RE: Apologist Matt Slick's atheist daughter tells of her experience growing up
July 19, 2013 at 1:53 pm
(July 19, 2013 at 11:53 am)Isun Wrote: Skepticism is healthy, but it doesn't constitute proof one way or another.
It's not supposed to.
To be skeptical is nothing more than to not accept a claim until it is supported by demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid logic.
You are passing the burden of proof to the skeptic, when it actually resides with the person making the claim.
Quote:What i find frustrating sometimes is that many skeptics feel that when they disprove the bible that it somehow proves their point god doesn't exist. In other words they are throwing out the principles of science out the door the same as religionists.
Are you just making up these skeptics?
I have never met an atheist, or even heard of one, that claims that disproving the Bible disproves the existence of all possible gods.
Quote:It is reasonable and quite acceptable in my opinion to state that the preponderance of evidence does not support the existence of god as christians believe, but it doesn't in any way provide proof that "god" doesn't exist.
You would not be in disagreement with the majority of atheists.
You seem to have this notion that atheists are making the claim that a god does not exist, when in reality, atheism is the lack of belief that a god exists.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
