American Unitarian Conference Forum

If I say that "I am just not convinced that a God does not exist" or "I believe in God" and if an atheist ask me to prove it, does the burden of proof fall on me? I never asserted that a God does exist.

In most cases it is not productive to argue with an athiest.

I would merely tell them or say that everyone who is doing good is doing God's work.

If they press the point, just tell them to stand up and look around. They can see evidence of God's work everywhere.

Most young people, that I have met, who state that they are atheist are not truly atheist for they do believe in a supreme force or being but don't accept what the church tells them they must believe.

I always assert my belief in the One God. When you are weak in your assertions of what you believe, others will see that as a weakness and try to get you to change to their way of thinking.

Just remind them that everyone has the free will to believe or not to believe. When they are ready you will freely share your beliefs with them. Till then to argue the point is just a waste of your time.

With love,

Rev Dorris

I have met few atheist-lots of agnostics, but very few people who truly fit the definition of "atheist". I do have one hand friend who is a "militant agnostic"-in other words, "I don't know and you don't either!" Sometimes I can almost relate to that sentiment! I think that acknowledging mystery and ambiguity is a strong beginning and common ground in a liberal religious-atheist/agnostic discussion, since it puts us at a closer starting place than someone of a traditional/orthodox religious viewpoint.

I agree with all of you. I do not like to argue with an atheist about God since it is a waste of time in my opinion as everyone can believe or not believe as they choose. While there are very few militant atheist, I have met them on forums.

There is no proving for either side....we believe in God based on both an emotional and intellectual level...a preponderance of the evidence. In the end...what is the explanation for anything? Just to say it popped into existence answers nothing....what is the source for the initial conditions and laws? The atheist cannot answer that. The theist can posit God...but cannot explain God either...still...a source seems much more reasonable than no explanation. It becomes and endless loop.

I agree once more, thank you for your insight.

I may be naive (I usually am) but I hope that more and more progressives would undertake debating with atheist such as Harris, Dawkins, Barker, and others. Not to convert them, but because, 9 times out of 10, it is the extreme fundamental, conservative view of God and the bible that they have rejected. I've rejected that view also. Most of the debates that I have listened to between Christians and atheist are between literalists and atheists who know of all the bible contradictions, immoral scriptures in the bible, and the actions (or lack thereof) of some portrayals of God in the bible.

While a progressive/atheist debate probably would not sway the atheist, it might help others who think that the only alternative to conservative theism is radical atheism.

On a personal note, I considered becoming an atheist for some time. But my belief in God is not based upon presuppositions that I *know* as proof, but upon my *experiences* of a "more" to life than simple material existence.

Absolutely - especially as I used to be a self-declared atheist and humanist! Humanistic ethics are also based upon compassion, and even atheists believe in interdependence even if they stay at a purely material, naturalistic level (you cannot avoid it).

Often the "god" they don't believe in, you don't believe in either. Many are simply negatively reacting to a very authoritarian, fear-based definition of God - and who can blame them. Maybe eventually they can get to a point where they don't instinctively react to the label and can define what they can believe in.

I would focus on the commonalities of ethical thought instead of debate myself (I've never seen anyone "converted" to a way of thinking through debate).

In the meantime, I prescribe simply applying the Law of Love / Great Commandment of Jesus.