is always on the claimant, not the respondent. Given the lack of conclusive proof of a thing, whether it be a God, a piece of furniture, a breakfast pastry or perhaps a magical creature of myth, any claims as to the thing's existence must meet validating standards established personally by each individual. This 'process' is somewhat formulized succinctly in a Court of Law. A Claimant/Plaintiff has the burden of proof. The standard of proof is pre-determined by the rules of the Court, just as every individual will determine their own personal standards for what constitutes proof outside of a courtroom.

All the OP has done is to be condescending, presumptuous and arrogant in stating that if we the respondents don't accept the given evidence and evaluate it on standards other than our own, then we are 'Blind' and delusional in that we can't properly identify what is real and what is not real. I certainly mean no offense personally to the author of the OP. I just thought you might like to know that if you are really trying to convince others that you are correct, if you are really trying to 'reach' people rather than provoke them, then your approach and your evidence will probably not be received too openly in this matter as you have immediately alienated much of your audience by insulting them and demanding they accept your particular standards for what constitutes proof. But then again, that's just the way I see it and I certainly can not speak for anyone else.

 

[HonestJoe]

I'm sure it can be clearly seen that I am not pushing Christianity in this post. I refer to "other religious texts", "other religious leaders", general spiritual cravings, the earth which is neutral to religion, and testimony of others which would include others of all religions that are theists.

The basic problem with your position is that you are being (by your terms) equally blind to the vast majority of what the list in your OP covers because so much of will directly contradicts the specific theistic beliefs you hold to.

At the very best, you could be seen to be making an argument for deism or recognising the scope for some form of spirituality but that argument puts you as someone with a definitive theistic position in the same group as those with a definitive atheistic one.

So why are you blind to the words of L. Ron Hubbard?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Atheists need faith like a fish needs a bicycle.

 

[Dan4reason]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.

It is funny that these experiences always happen to be emotional and do not obviously involve anything supernatural.

Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.

I know that religious books claim that they are inspired by the divine. That is not evidence of anything however. There are many mistakes in the bible, and many silly statements and unethical deeds. The bible reflects the culture of the people who wrote it, nothing divine.

General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.

I assume that a painting is made by humans because I know that humans happen to be able to make them. Design is something that humans do, so it was easy for early man to assume that the universe came about by design because this was the only way we knew that things came about. We are learning that the universe is quite different than how things are on earth. To assume that design is the only way things come about is to make an assumption based on limited knowledge.

Instead of using science, you have chosem to use an unproven comfortable idea to explain things you do not know. However, there is a contradiction in your own idea. My question to you is, who made God? By making up the concept of God, you have not solved the problem of complexity, you have only made it worse.

The theory of evolution has shown that in fact design can happen in different ways than we can assume.

Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.

There are also claims that Greek Gods have done miracles. These are only claims and are not evidence of anything.

Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

You may have a craving to worship something but I and all other atheists don't. People are not born to worship, they are taught to worship.

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

Atheists do not believe in God because there is not a shred of evidence to believe he exists. We have natural explanations that uproot the need to believe in God such as the theory of evolution and the big bang theory. The theory of evolution disproves a litteral interpretation of the bible. We also don't believe in God because the bible has so many ridiculous mistakes. It was obviously invented by a bunch of goat herders.

 

[hyacinthus]

You know, I don't have a problem with what others believe. I just hate it when they try and tell others what to believe.

I totally agree with you. This should be applied to both atheist and theist who are obnoxiously fond of disturbing other people's longing for peace of mind. If a Christian or Muslim refused to believe that they descended from ape like creatures who lived in some very very distant past, the aggressive atheist or evolutionists should leave them alone with their belief in Adam and Eves. The theist should do the same by letting their fellow atheist brotehrs and sisters cherish the view that apes are their ancestors who happened to have no names. In line with Bon Jovi's saying: "It's my life it's now or never...."

Live and let live....

Respect

 

[futureplanet]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.
Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.
General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.
Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.
Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

The testimony of others, and written history, are one and the same.
There is no testimony of Jesus outside of your written "history", being the bible.

The Bible, The Quran, The Vedas, The Buddhavacana, to name but a few are the written testimony of others....or works of complete fiction. There is actually no evidence at all for any of these documents to be actually true testimonies.

General revelation
Cancer exists, murder exists, drowning exists, rape exists, sex slaves exist, pedoaphiles exist. They all need a creator also? Obviously you must say yes, that god in his eternal sickness of mind, created people with a mind that entices them to kidnap, rape and murder children. Or with a sickness that causes the unborn to die in the womb and kill the mother also. (yes, yes, all part of his master PLAN)

OR, maybe it's too hideous to believe a "loving" god can make such peversions.

Additionally, we used to see lightening, and believe it existed, and god must be angry. Now we know better. Those that don't learn from the past are destined to repeat it. The church locked up Galielo for showing us the church was dead wrong, and yet the practice of denying evidence goes on. Now with evolution. Which clearly shows us that things evolve to be "seemingly designed" because they are perfectly suited for there environment.

Theism is the suspension of the critical mind, to believe ancient dogma. Atheism allows you to be free to view all the lastest technologies, sciences and explanations for the natural world, in a way that makes a LOT MORE sense.


Jesus or other religious leader - back to he bible again. Point 1, 2 and 4 are all one and same. You have a religious text, that has NO validity at all, expect that a lot of people believe it, and you were taught to believe it, and not taught an alternative religion, and due to the nature of humans following their community and socities beliefs, you follow this script. You believe in a book. Nothing more. WIthout this book, there is nothing. No Jesus, no "testimony", no fairytales.

Our own spirits I disagree, people have a craving to KNOW and UNDERSTAND. The assumption that there is a god, leans people to want to know god. Atheists also crave understanding, and therefore crave evidence, and learning outside of thousands of very very different ancient books of the many many different religions.


You believe in an old book. That's all theism is. Your book could the Quran, the bible or the Vedas. Pick one and start believing it. It's really really easy. Humans have proven they can believe ANYTHING. THerefore I am NOT telling what to believe, but strongly, very strongly disagree with your analysis, because it is with an closed mind, that theists cannot, ARE NOT ALLOWED TO, consider any other religion or alternative. You are locked to believe this book, and can never change. THat's why the church locked up Galileo. He proved their idea of the universe was wrong. An athiest would have had much higher morals than other priests and encouraged this study and learning.

 

[Atomist]

See: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru.../103510-atheism-reasonable-position-hold.html

 

[Autodidact]

Theists have:
The testimony of others – Whether it be growing up in a believing home or seeing others in church and worshiping, theists have the testimony of others of what God has done or doing in their lives.
Written history – Whether or not you accept the Bible or other religious texts as truth, theists have them and they point to God.
General revelation – When you see a painting you know there is a painter, just like when you see the earth, sky, and humans you know there has to be a creator.
Jesus or other religious leader – Theists have Jesus and other religious leaders that have supposedly performed miracles or have been ordained by and point to God.
Our own spirits – People have a spiritual craving to discover God and to worship something beyond self.

Atheists see all of the same things yet they choose not to believe which leads me to consider that it is the atheists that blind themselves to reality and have blind faith.

So you're a Muslim then?

 

[Autodidact]

This is a theist vs atheist post, not a theist vs theist one.

Oh, I see, so it fits in the second most popular category of theist fallacies, special pleading? (The first most popular is circular reasoning, in case you were wondering.)

 

[Man of Faith]

See: http://www.religiousforums.com/foru.../103510-atheism-reasonable-position-hold.html

The OP has 5 reasons why theism is reasonable.