{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
4/13/2016 10:49:41 PM
17
I am Christian and ur right. There is no evidence of God, but what evidence is there of any other belief system. All of it is based on faith and perspective
English
-
Preach!
-
That's the point... what you just said is why atheism/agnosticism is a thing.
-
Faith is the bridge between disbelief and belief. The atheist/agnostic has faith. They simply apply it elsewhere.
-
Atheists don't believe in nothing, rather they don't believe in anything. They have no belief or faith. Agnostics, on the other hand, don't believe in anything, but they are open to the possibility of a god/gods existing. They just don't claim to know the identity/identities of the supposed god/gods.
-
That would be why religion as an institution is outdated and archaic in modern society. It was our first step towards astronomy, into philosophy, and even into science, but it's time has passed. Any belief system that requires blind faith relies heavily upon dogma, and dogma has lead to some pretty negative events in the world.
-
What is "blind faith?". Do you think I or any other person is capable of making a decision without believing it to be appropriate? Faith is not blind. Everyone places faith into numerous areas of their beliefs. No one's faith is blind. Like any decision we make, faith in the Christian God is supported by a range of experiences.
-
Well if any belief system that requires blind faith has lost its value then we have nothing to believe...not even evolution.
-
Editado por Shryke: 4/14/2016 2:25:23 PMWell, evolution is not a belief system, it is a scientific theory... I honestly don't know why you're bringing it into the discussion. I believe what you are getting at is the solipsistic argument. Under said parameters, you are correct to believe that nothing is true, and that you are the only truly living being. This is a rather poor argument, however, as it is not falsifiable and thus does not answer to the standard rules of logical reasoning that are being applied here.
-
Also I brought to the argument because ur stand in the original argument is very much like others I have seen the demote religion and are in favor of evolution
-
[quote]Also I brought to the argument because ur stand in the original argument is very much like others I have seen the demote religion and are in favor of evolution[/quote] I'm not trying to come off rude, but I honestly cannot discern any meaning out of what you just said. Can you please clarify?
-
I brought evolution to the argument because the approach you took appeared that u were shooting down religion with the support for evolution when there is the same amount of evidence for all "beliefs", "religions", or "theories"(whatever u choose to call it). It all comes down to what you are willing to hear and assume is true
-
It is a belief system because someone had to think it and believe in order for it to be considered true buddy
-
Under that logic, everything is a belief system, and nothing can be considered fact. The difference between what I'm talking about and what you're talking about is a matter of evidence. There is evidence to support the theory of evolution, while there is no evidence to support the existence of a god.
-
What evidence is there of evolution. Scientifically evidence is something u observe. U have to be there to observe it. U can't observe evolution because no one was there to see it therefore making it not a scientific theory but a belief
-
[quote]What evidence is there of evolution. Scientifically evidence is something u observe. U have to be there to observe it. U can't observe evolution because no one was there to see it therefore making it not a scientific theory but a belief[/quote] [quote]What evidence is there of evolution[/quote] Did you legitimately just ask that? Nevermind. Clearly, I'm arguing with an ideologue that is so buried in their current beliefs that they cannot view the outside world objectively. I'm not a fan of wasting my time, thus I will not spend any more of it on this argument.
-
I would say the same of u
-
And don't tell me that stupid bacteria evolution experiment is evidence. It isn't the bacteria are still bacteria. They didn't evolve, they adapted. There is a huge difference
