Atheists, literary evidence?

Question

Kaborka: Yes you are thick. The claim is made that literary statements do not constitute evidence. Therefore, to use literary statements to deny the existence of a god, based upon the literary claims, should not, logically, constitute evidence. But then that is exactly what Atheists do. Because Zeus/Jesus/Rambo is described as some unbelievable thing, it is not real. Instead of actually using real evidence to support their claims.

Atheists never actually argue proof of somethings existence, they only argue notions and beliefs. I've seen some very good comments and points made, but I've seen some "christian logic" wrapped in atheist attire as well.

Answer 1

If we use pagan gods as an example of Christian foolishness, it's in irony, come on stay on the same page.

Answer 2

Neither. A book itself is not evidence for anything, just a literary work.

Atheists do not argue which god is more real according to the literary works on its name, we don't argue that Poseidon is more real than God because he spoke to Jason and his Argonauts. We are simply able to dismiss Christian claims for their god along the many others in literature. As I often refer to bible characters (God, Jesus, The Apostles) as fictional characters in a work of bronze age literature.

Answer 3

No one is saying that those other texts prove that those gods exist.  They are simply records of the beliefs of a people, just as the Bible is.  You're confusing two completely different things.  

The Bible is sufficient evidence to prove that a particular ethnic group believed those things in that time, just like the literature of any other culture.  However, it's not sufficient to prove that their beliefs were true.  There is no inconsistency.

Answer 4

No atheist is claiming that the Pagan gods were real -- if so we wouldn't be atheists. We're saying that historical research shows that a lot of the stories in the bible existed in other mythologies prior to the bible.

It's not the physical character of being printed on paper that disqualifies the bible. It's the methodology of creating the book that's relevant.

A scholarly work, studying historical evidence, citing it's sources, searching for corroborating evidence, is different than writing (and stealing) a bunch of fairy tales and claiming them to be true.

Edit: To answer your question to John S, YES, any book about mythology/religion/folklore that an atheist would consider valid -- such as the works of Joseph Campbell -- would cite their sources.

Edit: You understand what atheism is, but you don't seem to understand what a work of literary research is. Is the bible a work of research, examining stories and attempting to verify their accuracy? Of course not.

Edit: You're comparing apples and oranges, is your problem. The bible IS evidence of something: it is evidence that there are religions based on the bible. Nobody is arguing about that. It is NOT evidence that the claims within it are true. In other words, it is not evidence that there is a biblical god.

Other works of mythology ARE evidence that other religions once existed, based on this (what we now call) mythology. They are NOT evidence that the claims of their mythology is true.

Further, the similiarities between some of thse mythologies to the stories of the bible is evidence that the bible scribes plagiarized or co-opted from these other religions. It is NOT evidence that the bible or any of the other mythologies were true.

Are we clear, finally?

Answer 5

What atheist has ever said that? We reject all gods, hence the word "atheist." We don't call ourselves Achristians, you know.

Answer 6

Maybe their point is that they discredit both equally.

Answer 7

I don't think any literary work is any more or less able to prove the existence of anything that we cannot find with our five senses or a technological recording device.

People feel the need to spend so much time and energy disproving something that, by the admission of its proponents, is a matter of faith. There is no logical reason to believe. Any argument for or against is an exercise in futility. People are going to think what they want to think and believe what they want to believe regardless of any evidence presented to them.

There is a quote I like:

"Everyone must come out of his Exile in his own way." - Dr. Martin Buber

This was tossed off during a lecture he was giving, after he was asked what he meant by 'God'. I think it wonderful that his response can be used for any side of the argument about religion.

Answer 8

a book is only evidence of a writer, a human one, since there is no evidence of a supernatural one.  

Answer 9

An atheist does not believe in pagan gods either.

Generally a book is evidence that somebody thought of something, not of the thing itself.

There is no doubt there are people who think they perceive some kind of god. There is no doubt either that what god they perceive is largely due to their cultural background.

Answer 10

Since when did atheists subscribe to gods at all?

Answer 11

"I know what atheism means. I'm not saying atheists believe in pagan gods. I'm saying atheists will use literary evidence to decry a position and then use similar evidence to define a position. It is inconsistent."

I think you're slightly confused to say the least, dude.  Atheists aren't using literary evidence to decry a position and then use similar evidence to define a position.  They're showing how theists do that and are trying to prove a point.  It is not inconsistent, on the contray, it is consistent with your mentality and shows your hypocrisy and how you deny everything else but claim that your doctrine is the real one by making the same claims that you are so quick to dismiss when others make them

Answer 12

A book written 2000 years ago at a time when our knowledge of the universe was limited, I would call that insuffcient evidence. To take that one simple and outdated book as proof of god's existance isn't enough.  

Answer 13

I have never subscribed to that notion at all. I am well aware that all of those books, cultures, and stories you have presented are categorized into Mythology. Fun interesting stories to read, with morales and explanations of natural phenomena, but in no way confirming the presence of a deity in any way. These stories were written by people long ago, just as authors today write fantastic stories.

Answer 14

Interesting that I would come across this subject today. I have been reading The Case for Christ by Lee Strobel. He was an atheist who starting investigating these claims that Jesus was the Son of God after his wife became a Christian. I've only read the first four chapters, but he has already told of an abundance of evidence he was presented with during his investigation. He uses the word "investigation" because that is where his background is-he is a former legal editor. He puts every bit of evidence, which comes from experts on the subject (professors who have spent their careers studying the literary validity of the New Testament writings), through numerous tests the same way he would do when he was writing about a case as legal editor. I urge any skeptics to read it. I challenge them to dispute the validity of the Gospel and the claims of who Jesus is after reading it.

God Bless!

Answer 15

Because the Bible does not cite its sources.  You will not find any passage in the Bible that says that it's all God's word.  That was a fantasy by religious leaders.  Sorry to burst your bubble.

I'm not an atheist, but I would assume that atheists only accept information that can be backed up by evidence or corroborated somewhere else.

By the way, atheism isn't a "pagan God".  the word means, literally, "without God".

To the poster:  No, they don't.  That's my point.  Religious texts are largely based on specualtion, superstition, and myth.  Hey, I believe in the Source, but I'm not about to start acting like a grossly mistranslated book is "evidence" for my unprovable faith.

Answer 16

.  You missed the whole concept of atheist, didn't you?

Answer 17

It isn't.

No atheist is claiming any gods exist.  Most of the gods invented since the advent of writing have been written about, but we aren't by any stretch saying that that means they're real.

Ting!  Next, please.

Answer 18

Until there is satisfactory laboratory scientific tests to prove of such supernatural spirited beings that can think speak hear and feel and have their power tested under laboratory conditions then it is just that a book of words put into sentences from a period long ago in some remote outpost of civilisation when great nations such as Egypt, Assyrians Babylonian that ruled over those Hebrews as it is written in the chambers of the Gods then it is just that another myth.

Answer 19

You cannot impose your definition of atheist and then use that definition to point out the "oddness" of it.  Atheists believe in no gods, christian, pagan or otherwise.

Answer 20

You have to be very suspicious of any old literature.  If one is written about Zeus and fantastic tales, you can generally deduce that it is probably fiction.  But if a Greek text describes out to butcher a cow, pick olives, and make rope, it was probably written with the intent to be truthful.

What we are saying is the bible seems to be the same type of writing as the one about Zeus.

Answer 21

Huh? Atheists don't think that a book is proof of ANY God's existence. They don't believe any God exists, pagan or Christian. What part of that don't you understand?

Answer 22

No, atheists don't claim that any writings claiming any other god exists is factually accurate, either.  They are all incorrect.  If atheists thought that another book "is enough to support the claims of a pagan god," then they wouldn't be atheists; they would be pagans.

Answer 23

Where do you get the idea that any atheist would accept any claim about any god, pagan or otherwise? Of course no such sort of work can be taken seriously.

Answer 24

I don't think people choose to believe based on proof from a (very old) book. Beliefs are things we believe, we don't have to have a sound reason to believe them, nor do we need proof of their existance.  

Answer 25

Hmmm ..... what gives you the idea atheists believe that a pagan god existed?

Atheists are people who disbelieved in the existence of ANY supreme being(s).

-------

That is not inconsistence, when we say proof that Zeus don't exist when christians ask atheists to proof that their god don't exist. We are just trying to be consistent with our stand. Zeus don't exist and I do not need to proof that, if you want me to proof that your god don't exist, then you have to be consistent and show me proof that Zeus don't exist. If you cannot proof that Zeus don't exist, does not not mean the burden of proof lies with the person who claims positive, not the person who claims negative?

Answer 26

YOUR ARE A REEETAAAARRRDDDDD. sorry, but this is REDICULOUS... do you know what atheism is?????? WE ARE AGAINST ALL GODS. ALL. OF. THEM.