To him that believes, no proof is necessary. To him that disbelieves, no proof is sufficient.

Asked by: simpleman
  • Belief is a choice, not always necessarily concerned with evidence

    People see what they wish to see. Very rarely do people approach the prospect of something without attending preconceptions concerning what it is they are looking at. More often than not, we do not look at something from the position of being neutral. Usually the mind is made up prior to investigating something before such inquiry even begins. The crisis of belief is only too often self inflicted for this reason.

  • Believing in God is not a rational thing that comes from proof.

    Faith in God comes from abandoning reason and putting trust in God. Reading the word of God and praying to God with honesty and openness leads believers to a true experience of God. When you encounter God and through continuous practicing of your faith you come to know him you no longer require any proof of his existence. On the other hand if you don't believe in God and you are looking for proof but doing so within the limits of rational, thought requiring proof that conforms to normal, natural, physical laws then you will not succeed. You first have to take a leap of faith and practice and be committed, then you will find evidence of God everywhere. What's more you will come to an understanding of an almighty and great creator who is the source of all Love and kindness, who is merciful beyond human comprehension and who will lovingly embrace you and welcome you into his eternal glory.

  • Belief VS Disbelief

    To those that believe earnestly in the existence of God, faith tends to be a sufficient reason for their belief. To those who choose not to believe in a god, there is no philosophical or scientific argument that will suffice as proof of the perceived existence of said god. There are always going to be exceptions to this concept; atheists who convert, or believers that renounce their faith, but I would argue that that this concept holds true for many.

  • Of course not.

    This is a cop out used by theists to try and explain away why people don't believe, and to get out of meeting their burden of proof for their grandiose claims of a "god".
    If these theists actually had any objective, verifiable evidence that could not be explained by anything other than a god, there wouldn't be any atheists.

  • Absolutely not true

    If that is true, then people would never change their minds. People change their minds, therefore your statement is not true. Although , there is an allure to your statement and a modicum of truth to its core idea, it is too broad and general. Some beliefs are justified and some are not. I pride myself in changing my beliefs when I feel it necessary to do so.

  • To him that believes, no proof is necessary. To him that disbelieves, there is no proof.

    Before making a statement like that, what 'proof' exists for us athiests? If there were any proof, it would have become known by many more people than just you.

    Don't quote the bible because men wrote it, not God or Jesus. Or any other books for that matter.

    Don't tell me to look around, because all these things are scientifically explainable or man-made.

  • The argument should have died out.

    The point of this is suggesting that belief requires no evidence whilst those who disbelieve will always disbelieve regardless of the 'facts'.
    I would suggest that if some definitive proof of the existence of god were to present itself, every Atheist on the face of the earth would instantly believe in god (notice I said DEFINITIVE).
    If evidence came to light that god did NOT exist, and I mean absolute proof, not a single religious person would change their views. What the OP should have put is:
    To him that believes, arrogance and insecurity shall outweigh all proof. To him that disbelieves, no proof is sufficient to rid the world of religious oppression.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.