"I don't know. Therefore, God is real."

  • Thread starter Thread starter roseproject
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
R

roseproject

Guest
This is something Atheists often scoff at Christians for supposedly believing. Whereas, their argument is “I don’t know. Therefore, science hasn’t found an answer yet.”

How do you answer this dilemma?

Pax christi <3
 
I see no dilemma. Jesus allowed them to walk away. Yet, if they do not or cannot grasp the transcendent, they will never understand. Words will fail, since the matter is primarily spiritual.

Faith requires no “proof” but it does require evidence to be reasonable. Hebrews 11:1 is the best definition of faith ever written. We can do worse than to commit it to memory.
 
Last edited:
I don’t concede the “I don’t know” part. “I know God is real” has no dilemma. We do not come to the knowledge that God exists by some random guess, some internal impulse, or even by faith.

Faith is believing what God has revealed based solely on the authority of the revealer. But to believe what God has revealed, one must first believe God exists. We can know God exists with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason.
 
Last edited:
I think people at least need to get on board with God as proposed by Classic Theism.
The " philosophers God"
The one described by Aquinas and others.
The worst part of the popular
" debate" is it really isn’t about God at all. It really doesn’t matter to tell the truth.
The God of classic Theism is ultimately argued from necessity. It is not a God that is discoverable by science. And God is certainly ineffable.
 
I second that. We as Christians have a full deposit of faith, which has been revealed to us. So we are in the know.
Atheists, on the other hand, are limited to the natural and material. And even in that realm, there is so much that is unexplained… enter dark matter, dark energy, the order of the universe, the series of events that lead to life, the existence of morality, the nature of abstract thought, the fact we live in the best of all possible worlds yet discovered, etc.
 
I can honestly say, having been a Christian since 2009, I’ve literally never heard that argument.
 
SadPotato said:
The title of your post is logically incoherent. After stating “I don’t know” you could insert anything such as “there is a flying spaghetti monster orbiting Neptune”.
Click to expand...
It might not be a serious statement but just a catchy title. The fact that she doesn’t use it as an argument in her OP does go in this interpretation’s favor.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
I understand what you’re saying. You show someone the event that happened at Fatima, the miracle of the sun, that it was announced beforehand, and 70,000 people were there. You would expect that they would have some kind of reaction to this, that this is an incredible event. Instead, they say that there is some kind of explanation, but we don’t know what it is yet. But this I know, it wasn’t God behind it. That’s the part that’s missing. Their mind is closed to the existence of God.

This is a heart that isn’t ready to receive the word of God. The parable of the Sower comes to mind. Pray for them. Be kind to them. They think that believers are like people who believe in the tooth fairy. It may change down the road, but not today. Kindness can help prepare their heart.
 
It’s not a logical argument, but it’s not a bad way of thinking, either. Better safe than sorry sort of thing. Like St. Ignatius, (and I am not quoting) if I allow the possibility of the existence of heaven and hell, isn’t it best to live as if they’re real? Eternity is a very long time. I’d be willing to risk wasting my life to maybe make it into the heaven that might exist.
 
PennyinCanada said:
This is a heart that isn’t ready to receive the word of God. The parable of the Sower comes to mind. Pray for them. Be kind to them. They think that believers are like people who believe in the tooth fairy. It may change down the road, but not today. Kindness can help prepare their heart.
Click to expand...
I’d been giving God a chance for almost my entire life. That the silent, invisible being remained silent and invisible isn’t my fault.
 
Last edited:
roseproject said:
Whereas, their argument is “I don’t know. Therefore, science hasn’t found an answer yet.”
Click to expand...
This is a nonsense statement and one that I have never heard anybody, atheist or otherwise, state. This claim is tantamount to stating that one knows the entire corpus of scientific knowledge. Perhaps you want to flip this around?
Science hasn’t found an answer yet. Therefore, I don’t know.
Click to expand...
 
It’s called the “God of the gaps”. Essentially, “I don’t know what causes X, therefore God did it”.

To be fair, some people think this way.
 
I know the argument, I have just never actually heard it used. I only know about it because of Catholic answers.
 
roseproject said:
This is something Atheists often scoff at Christians for supposedly believing. Whereas, their argument is “I don’t know. Therefore, science hasn’t found an answer yet.”

How do you answer this dilemma?

Pax christi <3
Click to expand...
I think the right phrase is “I don’t know. Therefore God might be real.” What you suggest as the title simply doesn’t follow.
 
Last edited:
Yes, it would be a better way of phrasing it and some do phrase it so. Though I have seen people, usually lurking in the decrepit wasteland which is the Youtube comments section…most likely from cocky adolescents, word it as I have in the OP.
 
What I mean is that some think that future scientific advances might have the potential to prove things that were otherwise thought of as miracles and supernatural occurrences. I wouldn’t say it means they think they presently know all that science can know. I would revise the phrase as “Science hasn’t found an answer yet because we haven’t discovered the correct angle for viewing/testing X.”

…but that in itself is kind of an “act of faith” in the abilities of science; counting on supposed “future advancements” that may or may not eventually explain a thing.
 
Yep! Some do think that’s the best we’ve got in explaining God though. It’s simply the “god of the gaps” fallacy spelled out in a more mocking way. It’s the flimsiest of straw men though.
 
It depends on what you mean by “silent”.
He doesn’t always speak through a booming voice in the clouds. His speech goes beyond the audible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top