The only thing religion has going for it is that it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist.
I could tell you there are 30 invisible pink zebras in your room right now and you couldn't prove me wrong. You could logically assume I am wrong, but never completely prove.
That is the frustrating part of arguing religion.
Evolution is not proven either and its impossible to prove this even exists either. And I can find 3 layers of rock that no one has ever seen and say the 1st later is 3 years old, the 2nd is 130 years and the 3rd is 4000 years. Just stating how your statement is flawed as well.
Off topic, but my friend compares Christians to EQ and SWG players and Athiests to WoW players. Why? Immaturity reasons.
You can prove how old rock is. Unless you're trying to get really deep saying that you can't prove anything 100%. Which is true.
Either way I don't know how my statement is flawed when you provided no reasoning to why it is.
I will tell you after you stated why mine was =D. (Because you posted first).
Sabian is making a good point. To say "there is no God" is a thoroughly unproveable assertion. To say "a rock is X years old" there are scientific methods to determine this. Now, in the second case, you can chose to dispite the science, but you don't have to leave the known universe to prove it.
To prove that there is no God, one must step outside of Spacetime and look down and see if this God can be observed.
This is why someone saying "there is no God" is an absurd statement, but someone saying, "I do not believe in God" is perfectly reasonable.
One interesting thing to note however is that the main athiests who are out there publishing came to their conclusions about God when they were very young (Hitchens for example was 12). many, many people who believe in God come to that conclusion at the height of their intellectual power (I was 36, CS Lewis was mature -- there are many cases of this).
Most people who lose faith in later life either do not become full atheists and merely doubt the dogma of religion.
Again this doesn't count for all of anything, but most of the people publishing in these areas seem to work this way.
Now, to say that this unproveable assertion concept is all that religion has going for it is kinda odd, considering religion brought us civil rights, ended slavery, gave us the notion of human equality, the notion of having a government of Laws and not men, and pretty much everything we hold dear.
No doubt a lot of bad as well, and this counts against religion, but religion has a great deal going for it.
I am not saying carbon dating is wrong, I just believe the time frame is way off. Yes there may be scientific methods, however, someone thought of how old that layer or rock is and then the assumption was born for that. How do you know for certian, that layer of rock is 4 million years old? Was there a man, living and recorded it 4 million years ago? No.
If you really want to go that far you could start debating every part of history.
Is there some 270 year old man who saw the constitution being written? No, so I could techincally argue that it wasn't even written by Americans, but was forged by someone else.
Did the pyramids just instantly pop into place instead of being built?
Did dinosaurs really roam the earth, or did aliens just drop their old puzzles all over our planet?
Was jesus even a real being? Or did someone just make him up.
It works both ways.
Basically, religion comes down to faith. Even though I lack belief in any deity, I have to respect the faith some people have. It's hard to argue against faith, which is why I don't bother most of the time. The only exception to that rule is when religion is being forced on myself or others that don't want any part of it.
Originally posted by Sabiancym Basically, religion comes down to faith. Even though I lack belief in any deity, I have to respect the faith some people have. It's hard to argue against faith, which is why I don't bother most of the time. The only exception to that rule is when religion is being forced on myself or others that don't want any part of it.
Faith is just a lack of the necessary mental discipline/faculties to consider other possibilities.
There is no faith in science: Empirical "facts" are not really facts, but merely results from hypothesis testing. Mathematical derivations are based on manipulations of sets of axioms which follow a convention (consistency) ; there are no absolutes.
Getting to the point, science is not arrogant enough to prescribe absolute truths and the evolution hypothesis is just a hypothesis and not a truth. I can't respect faith, because it is a form of arrogance.
It would be an outright lie to say that any strong atheist (I'm a weak atheist; a person that does not assume the existence of a god, but does not deny the existence of one either.) does not have faith, so it is still a religion of sorts.
Looking at it all abstractly, an indicator function of faith is sort of a measure of risk aversion.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
I am just curious. I've been trying to explain my thoughts to one of my friends, and it is growing more and more into a heated battle, rather than a discussion. Any advice?
For a religious person religion is a big deal, it is part of their life and part of what they are.
For atheists it is not that important to feel atheist, so if people try to discredit their theory they usually move on if they are not good at defending their view.
It s not going to change their life if they lose a debate (there are of course the Atheist associations, but those are crazy people so I am not gonna put them in the equation).
But for a religious person is very important that after the debate, their faith is still intact.
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
Well, being agnostic, I do believe in a higher power, just none of these religions.
Being an atheist, you shouldnt have to view a point on religion. nuff said. You dont beileve in anything. Thats it. Dont view points or topics on someones religion. You have no say in anything to do with religion. Which is why you so happen to get into heated battles with someone religious. No religious person is going to have a religious discussion with someone who is not.
Well according from what I hear agnostics are considered wusses by both theists and atheists:P Hehe joking of course:)
I don't agree though that a person who is not religious can't view or have a say in religious matters. Many theologists are not theists yet they debate theology and holy manuscripts. So if you study the subject you should be excluded because of your chosen beliefs? Atheists don't believe in any god, not in "anything" unless I understood the meaning wrong in which case i am sorry.
If a religious person excludes a non religious one and vice versa then maybe their heads are too deep inside their behinds to actually have a conversation you know. Maybe I am used from the conversations with Fishermage so I am a bit of idealist it seems, but I don't see why 2 people of opposite ideals can't have a normal discussion.
Aye, Nihilism, not Atheism, is the belief in absolutely nothing, and those guys have a hard time convincing themselves they aren't just a brain in a lab jar "dreaming" about the world.
And yeah, you could say Agnostics are the fence sitters in this topic.
“Today a young man on Acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one conscienceless experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death. Life is only a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves."
Bill Hicks, acid user.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Originally posted by Sabiancym Basically, religion comes down to faith. Even though I lack belief in any deity, I have to respect the faith some people have. It's hard to argue against faith, which is why I don't bother most of the time. The only exception to that rule is when religion is being forced on myself or others that don't want any part of it.
Faith is just a lack of the necessary mental discipline/faculties to consider other possibilities.
There is no faith in science: Empirical "facts" are not really facts, but merely results from hypothesis testing. Mathematical derivations are based on manipulations of sets of axioms which follow a convention (consistency) ; there are no absolutes.
Getting to the point, science is not arrogant enough to prescribe absolute truths and the evolution hypothesis is just a hypothesis and not a truth. I can't respect faith, because it is a form of arrogance.
It would be an outright lie to say that any strong atheist (I'm a weak atheist; a person that does not assume the existence of a god, but does not deny the existence of one either.) does not have faith, so it is still a religion of sorts.
Looking at it all abstractly, an indicator function of faith is sort of a measure of risk aversion.
I agree.
I don't think I worded it correctly, but I meant to say I respect the argument of faith. They have somehow turned the 2 year old kids saying "Nuh uh" into an acceptable argument for something. For that, I applaud them.
I will always question the reasoning and intellect of anyone believing in any greater being.
The only thing religion has going for it is that it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist.
I could tell you there are 30 invisible pink zebras in your room right now and you couldn't prove me wrong. You could logically assume I am wrong, but never completely prove.
That is the frustrating part of arguing religion.
Yeah and its impossble to prove evolution or the big bang theory too, but apprently its ok to believe in these things and not be mocked.
Basicly if its close friend just leave out religion. I dont talk bout religion or poltics with my friends. There are so many other things to talk about that we can leave that behind.
Hold on Snow Leopard, imma let you finish, but Windows had one of the best operating systems of all time.
If the Powerball lottery was like Lotro, nobody would win for 2 years, and then everyone in Nebraska would win on the same day. And then Nebraska would get nerfed.-pinkwood lotro fourms
AMD 4800 2.4ghz-3GB RAM 533mhz-EVGA 9500GT 512mb-320gb HD
I am just curious. I've been trying to explain my thoughts to one of my friends, and it is growing more and more into a heated battle, rather than a discussion. Any advice?
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
Personally I don't and have never been a part of nor supported religion. I never had "faith" as a belief in something, only a knowledge that something was there at least according to the majority of evidence, that something being a god, the God. Do I still believe the same now? Yes. Do I give a darn about serving him..nope. I've changed my mind/ways about acting as I always should and living to please him.
Anywho if your friend wants to argue about religion then it's going to get ugly, and it will be ugly if you keep imposing upon him that he has a religion. A religion is nothing more than a set of rules you follow, belief is thinking something is a certain way whether or not there is evidence to support it is that way, or even if evidence says it isn't that way. Faith is belief in the absense of evidence.
If you simply call him stupid for believing something which there is little proof of..well if there's little proof why shoudl it bother you? Just tell your friend you don't want to hear it and if he keeps badgering you then forget about him, he needs to learn his lesson. You are free to respect him however much you want, or not at all. If he truly believes in what he believes in, then whatever you say should not change how he feels about it and you are free to say what you will about his beliefs. If it is a religion then realize it's not just up to you and him how things turn out..it's also up to his doctrine.
I am just curious. I've been trying to explain my thoughts to one of my friends, and it is growing more and more into a heated battle, rather than a discussion. Any advice?
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
I am not interested in those people, as I mentioned in my previous post, whoever create Atheist Associations are crazy people and a bit retarded too.
I am talking about regular guys who have good reasons not to be religious and don't have egomaniac syndrome, therefore their brain is not eaten by their own stupidity.
The only thing religion has going for it is that it is impossible to prove something doesn't exist.
I could tell you there are 30 invisible pink zebras in your room right now and you couldn't prove me wrong. You could logically assume I am wrong, but never completely prove.
That is the frustrating part of arguing religion.
Yeah and its impossble to prove evolution or the big bang theory too, but apprently its ok to believe in these things and not be mocked.
Basicly if its close friend just leave out religion. I dont talk bout religion or poltics with my friends. There are so many other things to talk about that we can leave that behind.
No you can't prove it. But you don't see Scientists scaring kids with threats of eternal fire and brimstone if they don't believe the world was formed by a massive explosion a long time ago.
I am just curious. I've been trying to explain my thoughts to one of my friends, and it is growing more and more into a heated battle, rather than a discussion. Any advice?
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
I am not interested in those people, as I mentioned in my previous post, whoever create Atheist Associations are crazy people and a bit retarded too.
I am talking about regular guys who have good reasons not to be religious and don't have egomaniac syndrome, therefore their brain is not eaten by their own stupidity.
Yeah, but for atheist that's very rare. And by the way, your sig of the Smirnoff, did you know those birds are a masonic symbol? In the scottish rite?
Originally posted by sniperg So what you are saying is that there are christians that don't believe in the bible which is their holiest book and in their God? And what exactly makes them christians if you don't mind me asking? An organised religion means that you accept such facts to be part of it. It's not cherry picking. Unless of course you make a cult then you can I guess.
Just leave people alone, especially mild christians who are mostly (I said mostly) peace loving people. 99% of people in Europe are christians and almost all of them also believe in Darwin and the Big-Bang theory.
So there goes your theory of christians needing to believe everything from the bible. For the most part I see atheists as annoying towards christians.
Believe it or not, there's no rules to be christian, you can believe whatever you want. There's no master, book, wikipedia definition or guide you absolutely need to follow to be a christian and anyone who tells you differently should get a grip. There's some basic values like compassion and some bible sections you might want to read, but no one will force you.
You can walk into any christian church here and no one will ask you if you're a christian, no one will ask you if you read the bible or if you believe it. We listen to stories and tales. That's all I do, and I wear a cross and I'm a christian, I'm baptised, and I don't believe a lot of the things written in the bible.
I don't know where this idea came from that christianity is dictated like a forced set of rules but it certainly didn't came from my town because people from everywhere are christian, people who believe 100% of the bible and people who believe 1%. So chill out.
You know you are really not supposed to carry around a cross on your person right?
"4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
Although it is considered part of the Christian faith it is still an "Idol".
Originally posted by sniperg So what you are saying is that there are christians that don't believe in the bible which is their holiest book and in their God? And what exactly makes them christians if you don't mind me asking? An organised religion means that you accept such facts to be part of it. It's not cherry picking. Unless of course you make a cult then you can I guess.
Just leave people alone, especially mild christians who are mostly (I said mostly) peace loving people. 99% of people in Europe are christians and almost all of them also believe in Darwin and the Big-Bang theory.
So there goes your theory of christians needing to believe everything from the bible. For the most part I see atheists as annoying towards christians.
Believe it or not, there's no rules to be christian, you can believe whatever you want. There's no master, book, wikipedia definition or guide you absolutely need to follow to be a christian and anyone who tells you differently should get a grip. There's some basic values like compassion and some bible sections you might want to read, but no one will force you.
You can walk into any christian church here and no one will ask you if you're a christian, no one will ask you if you read the bible or if you believe it. We listen to stories and tales. That's all I do, and I wear a cross and I'm a christian, I'm baptised, and I don't believe a lot of the things written in the bible.
I don't know where this idea came from that christianity is dictated like a forced set of rules but it certainly didn't came from my town because people from everywhere are christian, people who believe 100% of the bible and people who believe 1%. So chill out.
You know you are really not supposed to carry around a cross on your person right?
"4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
Although it is considered part of the Christian faith it is still an "Idol".
Technically you are correct. And I remember at school we were taught how there was this big fight about whether or not such icons are considered "idols" (In greek orthodox all the saints etc are depicted in "pictures" for which the english word eludes me). But there was a council that decided that it wasn't the matterial that you worshipped but instead you worshipped the representation of the symbol.
I am pretty sure that applies in this case also though.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
I remember my freshman year in college when I had to do a paper. And I choose why Atheist choose to "hate" Christianity verses other religions. After along tedious work for a week and half. I came with the results of "I would accept Buddhism or Hinduism over Judaism and Christianity". So I asked why. And the general answer I came up with was, because they allowed for more selfishness then the other 2 religions.
I remember my freshman year in college when I had to do a paper. And I choose why Atheist choose to "hate" Christianity verses other religions. After along tedious work for a week and half. I came with the results of "I would accept Buddhism or Hinduism over Judaism and Christianity". So I asked why. And the general answer I came up with was, because they allowed for more selfishness then the other 2 religions.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
I remember my freshman year in college when I had to do a paper. And I choose why Atheist choose to "hate" Christianity verses other religions. After along tedious work for a week and half. I came with the results of "I would accept Buddhism or Hinduism over Judaism and Christianity". So I asked why. And the general answer I came up with was, because they allowed for more selfishness then the other 2 religions.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
I remember my freshman year in college when I had to do a paper. And I choose why Atheist choose to "hate" Christianity verses other religions. After along tedious work for a week and half. I came with the results of "I would accept Buddhism or Hinduism over Judaism and Christianity". So I asked why. And the general answer I came up with was, because they allowed for more selfishness then the other 2 religions.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
I am not going to respond to you so you can get a kick out of it, because you have low self esteem issues. Seriously, grow up. I feel sorry for you. I really do, because you don't know what you do, you're so lost.
ok, one quick question, since i saw that u guys wer talking about evolution and intelligent design and stuff, im just wondering, how come no one seems to think that maybe god created evolution? maybe people do, but to me it seems like all christians believe that god just suddently created everything, why dosent anyone seem to think that maybe, god made up all the animals and plants and stuff, and kinda made it all happen through evolution?
ok, one quick question, since i saw that u guys wer talking about evolution and intelligent design and stuff, im just wondering, how come no one seems to think that maybe god created evolution? maybe people do, but to me it seems like all christians believe that god just suddently created everything, why dosent anyone seem to think that maybe, god made up all the animals and plants and stuff, and kinda made it all happen through evolution?
Because according to God's word it doesn't. I don't know how God created everything. But I can give you two points. 1. When God created Adam and Eve there was no death, because they were with God. When they sinned, they were seperated by sin from God. Then death came. 2. In Genesis, it states that God made everyhing by it's kind. A kind means, a dog, a cat. So Christians who accept evolution, counterdicts them self with the word of God.
Originally posted by Eronakis Because according to God's word it doesn't. I don't know how God created everything. But I can give you two points. 1. When God created Adam and Eve there was no death, because they were with God. When they sinned, they were seperated by sin from God. Then death came. 2. In Genesis, it states that God made everyhing by it's kind. A kind means, a dog, a cat. So Christians who accept evolution, counterdicts them self with the word of God.
Yet which is God's word, and which is man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
If God created everything, did he not create science?
And if God created science, did he not create the building blocks of life? Did he not create evolution?
Can a person believe in God, yet not believe in man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
Originally posted by Eronakis Because according to God's word it doesn't. I don't know how God created everything. But I can give you two points. 1. When God created Adam and Eve there was no death, because they were with God. When they sinned, they were seperated by sin from God. Then death came. 2. In Genesis, it states that God made everyhing by it's kind. A kind means, a dog, a cat. So Christians who accept evolution, counterdicts them self with the word of God.
Yet which is God's word, and which is man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
If God created everything, did he not create science?
And if God created science, did he not create the building blocks of life? Did he not create evolution?
Can a person believe in God, yet not believe in man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
Maybe there is evolution. But there has been no proof at all. Maybe Darwinism's evolution theory is wrong. Sure, God created science. Science just tells you how God did and made things. A friend of mine last night said that," so according to the bible God created by each kind. What about, since it has never happened, maybe one day it will? Whos to say that they don't evolve into what ever. A possibility. " I can agree with that, because it could. Will it? I don't know. But in my opinion it wont. But you never know.
If people want to consider adaptation and breads making new breads as evolution, alright that is reasonable. But, a dog will always be a dog and a cat will always be a cat.
Well, man wrote it physically you can say, but really, it was the Holy Spirit who wrote the bible. The statement I just said, you may not understand, but maybe if you study Christianity with an open heart and mind you can see. If you still truely can not believe in Christianity after knowing both sides of the coin, that is fair in my opinion.
Comments
Evolution is not proven either and its impossible to prove this even exists either. And I can find 3 layers of rock that no one has ever seen and say the 1st later is 3 years old, the 2nd is 130 years and the 3rd is 4000 years. Just stating how your statement is flawed as well.
Off topic, but my friend compares Christians to EQ and SWG players and Athiests to WoW players. Why? Immaturity reasons.
You can prove how old rock is. Unless you're trying to get really deep saying that you can't prove anything 100%. Which is true.
Either way I don't know how my statement is flawed when you provided no reasoning to why it is.
I will tell you after you stated why mine was =D. (Because you posted first).
Sabian is making a good point. To say "there is no God" is a thoroughly unproveable assertion. To say "a rock is X years old" there are scientific methods to determine this. Now, in the second case, you can chose to dispite the science, but you don't have to leave the known universe to prove it.
To prove that there is no God, one must step outside of Spacetime and look down and see if this God can be observed.
This is why someone saying "there is no God" is an absurd statement, but someone saying, "I do not believe in God" is perfectly reasonable.
One interesting thing to note however is that the main athiests who are out there publishing came to their conclusions about God when they were very young (Hitchens for example was 12). many, many people who believe in God come to that conclusion at the height of their intellectual power (I was 36, CS Lewis was mature -- there are many cases of this).
Most people who lose faith in later life either do not become full atheists and merely doubt the dogma of religion.
Again this doesn't count for all of anything, but most of the people publishing in these areas seem to work this way.
Now, to say that this unproveable assertion concept is all that religion has going for it is kinda odd, considering religion brought us civil rights, ended slavery, gave us the notion of human equality, the notion of having a government of Laws and not men, and pretty much everything we hold dear.
No doubt a lot of bad as well, and this counts against religion, but religion has a great deal going for it.
I am not saying carbon dating is wrong, I just believe the time frame is way off. Yes there may be scientific methods, however, someone thought of how old that layer or rock is and then the assumption was born for that. How do you know for certian, that layer of rock is 4 million years old? Was there a man, living and recorded it 4 million years ago? No.
If you really want to go that far you could start debating every part of history.
Is there some 270 year old man who saw the constitution being written? No, so I could techincally argue that it wasn't even written by Americans, but was forged by someone else.
Did the pyramids just instantly pop into place instead of being built?
Did dinosaurs really roam the earth, or did aliens just drop their old puzzles all over our planet?
Was jesus even a real being? Or did someone just make him up.
It works both ways.
Basically, religion comes down to faith. Even though I lack belief in any deity, I have to respect the faith some people have. It's hard to argue against faith, which is why I don't bother most of the time. The only exception to that rule is when religion is being forced on myself or others that don't want any part of it.
The Official God FAQ
Faith is just a lack of the necessary mental discipline/faculties to consider other possibilities.
There is no faith in science: Empirical "facts" are not really facts, but merely results from hypothesis testing. Mathematical derivations are based on manipulations of sets of axioms which follow a convention (consistency) ; there are no absolutes.
Getting to the point, science is not arrogant enough to prescribe absolute truths and the evolution hypothesis is just a hypothesis and not a truth. I can't respect faith, because it is a form of arrogance.
It would be an outright lie to say that any strong atheist (I'm a weak atheist; a person that does not assume the existence of a god, but does not deny the existence of one either.) does not have faith, so it is still a religion of sorts.
Looking at it all abstractly, an indicator function of faith is sort of a measure of risk aversion.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
For a religious person religion is a big deal, it is part of their life and part of what they are.
For atheists it is not that important to feel atheist, so if people try to discredit their theory they usually move on if they are not good at defending their view.
It s not going to change their life if they lose a debate (there are of course the Atheist associations, but those are crazy people so I am not gonna put them in the equation).
But for a religious person is very important that after the debate, their faith is still intact.
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
Well according from what I hear agnostics are considered wusses by both theists and atheists:P Hehe joking of course:)
I don't agree though that a person who is not religious can't view or have a say in religious matters. Many theologists are not theists yet they debate theology and holy manuscripts. So if you study the subject you should be excluded because of your chosen beliefs? Atheists don't believe in any god, not in "anything" unless I understood the meaning wrong in which case i am sorry.
If a religious person excludes a non religious one and vice versa then maybe their heads are too deep inside their behinds to actually have a conversation you know. Maybe I am used from the conversations with Fishermage so I am a bit of idealist it seems, but I don't see why 2 people of opposite ideals can't have a normal discussion.
Aye, Nihilism, not Atheism, is the belief in absolutely nothing, and those guys have a hard time convincing themselves they aren't just a brain in a lab jar "dreaming" about the world.
And yeah, you could say Agnostics are the fence sitters in this topic.
“Today a young man on Acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one conscienceless experiencing itself subjectively. There's no such thing as death. Life is only a dream and we're the imagination of ourselves."
Bill Hicks, acid user.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Faith is just a lack of the necessary mental discipline/faculties to consider other possibilities.
There is no faith in science: Empirical "facts" are not really facts, but merely results from hypothesis testing. Mathematical derivations are based on manipulations of sets of axioms which follow a convention (consistency) ; there are no absolutes.
Getting to the point, science is not arrogant enough to prescribe absolute truths and the evolution hypothesis is just a hypothesis and not a truth. I can't respect faith, because it is a form of arrogance.
It would be an outright lie to say that any strong atheist (I'm a weak atheist; a person that does not assume the existence of a god, but does not deny the existence of one either.) does not have faith, so it is still a religion of sorts.
Looking at it all abstractly, an indicator function of faith is sort of a measure of risk aversion.
I agree.
I don't think I worded it correctly, but I meant to say I respect the argument of faith. They have somehow turned the 2 year old kids saying "Nuh uh" into an acceptable argument for something. For that, I applaud them.
I will always question the reasoning and intellect of anyone believing in any greater being.
The Official God FAQ
Yeah and its impossble to prove evolution or the big bang theory too, but apprently its ok to believe in these things and not be mocked.
Basicly if its close friend just leave out religion. I dont talk bout religion or poltics with my friends. There are so many other things to talk about that we can leave that behind.
Hold on Snow Leopard, imma let you finish, but Windows had one of the best operating systems of all time.
If the Powerball lottery was like Lotro, nobody would win for 2 years, and then everyone in Nebraska would win on the same day.
And then Nebraska would get nerfed.-pinkwood lotro fourms
AMD 4800 2.4ghz-3GB RAM 533mhz-EVGA 9500GT 512mb-320gb HD
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
Personally I don't and have never been a part of nor supported religion. I never had "faith" as a belief in something, only a knowledge that something was there at least according to the majority of evidence, that something being a god, the God. Do I still believe the same now? Yes. Do I give a darn about serving him..nope. I've changed my mind/ways about acting as I always should and living to please him.
Anywho if your friend wants to argue about religion then it's going to get ugly, and it will be ugly if you keep imposing upon him that he has a religion. A religion is nothing more than a set of rules you follow, belief is thinking something is a certain way whether or not there is evidence to support it is that way, or even if evidence says it isn't that way. Faith is belief in the absense of evidence.
If you simply call him stupid for believing something which there is little proof of..well if there's little proof why shoudl it bother you? Just tell your friend you don't want to hear it and if he keeps badgering you then forget about him, he needs to learn his lesson. You are free to respect him however much you want, or not at all. If he truly believes in what he believes in, then whatever you say should not change how he feels about it and you are free to say what you will about his beliefs. If it is a religion then realize it's not just up to you and him how things turn out..it's also up to his doctrine.
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
I am not interested in those people, as I mentioned in my previous post, whoever create Atheist Associations are crazy people and a bit retarded too.
I am talking about regular guys who have good reasons not to be religious and don't have egomaniac syndrome, therefore their brain is not eaten by their own stupidity.
Yeah and its impossble to prove evolution or the big bang theory too, but apprently its ok to believe in these things and not be mocked.
Basicly if its close friend just leave out religion. I dont talk bout religion or poltics with my friends. There are so many other things to talk about that we can leave that behind.
No you can't prove it. But you don't see Scientists scaring kids with threats of eternal fire and brimstone if they don't believe the world was formed by a massive explosion a long time ago.
The Official God FAQ
Also sometimes is very difficult for religious people to defend religion against an atheist during a discussion.
The Bible, or the Koran or whatever Holy Book, requires faith, they cannot be explained rationally.
Atheist usually use rational arguments during the debate, and religious people have problem to counter act those arguments without mentioning the faith.
Faith is what makes religion, and you can never win a debate if faith is involved, no matter how hard you try.
LOL Atheists use rational arguements in debates? SHOW ME! Everytime I see a Christian and an Atheist debate , the atheist always pull an adhominon. The Christian asks an legitimate question and the atheist changes the subject and then makes fun of him. By the way Kent Hovind is a great Christian debater imo. Usually the debates I have seen, it's not about faith at all.
I am not interested in those people, as I mentioned in my previous post, whoever create Atheist Associations are crazy people and a bit retarded too.
I am talking about regular guys who have good reasons not to be religious and don't have egomaniac syndrome, therefore their brain is not eaten by their own stupidity.
Yeah, but for atheist that's very rare. And by the way, your sig of the Smirnoff, did you know those birds are a masonic symbol? In the scottish rite?
Just leave people alone, especially mild christians who are mostly (I said mostly) peace loving people. 99% of people in Europe are christians and almost all of them also believe in Darwin and the Big-Bang theory.
So there goes your theory of christians needing to believe everything from the bible. For the most part I see atheists as annoying towards christians.
Believe it or not, there's no rules to be christian, you can believe whatever you want. There's no master, book, wikipedia definition or guide you absolutely need to follow to be a christian and anyone who tells you differently should get a grip. There's some basic values like compassion and some bible sections you might want to read, but no one will force you.
You can walk into any christian church here and no one will ask you if you're a christian, no one will ask you if you read the bible or if you believe it. We listen to stories and tales. That's all I do, and I wear a cross and I'm a christian, I'm baptised, and I don't believe a lot of the things written in the bible.
I don't know where this idea came from that christianity is dictated like a forced set of rules but it certainly didn't came from my town because people from everywhere are christian, people who believe 100% of the bible and people who believe 1%. So chill out.
You know you are really not supposed to carry around a cross on your person right?
"4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
Although it is considered part of the Christian faith it is still an "Idol".
Just leave people alone, especially mild christians who are mostly (I said mostly) peace loving people. 99% of people in Europe are christians and almost all of them also believe in Darwin and the Big-Bang theory.
So there goes your theory of christians needing to believe everything from the bible. For the most part I see atheists as annoying towards christians.
Believe it or not, there's no rules to be christian, you can believe whatever you want. There's no master, book, wikipedia definition or guide you absolutely need to follow to be a christian and anyone who tells you differently should get a grip. There's some basic values like compassion and some bible sections you might want to read, but no one will force you.
You can walk into any christian church here and no one will ask you if you're a christian, no one will ask you if you read the bible or if you believe it. We listen to stories and tales. That's all I do, and I wear a cross and I'm a christian, I'm baptised, and I don't believe a lot of the things written in the bible.
I don't know where this idea came from that christianity is dictated like a forced set of rules but it certainly didn't came from my town because people from everywhere are christian, people who believe 100% of the bible and people who believe 1%. So chill out.
You know you are really not supposed to carry around a cross on your person right?
"4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, whether in the form of anything that is in heaven above, or that is on the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth."
Although it is considered part of the Christian faith it is still an "Idol".
Technically you are correct. And I remember at school we were taught how there was this big fight about whether or not such icons are considered "idols" (In greek orthodox all the saints etc are depicted in "pictures" for which the english word eludes me). But there was a council that decided that it wasn't the matterial that you worshipped but instead you worshipped the representation of the symbol.
I am pretty sure that applies in this case also though.
A friend is not him who provides support during your failures.A friend is the one that cheers you during your successes.
I remember my freshman year in college when I had to do a paper. And I choose why Atheist choose to "hate" Christianity verses other religions. After along tedious work for a week and half. I came with the results of "I would accept Buddhism or Hinduism over Judaism and Christianity". So I asked why. And the general answer I came up with was, because they allowed for more selfishness then the other 2 religions.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
This is a sequence of characters intended to produce some profound mental effect, but it has failed.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
No, it was Whazza Matter U.
What school was that? Mongolotech? Retarvard? Downsford? Wherever you went to school, it sounds like they make sure their graduates can write coherent sentences.
I am not going to respond to you so you can get a kick out of it, because you have low self esteem issues. Seriously, grow up. I feel sorry for you. I really do, because you don't know what you do, you're so lost.
religious people wont be as open minded as atheists and wont accept your views. its that simple.
What a first post.
I am very open minded. And when you see the truth, its hard to deny it.
ok, one quick question, since i saw that u guys wer talking about evolution and intelligent design and stuff, im just wondering, how come no one seems to think that maybe god created evolution? maybe people do, but to me it seems like all christians believe that god just suddently created everything, why dosent anyone seem to think that maybe, god made up all the animals and plants and stuff, and kinda made it all happen through evolution?
answer:
When an Athiest recognizes that his is a religion. Takes as much faith to believe God doesn't exist as it does to believe He does.
Atheism doesn't demand anything from you,Christianity does.Thus it's the path of least Resistance.
Trade in material assumptions for spiritual facts and make permanent progress.
Because according to God's word it doesn't. I don't know how God created everything. But I can give you two points. 1. When God created Adam and Eve there was no death, because they were with God. When they sinned, they were seperated by sin from God. Then death came. 2. In Genesis, it states that God made everyhing by it's kind. A kind means, a dog, a cat. So Christians who accept evolution, counterdicts them self with the word of God.
Yet which is God's word, and which is man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
If God created everything, did he not create science?
And if God created science, did he not create the building blocks of life? Did he not create evolution?
Can a person believe in God, yet not believe in man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
Yet which is God's word, and which is man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
If God created everything, did he not create science?
And if God created science, did he not create the building blocks of life? Did he not create evolution?
Can a person believe in God, yet not believe in man's interpretation and transcription of God's word?
Maybe there is evolution. But there has been no proof at all. Maybe Darwinism's evolution theory is wrong. Sure, God created science. Science just tells you how God did and made things. A friend of mine last night said that," so according to the bible God created by each kind. What about, since it has never happened, maybe one day it will? Whos to say that they don't evolve into what ever. A possibility. " I can agree with that, because it could. Will it? I don't know. But in my opinion it wont. But you never know.
If people want to consider adaptation and breads making new breads as evolution, alright that is reasonable. But, a dog will always be a dog and a cat will always be a cat.
Well, man wrote it physically you can say, but really, it was the Holy Spirit who wrote the bible. The statement I just said, you may not understand, but maybe if you study Christianity with an open heart and mind you can see. If you still truely can not believe in Christianity after knowing both sides of the coin, that is fair in my opinion.