DnAuK Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 The problem is that you have no evidence to prove we were born WITH belief, so around we go. The difference is that science specifically questions itself, has peer reviews, updated studies using improved techniques. So when science gets it wrong, it more often than admits it and changes. Religion does none of these things and logic would dictate that in a world where no one can 100% prove the existence of God or not, that the area who challenges their own assumptions and questions is more likely to be believable than those who do not. I can guarantee that scientists all over the world are desperately trying to PROVE God DOES exist, as the pure kudos points alone would make them one of the greatest legends in the history of humanity, yet none have come even close, because if they had, it would be the biggest news story of any of our lives. This the reason you can't win an argument against religion. If someone believe then they have faith, simply because there is no evidence to go on. One might in fact argue that if God were proven to exist then faith would have no place in the world. It would be like believing in the Prime Minister or something - a thing you know exists. So in some respects religion would be dead. You would just have a massive group of people wanting to know who elected this God and saying that his/her/its very existence was undemocratic. Plus imagine the stack of complaints letters God would get... So indeed around we go, and around we will always go until either God in proved, or faith finally dwindles away and religion eventually dies a death. Which I doubt is actually very far away, in the grand scheme of things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted December 16, 2015 Author Share Posted December 16, 2015 This the reason you can't win an argument against religion. If someone believe then they have faith, simply because there is no evidence to go on. One might in fact argue that if God were proven to exist then faith would have no place in the world. It would be like believing in the Prime Minister or something - a thing you know exists. So in some respects religion would be dead. You would just have a massive group of people wanting to know who elected this God and saying that his/her/its very existence was undemocratic. Plus imagine the stack of complaints letters God would get... So indeed around we go, and around we will always go until either God in proved, or faith finally dwindles away and religion eventually dies a death. Which I doubt is actually very far away, in the grand scheme of things. Faith: The decision to believe something because it's not true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 This the reason you can't win an argument against religion. If someone believe then they have faith, simply because there is no evidence to go on. One might in fact argue that if God were proven to exist then faith would have no place in the world. It would be like believing in the Prime Minister or something - a thing you know exists. So in some respects religion would be dead. You would just have a massive group of people wanting to know who elected this God and saying that his/her/its very existence was undemocratic. Plus imagine the stack of complaints letters God would get... So indeed around we go, and around we will always go until either God in proved, or faith finally dwindles away and religion eventually dies a death. Which I doubt is actually very far away, in the grand scheme of things. Faith: The decision to believe something because it's not true. It sounds like you're talking about blind faith rather than simply faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Faith: The decision to believe something because it's not true. If you ever get to a point in a discussion where someone answers 'It's my faith' the discussion is effectively over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 The problem is that you have no evidence to prove we were born WITH belief, so around we go. The difference is that science specifically questions itself, has peer reviews, updated studies using improved techniques. So when science gets it wrong, it more often than admits it and changes. Religion does none of these things and logic would dictate that in a world where no one can 100% prove the existence of God or not, that the area who challenges their own assumptions and questions is more likely to be believable than those who do not. I can guarantee that scientists all over the world are desperately trying to PROVE God DOES exist, as the pure kudos points alone would make them one of the greatest legends in the history of humanity, yet none have come even close, because if they had, it would be the biggest news story of any of our lives. I don' think you understood my post. This is not about science getting it wrong or right- I know science is always changing and nothing in science is 100% right. We know that from history etc and thats a different topic alone. I was talking about our rational sense- how we have the ability to determine truths etc. Based on blind natural forces, randomness etc- are you presupposing that rationality came from non rational blind physical processes? If so then to believe this is to believe something can come from nothing. How can rationality come from non rationality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chelle-82 Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 Slagging off religious people is being intolerant in my view.... 100% agreed! I'm not religious but my entire family is riddled with Catholics! And there is no religious group more intolerant of others than Catholics However, I have come across some atheists who really are very intolerant of people with faith (my OH being one!!) but I think they're a bit like ex smokers.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RootsBooster Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 100% agreed! I'm not religious but my entire family is riddled with Catholics! And there is no religious group more intolerant of others than Catholics However, I have come across some atheists who really are very intolerant of people with faith (my OH being one!!) but I think they're a bit like ex smokers.. In what way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted December 16, 2015 Author Share Posted December 16, 2015 I don' think you understood my post. This is not about science getting it wrong or right- I know science is always changing and nothing in science is 100% right. We know that from history etc and thats a different topic alone. I was talking about our rational sense- how we have the ability to determine truths etc. Based on blind natural forces, randomness etc- are you presupposing that rationality came from non rational blind physical processes? If so then to believe this is to believe something can come from nothing. How can rationality come from non rationality. Complex, ordered patterns come from randomness all the time. Fractals for example are everywhere in nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SnailyBoy Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 100% agreed! I'm not religious but my entire family is riddled with Catholics! And there is no religious group more intolerant of others than Catholics However, I have come across some atheists who really are very intolerant of people with faith (my OH being one!!) but I think they're a bit like ex smokers.. Can you give examples of the intolerance towards people with faith you've come across? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betterman Posted December 16, 2015 Share Posted December 16, 2015 (edited) Slagging off religious people is being intolerant in my view.... According to the Council of Euroup. Intolerance is a lack of respect for practices or beliefs other than one's own. Intolerance can manifest itself in a wide range of actions from avoidance through hate speech to physical injury or even murder. So I would say you are rght. Now we all just need to accept that we are all intolerant and if you are not intolerant of FGM there must be something wrong with you. Edited December 16, 2015 by betterman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now