freethinker44
Well-Known Member
But that implies all theists use this sort of argument, which not all do. Just a recent influx of encounters with them on RF has prompted this thread. It's tedious to destroy all of their points, only for them to say God doesn't require proof, only faith while at the same time, claiming it as fact.
There are theists who claim they don't know for sure and that's a much more reasonable alternative than claiming knowledge of something that cannot be known. Just as there are atheists who claim they know for sure God doesn't exist, which is just as unreasonable. It's unreasonable to claim something you cannot know.
I think all theists must use some form of this argument. I have debated many, and always, ALWAYS, when their argument fails they fall back on faith as the only proof necessary. I use a lot of logic arguments so what I get all the time is "god is beyond understanding" or something like that which is really a different way of saying "you can only understand with faith". But I have yet to debate a theist who doesn't fall back on faith, everyone from deists to fundamentalist christians, ultimately the only argument they have is faith, all the rest is just rationalizing.