i'm afraid what you said is right, considering you atheist pigeonhole.
you guys seem not to understand the meaning of believe.
a kid believing he can fly takes the fact that humans can't fly and slams it against a wall. his belief, his subjective belief, automatically disregards the grownup fact.
now, you think it's a fact that god doesn't exist.
not only that, but you actually believe theists know it too, so their belief not only is wrong, but they have doubts about it out of lack of evidence.
so you have jumped from labeling god's nonexistence as an objective matter, but are now saying even us theists cannot or should not be able to have it as a subjective belief.
please, all of you, broaden your scope and work your imagination hard to imagine us actually believing with every cell in our body that god exists, totally acknowledging the evidence we have as proof of our beliefs.
wording it to make it easier for you:
we are truly deluded.
we don't know we are wrong but are fighting nonetheless.
The common denominator for theism and atheism is not knowing if God exists.
no, i KNOW god exists,mm, look, as much as you know he doesn't exist.
that common denominator is between atheists and agnostics IMO.
Neither one has any hard evidence to support their claim.
"hard evidence" CAN be subjective.
Atheists because of the lack of evidence state their opinion and it is no different for the theist. If there was all kinds of evidence then there would be no theists or atheists.
again, why do smokers smoe despite all the evidence?
you can't deny humans their power of choice.
that is why lots and lots of logic is useless, because it isn't practical, many times illogic which is followed by most humans is more important than logic which isn't followed by many humans.
Therefore any atheist cannot totally refute a god nor can a theist ignore the possibility a god doesn't exist.
For those who claim to know, they simply do not believe.
WHAT? how can you actually say that?
If you don't know then you either believe or don't.
:wtf: how can you believe if you don't know, why can't we know what we believe, but you can know what you believe? is it because
you can't know what we believe that you say
we can't know too?
The most devoted believer or atheist on this forum doesn't know for sure if they are correct.
Yes my religious friends, even you cannot support God with evidence just as I cannot support His absence. It's a draw. I'd pay to hear an evangelist say that.
don't extend beliefs of your side to the other, atheists are not supposed to know, i mean, being sure of a negative? but hey, look here:
-=-
I do know I'm correct.
i believe stranger believes what he says he believes.
belief is not always connected to evidence, not only can you believe without evidence (as you think we do), but you can disbelieve albeit evidence (which many think is the case with you)..
If there are gods, they're playing hide&seek.
and so since gods can't play hide and seek then they don't exist.
that's some bet you're taking..
A little over 530 million years ago everything lived in the sea. The
fossil record is proof enough. Man evolved and was not created. Fish is the word.
circular reasoning.
what if man was brought down to earth after some ground was revealed.
it can't be because there is no evidence? well you're looking in the wrong place, evidence that man was created as whole after the suggested evolution started in the other animals, is what makes the majority of humans theists and creationalists, and a hint: you won't "unearth" that evidence with a shovel.
besides, if absence of evidence is the proof of absence, then absence of neanderthals is evidence IMO of human evolution.
scientifically speaking... i like it
