TnAtheist - To be atheist is to deny the existence of a metaphysical/spiritual/divine deity. So, in order to make such a claim, you would have to defend it by disproving the existence of said deity, correct? It seems that atheism is an assertion that you know something to be true despite an absence of facts. Because if you can’t disprove it, you’re on no better footing than theists who cannot prove it. So, atheists, just like Christians claim to know “the truth” So my question: Is rejection of a belief that cannot be proven more, less, or equally logical than embracing a belief that cannot be proven? Why?

I live in Tennessee, USA. I'm an Atheist. I'm unabashedly girl-crazy; Unashamedly me.

Home

About TnAtheist

Archive

Subscribe (RSS)

Ask TnAtheist

Random post

Twitter

TnAtheist on Facebook

That's Hot Gallery

TnAtheist Live

Catching Elephant is a theme by Andy Taylor

Anonymous asked

To be atheist is to deny the existence of a metaphysical/spiritual/divine deity.

So, in order to make such a claim, you would have to defend it by disproving the existence of said deity, correct? It seems that atheism is an assertion that you know something to be true despite an absence of facts. Because if you can't disprove it, you're on no better footing than theists who cannot prove it.

So, atheists, just like Christians claim to know "the truth"

So my question:

Is rejection of a belief that cannot be proven more, less, or equally logical than embracing a belief that cannot be proven? Why?

Rejection and denial are both loaded words and both are incorrect in this case. Atheism is a ‘lack of belief’ as opposed to a rejection or denial which are both choices. I don’t choose to not believe in God. It’s just that when I really thought about it, I came to conclusion that I didn’t.