Originally posted by Adam Grimes
Then why are you so agressive about Christian's beliefs if you also believe in absurdity with admitedly no evidence?
This.
What's so wrong with Muslims believing in their 72 virgins if we're allowed to just make shit up without evidence?
Why believe in the supernatural then if you admittedly don't have evidence?
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
This.What's so wrong with Muslims believing in their 72 virgins if we're allowed to just make shit up without evidence?
Lol um, who said it's wrong they believe in 72 virgins? What is wrong is some of the shit they feel they can do to get it.
Plus like I said, my beliefs entail the nature of the universe only. Not morality, not asinine little rules.
Nobody gives a shit if you believe in 72 virgins. I give a shit if you think you can get them by exploding yourself.
EDIT: You can make up whatever shit you want, just don't try to shove it down the throats of others.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Sure, the outcomes are different, but it's a slippery slope.It's a bit hypocritical to rail against religion if you have some unsupported beliefs of your own.
I rail against religion for the harm it can cause. Do go on and explain how because I believe the spirit continues after your body dies that makes me a hypocrite.
See because the problem comes when your unsupported beliefs f*ck with others in the world.
For example if you decided you wanna worship the cartoon Rocko' Modern Life? Cool. If you began to try to dictate how others should live their lives based on your beliefs or you began to get violent then there would be a problem. The fact that it is unsupported that the cartoon is anything more than a cartoon would not be my issue.
Lol er so did we just enter the Twilight Zone? An unsupported belief is now grounds for it to be hypocritical to call out the harm religion can cause?
So wait, people weren't under the impression that thinking God isn't real is anything other than an unsupported belief, were they? Cuz I don't believe God is real, and I kinda have no evidence to support that belief. So, more hypocrisy I take it?
Originally posted by Surtur
Do go on and explain how because I believe the spirit continues after your body dies that makes me a hypocrite.
It's okay to be open to the possibility, because it certainly is a possibility. But to have some firm belief that it is so is a bit dangerous. Where does said spirit go? Heaven or hell? See, you're lending support to Christians and Muslims.
It's a jump in faith...
You are saying I have some firm belief, but it's not like I have this rigid belief. Not like the people who believe in God. They believe he exists, no questions about it from them.
I believe physical death isn't the end, but I'm not opposed to this not being the case. Nor would I find it hard to believe if this was the case. Nor would I say a person is wrong if they do not believe.
I'm not sure why you are making this about evidence because my issues with religion have never stemmed from the lack of scientific evidence for it.
I think my spirit will go to spaghetti land when I die. 🙂
Originally posted by Surtur
You are saying I have some firm belief, but it's not like I have this rigid belief. Not like the people who believe in God. They believe he exists, no questions about it from them.
Then perhaps you should revisit the definition of "believe."
be·lieve/bəˈlēv/
verb
1. accept (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of.
Originally posted by Surtur
What exactly is the "age of reason" ? I would assume the age would be something like 18 or 21, which I would think most posters here are older than that.
I don't think there is a particular age when someone develops reason. Some children do before their parents do.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by cdtm
My point is that he's wrong in saying science and faith are incompatible. The two have nothing to do with each other.Being a Catholic, Christian, Muslim, or practicing jew is no more relevent to being a scientist then taking it on faith then accepting a parent loves their child above other human, or beliving that equality is a virtue worth advocating, is.
Faith and science are incompatible.
Flat earth faith says the earth is flat. Science with verifiable information says otherwise.
To say that both of those are compatible would be as stupid as the notion that faith without facrs is good.
Regards
DL
Originally posted by cdtm
My point is that he's wrong in saying science and faith are incompatible. The two have nothing to do with each other.
The compatibility of science and faith varies from person to person, but they absolutely have plenty to do with each other. Science all about observing the world through the senses; if you're looking at the world with baseless religious preconditions, that will absolutely interfere with what you see.
Being a Catholic, Christian, Muslim, or practicing jew is no more relevent to being a scientist then taking it on faith then accepting a parent loves their child above other human, or beliving that equality is a virtue worth advocating, is.
Not really, lol.
They aren't incompatible if you posit the logical conclusion that if a God created the universe scientific laws and fact are his direct word.
Exactly. In other words, religion and science become more compatible the more religion concedes. 👆
It's even more compatible when it's not there at all.
Science and Faith both make claims about the universe. They both make claims about the way the universe is. Science makes those claims with evidence. Supportable claims. Faith makes claims, for example, that Jesus walked on water or turned water to wine or rose from the dead. Those a very big claims that say something about the nature of water and about reanimating flesh (zombie Jesus anyone?). Or maybe a cracker turns into the body of Christ or a waffle literally turns into Uncle Sam.
These claims are incompatible with science. End of story.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Science and Faith both make claims about the universe. They both make claims about the way the universe is. Science makes those claims with evidence. Supportable claims. Faith makes claims, for example, that Jesus walked on water or turned water to wine or rose from the dead. Those a very big claims that say something about the nature of water and about reanimating flesh (zombie Jesus anyone?). Or maybe a cracker turns into the body of Christ or a waffle literally turns into Uncle Sam.These claims are incompatible with science. End of story.
You still haven't quite explained how it's hypocritical to say you don't believe physical death is the end, but it's not hypocritical if you don't believe God is real. There is no evidence on Gods existence either way, so that is a problem we run into.
On top of that, you've still left us all in the dark about how believing something without empirical evidence is hypocrisy unless you similarly railed against religion specifically because of the lack of scientific proof. See because I didn't do that lol. A persons lack of scientific evidence for their beliefs is irrelevant to me. It's the harm their beliefs cause. The beliefs are still harmful even if you had evidence, is my other thing. There is no scenario killing every first born is okay, whether God is a legit person that science proved or not.
Now if you see me, in the future, going "hey religious person you're a piece of shit because science doesn't back up your claims" then I encourage you to indeed drop the hypocrisy hammer. I don't doubt there are folk out there who hammer at religion using only science, but it's not me so why apply arguments to me I never made?
EDIT: Now if you've run into scientific evidence proving without a doubt God isn't real I'd be interested.
Originally posted by SurturI guess you didn't understand the content of yet another post. Sigh.
Yes, your first try was indeed a failure. What I am doing is giving you another attempt at a "gotcha". Did you want to take it?
But don't worry friend, I'm here to help you out. 👆
My post wasn't oriented to your fairly misdirected moral judgement of religion, but rather to the way you make fun of their core beliefs -even in your very first reply to me in this thread-, while at the same time believing in stupid shit yourself, like ghosts and bigfoot, with admitedly no basis in reality. Lol. Is that clear enough?