Something struck me: aren’t the atheists just as much condemned to relying on faith for the view as the God fearing people they often criticise?  Let me expand and explain.

1. The existence of God is unverifiable so you can never prove or know for sure whether He really exists (a typical atheist claim).

2. But similarly, you can not prove his non-existence either, for the same reason.

3. Therefore, in order for atheist to believe that God DOES NOT exist, he must rely on an article of faith, just as much as the theist requires an article of faith for his belief that God does exist!!

This is kind of interesting because the main ground on which the atheist attacks the theist is usually on the basis that faith is not a legitimate ground for believing in anything!!! Kind of hypocritical, don’t you think?

It seems that the only escape from being committed to faith is to be an agnostic: the claim that the question of God’s existence can not be/should not be answered….. In other words, they just pass over the question without any kind of commitment either way. Almost like they are running away from the question because they have no way of answering it…. not the most exciting position, don’t you think?
But one does not get off so lightly. To hold the atheist or agnostic positions comes with more of an intellectual cost than one might think!! Here are 3 possible problems:

1. The prime …