this post was submitted on
287 points (82% like it)
366 up votes 79 down votes

reddit is a source for what's new and popular online. vote on links that you like or dislike and help decide what's popular, or submit your own! learn more ›

all 31 comments

[–]DaftAss 10 points11 points ago

Theists understand this perfectly; they consider the non-existence of their deity to be an extraordinary claim.

[–]cheesesavouries 6 points7 points ago

I believe David Hume was the first to make this observation, no disrespect to Carl Sagan.

[–]BadSysadmin 1 point2 points ago

This is reddit, no athiest celebs exist except Sagan, Dawkins, Hitchens and Tyson

[–]cheesesavouries 0 points1 point ago

I wouldn't call Hume a celebrity, he was a famous philosopher from the 1700s, and his religious beliefs are not known for certain in the philosophy sphere.

[–]Spectro87 0 points1 point ago

Adam Savage, Michael Shermer, Dan Savage, Bill Maher, Penn & Teller, James Randi, Brian Cox, Richard Feynmann, Stephen Hawking, PZ Myers, Matt Dillahunty, AC Grayling, HL Mencken, Bertrand Russel

Continue your circlejerking though. Obviously none of the above people are ever mentioned here.

[–]Bestpaperplaneever 0 points1 point ago

The latter's teapot is the logo of this forum.

[–]Spectro87 0 points1 point ago

You can't prove it doesn't exist!

[–]Bestpaperplaneever 0 points1 point ago

Checkmate, ateapotists!

[–]cuttlefish1054 2 points3 points ago

Also a coherent definition of the claim being made helps, too.

[–]Uranus_Hz 2 points3 points ago

They think God existing is perfectly obvious and that the claim that God does NOT exist is extraordinary. This is why they expect atheists to prove God does NOT exist, instead of the other way around.

[–]UnholyGeezer 1 point2 points ago

This just creates a dispute over what is extraordinary, and what isn't.

The burden of proof lies with the one claiming knowledge.

[–]Dan007a 1 point2 points ago

There is an extraordinary amount of archaeological evidence backing up the Bible though.

[–]SolomonGomes 3 points4 points ago

They've got their bible. I think it's extraordinary that they consider it evidence.

[–]Dan007a 1 point2 points ago

There is archaeological evidence to back it up though.

[–]Bestpaperplaneever 0 points1 point ago

What evidence would that be?

[–]Dan007a 1 point2 points ago

Jericho was found, the burial tomb of Annas was found the high priest who tried Jesus, the capital of the Hittites civilization was found, these are but a few of the many archaeological evidence which backs up Biblical tales.

[–]Bestpaperplaneever 0 points1 point ago

That's evidence that a few locations, civilizations and people mentioned in the bible exist. There's no evidence that Jericho was conquered by trumpets, the high priest tried Jesus etc. It's not exceotional to write a fictional story set on a real background.

[–]carleslireis 3 points4 points ago

What atheists don't understand is that the Christian God does not require scientific evidence, any more than logic requires scientific evidence.

[–]Notagtipsy 0 points1 point ago

Why exactly is God above evidence? What kind of special pleading allows that?

[–]carleslireis 0 points1 point ago

It's no more special pleading than the fact that science cannot prove itself, or logic, correct. There is a metaphysical realm that underpins both the atheist and theist/spiritual worldviews. Scientific evidence isn't admissible there. Of course, there must be some evidence and logic behind both systems. You can't just say "God exists, QED".

[–]TheBlasianBruski 1 point2 points ago

What theists AND atheists don't seem to understand. FTFY I mean, shit, we're basically saying an omnipotent being doesn't exist. We have no solid proof so we can't say for sure that one does not exist. Though, we do lack proof of existence of one, and because of burden of proof blah blah blah, the consensus is that there isn't one.

[–]Nisas 3 points4 points ago

"That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." - Christopher Hitchens

[–]selkcunk 1 point2 points ago

Richard Dawkins explains a scale where he essentially says that by far the majority of "atheists" are more agnostic than they realise, merely "agnostic only to the extent that [one is] agnostic about fairies at the bottom of the garden." Very, very few atheists claim to know that there isn't a God... In short, Dawkins' line "Atheists do not have faith; and reason alone could not propel one to total conviction that anything definitely does not exist" covers it.

[–]BadAtThisGame 1 point2 points ago

So would it be fair to call it a suspension of judgement 'til evidence is presented?

[–]d_hood 0 points1 point ago

Sorry to break it to you (coming from a non-religious person who believes science), but science has made extraordinary claims and has been wrong a lot. Also, many things in science are incorrect and the truth will be proven later on. In fact, there are a lot of scientific theories that scientists accept for the fact that it is just the best thing that makes the most sense now.

I'm not knocking down science whatsoever, I'm knocking down the anti-religion/atheist fundamentalists.

PS: Darwin was a Christian.

[–]Bestpaperplaneever -1 points0 points ago*

Darwin became atheist over the course of his life.

Scienence has never made extraordinary assertions and claimed them to be "truth". Science makes observations and theories with descriptive and predictive capability. All scientific knowledge is preliminary. Expanding the scope of science.

"To go beyond present science is one of the chief goals of science." -Carl Sagan

[–]Adaptation01 -1 points0 points ago

The main problem is that they don't feel they need to even look for it, content and confident that what they believe is true, and that's the scary part.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points ago

It is only scary when it skews their views on things in a negative way. Most of the Christians I know are Catholic or liberal protestant and they are great people. In fact, their religion seems to help them be better people. Oh well.

[–]phillyzz[S] 0 points1 point ago

Couldn't agree more my friend.

[–]rngdmstr -1 points0 points ago

Ironically, it was this very same quote that Sagan used to justify his opposition to atheism itself.

[–]sdflksjdfl -1 points0 points ago

Carl sagan is an agnostic.

In reply to a question in 1996 about his religious beliefs, Sagan answered, "I'm agnostic."[47] Sagan's views on religion have been interpreted as a form of pantheism comparable to Einstein's belief in Spinoza's God.[48] Sagan maintained that the idea of a creator of the universe was difficult to prove or disprove and that the only conceivable scientific discovery that could challenge it would be an infinitely old universe.[49]