After observing the argument between the proponents of atheism and theism, I've realized that the bone of contention is the 'occurrence of paranormal phenomenon (extrasensory perception (ESP), telekinesis, ghosts, poltergeists, life after death, reincarnation, faith healing, human auras, and so forth)'

Now, all theists believe in paranormal phenomenon and that they are divine, while some atheists believe they are made up and some others believe they came be explained.

This has caused a lot of back and forth between the two parties. Both parties present lots of examples to back up thier claims, but none of these claims have proved to be sufficient enough to triumph over counterclaims, which has left thier beliefs questionable.

All the threads on this topic lack substantial evidence that no conclusions can be drawn from them.

My opinion:
I don't see the point in entering into an argument/opening a thread on 'this is the right ideology' when you don't have enough/sufficient evidence/proof. to back up your claim and sufficient knowledge of the opposing ideology to disprove it.

My advice:
The religious people should desist from arguing this topic (because you cannot win, you can't provide the evidence the atheist is asking for) and face thier faith. Pray for them. Preach to (not argue with) them, and if they refuse to listen. Leave them alone, the truth will be revealed on Doomsday.

The atheists on the other hand, actually have something to lose, because if doomsday eventually comes and God's existence turned out to be true, you'll end up with the short end of the stick. Therefore, you have to study /find enough evidence to disprove the existence of God and to provide explanations to all the unexplained phenomenon that has be attributed to providence.

And for people like me........you can keep waiting
Being an atheist is definitely harder than being a theist.

OP with this write up of yours,you are certainly the man of the year......lemme quickly stop here before both parties arrive.

cooncudee:
After observing the argument between the proponents of atheism and theism, I've realized that the bone of contention is the 'occurrence of paranormal phenomenon (extrasensory perception (ESP), telekinesis, ghosts, poltergeists, life after death, reincarnation, faith healing, human auras, and so forth)'

Now, all theists believe in paranormal phenomenon and that they are divine, while some atheists believe they are made up and some others believe they came be explained.

This has caused a lot of back and forth between the two parties. Both parties present lots of examples to back up thier claims, but none of these claims have proved to be sufficient enough to triumph over counterclaims, which has left thier beliefs questionable.

All the threads on this topic lack substantial evidence that no conclusions can be drawn from them.

My opinion:
I don't see the point in entering into an argument/opening a thread on 'this is the right ideology' when you don't have enough/sufficient evidence/proof. to back up your claim and sufficient knowledge of the opposing ideology to disprove it.

My advice:
The religious people should desist from arguing this topic (because you cannot win, you can't provide the evidence the atheist is asking for) and face thier faith. Pray for them. Preach to (not argue with) them, and if they refuse to listen. Leave them alone, the truth will be revealed on Doomsday.

The atheists on the other hand, actually have something to lose, because if doomsday eventually comes and God's existence turned out to be true, you'll end up with the short end of the stick. Therefore, you have to study /find enough evidence to disprove the existence of God and to provide explanations to all the unexplained phenomenon that has be attributed to providence.

And for people like me........you can keep waiting
Being an atheist is definitely harder than being a theist.

Well said.
Atheist always reject the idea of having faith in God or the believe in God but the truth is that the scientific explanations in which the atheist often give to be the course of existence of life, or creationism including other scientistific theories also rely on faith to be accepted as true.
In a simpler term the belief that science is the most reliable source of knowledge could only have been accepted if scientists had answers to every event in the universe therefore, it requires faith for scientists to believe that science is the most reliable source of knowledge even when scientists doesn't have the answer to everything.

respect80:


Well said.
Atheist always reject the idea of having faith in God or the believe in God but the truth is that the scientific explanations in which the atheist often give to be the course of existence of life, or creationism including other scientistific theories also rely on faith to be accepted as true.
In a simpler term the belief that science is the most reliable source of knowledge could only have been accepted if scientists had answers to every event in the universe therefore, it requires faith for scientists to believe that science is the most reliable source of knowledge even when scientists doesn't have the answer to everything.

Apt and well said.
Excellent.