Register
Events
Popular
More
Post #1If one claims there is a God, they need to prove there is a God with scientific evidence for it to be considered true. Otherwise there's no reason to believe in him any more than you believe in the flying spaghetti monster. Correct?
Why would the burden of proof fall on the agnostic to disprove the claim that does not have any observable evidence? (books written by men do not count as scientific evidence). In what strange world do we live in where a claim with no evidence (actually having evidence that directly contradicts the claim) is considered true until it can be disproved? You might as well say "The flying spaghetti monster exists until you can disprove his existence, otherwise, you're wrong", which as I'm sure you'll all agree is ridiculous.
Religion has actually tried to adapt to contradictory scientific evidence by changing their standpoint from "this is the unaltered 100% true word of god as it happened" to "ok well maybe the words were more vague and metaphorical and genesis days are actually millions of years" etc. It shows that people are so strongly addicted to spirituality that they won't let go even in the face of mountains of contradictory evidence, instead trying to shape their belief into a more modern and attractive package. Illogical claims are still illogical however, and it all still boils down to the same general point, the claim isn't right until proven wrong.. its wrong until proven right.
-
-
Nobody can prove or disprove most religions, it's up to the person to decide whether they want to partake in them.
-
Read the post. This isn't about whether someone has the right to partake in a belief, of course they have that right. It's addressing the general lack of logic behind it.
-
Exactly. If they want to be part of a religion, that is up to them. They don't need logic to believe certain things.
-
More than likely because religion's roots lie in faith and not logic...
-
It has been hypothesized that humans need to believe in a god as part of our make up.
Granted, this should be mostly pointless now that we have evolved to be intelligent enough to know that there is almost certainly no god.
Now, the main reason that people are religious, at least in my opinion is because their parents were and now they are simply because they don't want to disappoint their parents. They in turn make their kids follow the religion they are in, ad infinitum.
-
Because some people want something to believe in, they don't care if they can't prove it.
Also, wasn't there a study that said that the Human brain is 'wired' in such a way that fiath is easy for them to believe?
-
Oh, right, so ignoring mountains of scientific evidence and saying we don't need logic is obviously something an educated person would do.
-
Again, they don't care. A lot of religious people just believe in the morals and the support of the other members of the religion. It doesn't matter how stupid or illogical the religion sounds on paper.
-
Religion isn't a matter of logic. It's a matter of identity. People, even very logical people, aren't just going to switch to atheism just because they can't prove God exists, because believing in God is part of who they are. I don't know why some people have so much time accepting that. Lots of great philosophers, logical thinkers and scientists throughout history have been Christians or Deists. What isn't logical is to have the stance that everyone who believes in anything they can't scientifically prove is stupid because of it.
-
Christianity is actually one of the only modern religions that is based off of historical events and the history of Jesus Christ is where most of Christians get their "evidence".
Corinthians 15:1-20 basically says the Christian faith is dependent upon the historical fact of the life and death of Jesus.
However everybody has a different interpretation where Jesus was the messiah, maybe he existed but wasn't God, or maybe he never existed at all.
-
Dont make me talk now.
-
Claims based on evidence
Claims based on faith.
The first one is logical, the second one isn't.
-
Religion is easy to believe if you're unable to comprehend the truth. I'd imagine it would be kind of hard to a true scientist to believe that God created everything on earth. That's what it comes down to.
I can see how people get `addicted` to the community and the routine. I can see how it holds people together to have something to believe in.
But the indisputable bottom line is that religion is illogical.
-
Before trying to prove there is no God, try to explain what happened from the start. There is something out there that we don't know. You can't deny it.
-
It appears humans always want to know everything about themselves including their creation and what will happen to their personalty after they die. They naturally turn to a bunch of stores passed on for centuries and try to prove information about how we ended up here and where we go next.
Personally I do not see why we must criticize the ones that want to believe that. It really has nothing to do with anyone else. (Sometimes people make it though and that's when it gets annoying)
-
I live assuming wrong unless proven right. The logic behind Religion as I see it is to give people (a false sense of) hope.
-
Using the Bible to prove that Jesus was the son of God is like using Lord Of The Rings to prove that elves exist.
-
Yes, my bottom line is that religion (and faith) are both illogical. Whether not society wants to accept that is not the point of my post. You don't get to just ignore science and logic because they disprove some of your traditions.
-
There are no "mountains of scientific evidence" for saying God doesn't exist, and if you're talking about Evolution and stuff like that, then you're lumping all Christians into one group, which is not intellectually honest.
Whether or not there's a God is not a matter of science, thinking otherwise is extreme arrogance on the part of an Atheist.
-
If that's the case, why is that a bad thing?
We give false hope to each other daily.
-
You don't have to prove there isn't a God, there's no evidence for God. It works the other way around. You have to prove there is a God.
-
No one on this planet knows the exact origins of the universe, yes, we have theories as to where we came from, but none of them are without problems. I think until we have substantial evidence as to our origins it would be ignorant and wrong to bash other peoples' beliefs, however ridiculous or unlikely they are.
-
Are you trying to imply they don't?
-
Science doesn't claim to know the answer to that question. But we're working on getting the answer to that (heard of the LHC?). Religion pretends to know the answer to that question while not addressing several questions itself.. (like what created the creator)
-
But a lot of people would argue that the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John would be truthful because they're basically eye-witness accounts of Jesus' life and the majority of the events that are described in them have been proven by historians to be true.
-
I miss my beautiful Lord_Schrotty because my master Eternalflamez killed him
January 2010
5,827 Posts
Religion is a way to control mass amount of people.
-
But, but, but...... God has always been and always will be. Humans are just to stupid to understand his amazing power!
-
Proving things is important, but how can you explain things like the creation of the universe?
-
This is just my opinion, but there's barely any logic behind religion, other than to comfort people knowing that in their hardships, they always have somewhere to go/they can always pray.
-
And science has the chance to find out what they are. If not, it's still going to answer other questions that religion never could.
Furthermore, you don't need to prove somthing for which there is no proof.
-
Now is it absolutely a bad thing ? I don't think so.
-
to control people.
-
Believing in God isn't an answer to the origins of the universe. It begs more questions than answers. Who is God? Who made God? What was there before God existed?
-
It is also a way to comfort a widow who has recently lost their husband in the battle for cancer, donating millions to the underprivileged across the globe and one of humanity's first steps to a proper civilization.
-
The only way to completely disprove religion is if scientists can explain exactly what happened from the beginning to now and even them people will still be in denial.
-
You don't really have to prove either. Which is good, because it's impossible to prove either.
Whether or not there's a God is a matter of faith, no matter which side you're on. There are ideas about the nature of God you can say are illogical, and there are ideas about the earth or universe that you can disprove. But you can't prove the existence or lack of existence of a God or gods in general.
-
I didn't say there was evidence specifically disproving god, I was saying there's evidence that contradicts claims in the bible which state that there is a god. Genesis says the world was created in a few days, science has proven that the world was not created over a few days, but over billions of years.
So religion is exempt from the rules that bind everything else? Like physics and logic?
If I wrote a book claiming that you need to have faith in something, and in my book I defied the laws of physics, made unscientific clams, and spouted a ton of illogic nonsense, does that make me valid because I'm writing about religion?
-
Telling Religion is bad because it has no logic is like saying food is bad because it nourishes you. It's not made to have a logic, it's made to give people comfort where science can't pretend to.
-
You don't always need evidence to prove something, this isn't CSI Miami. God's movements and his activities already proves him.
