You Don’t Have to Know to Not Think So

Question from Neil:
Why do atheists mostly dismiss the existence of an intelligent creator of any kind?

I see no firm evidence of any god being especially the Old Testament one, he doesn’t seem to be aware the Earth moves among many other things!
But I accept the possibility that one could exist and may have caused the Big Bang.

Until we discover what did cause the Big Bang it seems arrogant to dismiss the possibility.

Athiests are accused of being arrogant (mainly by arrogant religious people). I wonder if they’re right or are most atheists really agnostics?

Answer by SmartLX:
It all depends, heavily, on the atheist.

Like you I acknowledge the possibility, however remote, that there is or was a creator god or equivalent entity. To know for a fact that there wasn’t one would take more information than the human race as access to at the moment. I’m still an atheist because I don’t think or believe that there was a creator, but I accept that there’s a chance I’m wrong simply because I don’t know. That makes me an agnostic atheist, same as Dawkins, same as Dennett and same as many other prominent atheists who spell out their positions in public. I think most or at least a lot of atheists are agnostic but statistics on that are hard to come by.

Those who claim to know there’s no god are gnostic atheists and when I discuss gods with them, like you I ask them how they think they know.

15 thoughts on “You Don’t Have to Know to Not Think So”

  1. The basis of all atheism is that there is no evidence of any god at any time. As I often say to theists, “Shown undeniable proof, I will change my mind on anything, including religion.” Then I ask the theist, “What will it take to change your mind?”

    On the very rare occasions I receive an answer, it is invariably, “Nothing will change my mind.” Ironically, that same person will often accuse me of being closed-minded. Then they assert that we atheists and scientist (most of whom are atheists) “think you know everything.” That is also ironic because science has never claimed to know everything and, shown better evidence, will change their thinking on anything.

    It is theists that claim to have all the answers. It is always the same answer, “God did it.” I admit, that is much easier than thinking, especially when, to be a theist, you must abandon any semblance of rational thought.

    1. “Like you I acknowledge the possibility, however remote, that there is or was a creator god or equivalent entity.” “That makes me an agnostic atheist, same as Dawkins, same as Dennett and same as many other prominent atheists who spell out their positions in public”
      This part of a post from SmartLX, does, I’m afraid does kind of lean to “some evidence” for their being God. I’m sorry to have to be a kill joy, but the same evidence, or at least some of that evidence, that the Atheists look at and don’t see any need to accept that there is God, the Creationists look at and say that it is sufficient to say that God is. The failure of the Atheists to explain how this universe did come to be, points to that God did it. The failure for the Atheists to demonstrate how life came to be, is another point the the possibility that God did it. The failure to demonstrate that either one of these could have come about through any of the other theories that they would rather accept. Now when we get to other small details that are also denied as evidence for God, is the fact that life is too complex to have come to be on its own. Not only are the structures of those organisms are too specially made, but the programming that would be needed would have had to be on board at the same time the organisms came to be. It makes no sense to believe that an almost life come to be and then it begins to evolve to something else. How would it be able to do anything if it doesn’t have programming to direct it to perform any act. This suggest that that life didn’t not even have the capability to hold information of programming. So that means that the almost life would need to evolve to develop DNA. But how would this be possible, because without DNA, it would not be able to be programmed. And the only thing that the Atheists say about it is quiet. They can’t even explain this failure of theirs to have not thought of this slip up on their part. Every action of an organism, from the most simple to the most complex, is determined by the programming and the sub routines that determine how the programming is used and such. So to believe that anything could have come to be by itself, is ludicrous and shows an utter failure to reason logically. But then to assume that even if a life of any sort could have come to be by accident, then how would that sort of life ever have received any programming to direct it to do and tasks necessary for its survival, or to insure the continuation of its lineage. You see it would have been the first of any life. All organisms that are always receive their programming from their predecessor. That means that the DNA needed to have in place and that all programming would have needed to be on board when it comes to be. So a brand new what ever life would have not had that opportunity. So to assume that it could have known what to do, is also illogical. Everything needed to have been created all ready to hit the road running with the knowledge that it would have needed to fulfill any required tasks. To believe anything else is not thinking logically. Everything points to the fact that an intelligence created all of it and us.

  2. Neil:

    My experience is that most atheists will openly admit that they can never say, with 100% confidence, that there is no such thing as gods. I am one of them. It’s an honest thing to say too, because you cannot prove that gods don’t exist (you can’t prove a negative). As LX pointed out, we have only a partial understanding of the universe, and therefore the evidence for gods may exist and we just haven’t found it yet.

    Some believers, by the way, take that position as a sign of “weakness”, or that atheists are “hedging their bets” about gods. Don’t let anyone accuse you of that if you are an agnostic atheist like I am. I’m being intellectually honest with myself and with everyone else when I admit that there is a possibility that god creatures exist. That’s not a weakness, that is a strength.

    So while I can never be sure, I can say quite comfortably that I don’t find the idea of god beings to be even remotely plausible. There are way too many contradictions and irrational claims in the pantheon of human religions, and because of that they simply do not make logical sense. No believer has ever been able to provide even one piece of empirical data or evidence for god creatures, despite being asked all the time at this website and others. There is no rational reason for me to think such beings actually exist, and therefore I don’t.

  3. Because I believe what I see…what can be measured and tested…I need proof one way or the other…

  4. “Because I believe what I see…what can be measured and tested…I need proof one way or the other” When you walk out somewhere and you see the tracks of an animal, you recognize them as not a part of the regular scenery. It looks different. Ant those tracks that there is something around that mad that difference in the scenery, because there is evidence that you are looking at that tells you that the animal is around. You may not be able to see it or pick it up and handle it, but you see the tracks. That is evidence. So too, when you see the evidence that is presented about a being that has made everything around, it is the evidence that that being exists. You may not be able to see Him or handle Him but the evidence is still there that He is. And until you can rule out with certainty that the evidence design was not made by an Intelligence, it would be batter, far better to operated under the frame of mind that the Intelligence made the evidence. Because crafted items are never accidentally made. They are designed and manufactured. What anyone has ever invented tells us that. And all of life especially points to design which points us to Intelligence. Ignoring it only keeps you from making the biggest discovery in your life. The One who designed and manufactured you.

    1. As has been explained to you many times previously Gerald, the existence of “everything” is not proof that your god creature exists. The reason we know that the animal left those tracks is because we can ALSO prove the animal exists. The tracks don’t prove the animal exists. The tracks could have gotten there for any number of reasons. But when we prove the animal exists, and can match it’s prints to the tracks we’ve found, then we can say the tracks belong to the animal. Can you prove your god creature? No, that has been firmly established for over a year now at this website. You have no data or empirical evidence for the god being, so there is no reason to think it had anything to do with “everything”…

  5. That is the typical brainless answer of a creationist. What you are saying is, “I don’t understand it and thinking is too hard for me, so God did it.”

    When you understand the concept of verifiable facts, try again. UNtil then, you are insulting the intelligence of others with your absurd explanations. PLease do not project your own delusional excuse for thinking upon others.

    1. What is the typical brainless answer of a Creationist? And please give me the reason why you would think such a thing? Tell me why you consider my explanations absurd? And also please let me know what about my verifiable facts that you find off the mark? I’m afraid that what I’m getting from you right, is the same run around that all the other Atheists offer as proof. Pure and simple “what is though by them”, and no explanations with evidence to back up those thoughts. Tell me why my concept of verifiable facts is incorrect. And what I said is that evolution makes no sense. There is nothing that I need to understand about evolution, because evolution is a fake theory. Nothing that it is purported to be, has ever been proven to be possible. It is all unverifiable hear say. And all I am getting back from those who are crying, “not so” is simply that and only that. You give nothing to show that what I said about evolution is not true. You just say it isn’t. What are you so afraid of. If what I am saying is not true, prove it. Don’t just make idle no’s.

  6. “the existence of “everything” is not proof that your god creature”. For one thing Tim. God is not my god creature. We are His creatures. And for another thing. The fact that God is one of the options, or the only option available that could have created everything. Is it definite proof. No. I’ll grant you that. But He is an option. As far as we know, He is the only one that could create. This is a theory, any way. And I believe that all the other options have just as little or as much proof at the God theory. I believe that God did it. But the evidence points to the fact that it was designed. The other theories that are in the running, all say something maybe did it but the theories don’t appear to have been possible. Neither do the other theories have been demonstrated to be possible. And when they attempt to prove that that theory could be the one, they end up falling far short. God’s handiwork is the only way to show that He is the one. But you refuse to accept that even tough “everything” appears design, that it actually is designed. And you don’t have any proof to reject the design theory because you have never have shown that design could come from chance or from an accident. Go ahead, give me proof that life could have come from nothing or from an accident. And at the same time give proof that anything that appears designed could have come from an accident or by chance. Come on just name or show the research of one thing that appears to be designed that you or any other can show just popped up out of an accident or by chance. And while your at it please demonstrate how that theory that the passage of millions and millions of years could possible be the cause of life or that it is able to improve that life through evolution. You can’t. There is nothing that can be used as evidence to show design or improvement to a design that has no need to be improved upon. If you feel that the Intelligent Design theory has no proof, then you must realize that any theory that has been purposed by the Atheistic community, has even less evidence. I’ll be awaiting the “evidence” that you have that shows that any theory supported could in any way be used to make design out of nothing or by an accident.

  7. “Can you prove your god creature? No, that has been firmly established for over a year now at this website” God has not been proven not to exist on this site or anywhere else. And it is hypocritical that you as an evolutionists and Atheist, can say that, “just because God is not quantifiable by conventional means, just because you can’t put Him into a test tube, that that is evidence that God is not. You keep, talking about how evolution is true, yet you have no proof that it is true. You hang onto it as though it is a god, and then get mad whey someone denies it. What happens when you can’t find that animal that left the tracks. You don’t just assume that those tracks are by chance there. No you know from all around you that something made those tracks. And as you said you find the reason for those tracks and you know that those tracks belong to that animal. So God has left His tracks all over. And science is failing to utilize the correct reason and logic and that is why you fail to see God. Even though He is the only one shown that could have left the tracks of intelligent design. And just because you say that isn’t evidence, which is wrong, it is evidence that you don’t want to accept. But there are millions of people around the world who testify that God is. That is two different sources of evidence. Then you include the third source of evidence. An historical item that has been used to find unknown cities. To find historical figures that were previously unknown. An historical document that has today’s proven health and scientific facts that seems that had no reason or way to be known so long ago in the past. Information that had not been used in any other historical document, which instead gave false information contrary to what this historical document has given. That’ right I’m talking about the Bible. And all you can say is it’s not so. But I have the proof. And there have been atheist after atheist who said, “no” and have still not prove why or how what the Bible has said is not accurate. Why because it is the word of God. Given to us by God through men who He gave what they needed to write and pass along to us. So that is now four sources of evidence that proves that God is more likely than Evolution. And there is more. The prophecies that the Bible gave about what the history would be like years later, has been dead on. You want to dismiss it but the real atheists back then could not just dismiss the prophecies. They dedicated their lives to try and disprove the prophecies or to try to prove that they were provided around the time that the events happened. And these atheist either wen away shaking their heads in disbelief because the evidence was true to the needle. Or they ended up accepting the Bible as the Word of God. Now this is 5 sources of evidence. Still 5 more pieces of evidence than evolution has yet to provide as support since it was lied into existence in the beginning of it’s history.

  8. Your posts demonstrate that you are stubbornly stupid. You haven’t the fainted concept of what is provable fact or rational logic.
    you babble is not evidence of anything but your own gullibility.

    If you want to show evidence it must be something that can be proven by verified by an objective, even hostile, observer. You only have the lie of a paradise and the empty threat of a hell. Until you can prove any god has ever exited, you would be better served by “remaining silent and be thought a fool rather than speaking out and removing all doubt.”

    As for as your insane “prophecies” go, not ONE has ever been demonstrated to be true. Here are a few example of them. Prove anything I have posted is not true. Prove any god has ever existed. Show me even ONE contemporary account of the mythical jesus.

    Genesis 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.
    Here God tells Isaac that his descendents (Hebrews) will be as numerous as the stars.  Considering the number of stars there are in the universe, that would have to be on the order of 10 to the 20th Jewish people.

    Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.
    Christians say that this verse is a prophecy of Jesus’ birth to a virgin.  There are a couple problems with this prophecy…First, virgin in this verse is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word “almah”, which actually means “young woman”.  A young woman is not necessarily a virgin.  “Bethulah” would have been the correct word to use if the author meant virgin.  Second, nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus referred to as Immanuel.

    Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.
    Damascus is still inhabited today with over a million people, and hardly a ruinous heap.

    Isaiah 19:4-5 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts. And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up.
    The river mentioned here is the Nile.  The Nile is still one of Egypt’s greatest natural resource.

    Isaiah 19:18 In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the LORD of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.
    The Canaanite language has never been spoken in Egypt, and is now an extinct.

    Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.
    There are uncircumcised people living in Jerusalem even today.

    Ezekiel 29:10-11 Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia.  No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.
    Never in its long history has Egypt ever been uninhabited for forty years.

    I have many more of these lies posing as prophecies. Prove any of them are not true.

  9. Why do you hesitate giving me the proof I ask for. You attack what I said. Fine. But give me the evidence why what I said is babble. Show me with some king of physical proof that what I have said about evolution is just babble. Give me proof how my arguments are invalid. Stop attacking me and check my arguments. You know why. You can’t. That is why none of the Atheists have given me only the same spiel, that evolution has offered from day one. And they talk but offer nothing to back it up. They attack but give not a word of concrete proof. You say one almost organism became all else. Tell me please, which organism became all else. You all made the theory, yet you haven’t demonstrated that the theory is able to perform what you claim. Why you can’t even tell us which organism did as you claim. Why, well for one because you don’t want to answer the question that would follow. Which is, well if that organism did as you say, then why do we still see that organism alive and well, exactly as it started out as. Or we would ask, why that organism is extinct if it was able to do so much. You are not reasoning. You are only guessing and doing it poorly. Guessing should be made upon logic. And there is not logic in the camp of the evolutionists and Atheists.

  10. You make a lot of statements that only demonstrate that you know noting about evolution. Where does it say that everything statred from the same life form? You might be thinking about that humans did not evolve from apes but that all anthropoids evolved from a common ancestor.

    For theists, not knowing anything about a subject never stops you from making uninformed pronouncements about it. The pnly reason I can see for that is you get a cheap thrill from exosing your deeply entrenched ignorance in front of others.
    Prove evolution is not true. There are thousands of proof of evolution in museums, laboratories and universities throughout the world. There is not an iota of proof of creationism. If there were you would show it instead of showing your stubborn stupidity and intentional ignorance.

  11. Your kidding. What I sent was from book by an evolutionists. What did he say that was not evolutionary?

  12. “Common descent describes how, in evolutionary biology, a group of organisms share a most recent common ancestor. There is evidence of common descent that all life on Earth is descended from the last universal common ancestor (LUCA).[1][2] In July 2016, scientists reported identifying a set of 355 genes from the LUCA of all organisms living on Earth.[3]

    Common ancestry between organisms of different species arises during speciation, in which new species are established from a single ancestral population. Organisms which share a more recent common ancestor are more closely related. The most recent common ancestor of all currently living organisms is the last universal ancestor,[1] which lived about 3.9 billion years ago.[4][5] The two earliest evidences for life on Earth are graphite found to be biogenic in 3.7 billion-year-old metasedimentary rocks discovered in western Greenland[6] and microbial mat fossils found in 3.48 billion-year-old sandstone discovered in Western Australia.[7][8] All currently living organisms on Earth share a common genetic heritage (universal common descent), with each being the descendant from a single original species, though the suggestion of substantial horizontal gene transfer during early evolution has led to questions about monophyly of life.[1]

    Universal common descent through an evolutionary process was first proposed by the English naturalist Charles Darwin in On the Origin of Species (1859), which concluded: “There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.”[9”
    I’m sorry to have to say this, but some of you novice evolutionists and maybe a few of those who think themselves devout evolutionists need to really go and study evolution. The simple fact that you choose to believe in something so cockeyed, is proof that you have not really read and understood what those who thought up evolution were really saying. And you have developed your own evolution. But in any case all of it is not true. Toss it with tomorrows trash.

Comments are closed.