Total Posts:121|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Problem with Faith

Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.
merbear2536
Posts: 35
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 2:11:18 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
So are you saying that because there are a bunch of different religions then no one should put their faith in one? What if one religion was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be true? Would it still make no sense to have faith in that religion? I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 2:16:56 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 2:11:18 PM, merbear2536 wrote:
So are you saying that because there are a bunch of different religions then no one should put their faith in one? What if one religion was proven beyond a reasonable doubt to be true? Would it still make no sense to have faith in that religion? I am not sure exactly what you are trying to say.

If one religion was proven then it would no longer be faith. I'm saying faith is irrational. When I speak of faith I mean in the context of something that is based on things that are not proven.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 3:38:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Inductive logic.

Really it works. Its how you sort through THOUSANDS of claims and arrive at those that have a HIGHER probability of truth than others. Its the same process that leads you to God, as there is no definitive proof. Yet you reject ALL the other claims merely because there are other claims? Well, that is fallacious.

Some are clearly better than others, and why we would need to treat the opinion of Larry in Inner Mongolia as credibly as we would the Catholic Church? Christianity writ large? That makes no sense.

http://www.adherents.com...

Indeed, I wonder why the rejection of inductive reasoning is so strong in this case that we would posit THOUSANDS of religions like there is a huge dilemma to sort through.

There are four religions that take up the vast majority of religious positions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, (We could add non-religious as a fifth, but atheists tend to get persnickety when you call atheism a religion - best avoided).

I am curious why this position, again a common claim in atheism, is unable to define simple criteria that would separate wheat from chaff and tackle the issue? Instead relying on faith, apparently blind faith as you present zero evidence in support of the No God conclusion, to believe there is no God?

There are just too many religious claims? Obviously, the vast majority of religious people disagree. Odd that.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 4:27:28 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 3:38:49 PM, neutral wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Inductive logic.

Really it works. Its how you sort through THOUSANDS of claims and arrive at those that have a HIGHER probability of truth than others. Its the same process that leads you to God, as there is no definitive proof. Yet you reject ALL the other claims merely because there are other claims? Well, that is fallacious.

Excuse me? When did I do that? I addressed other things too such as contradictions and origins of the religion. Infact near the end of my paragraph I even explained how beliefs could co-exist indirectly.
Some are clearly better than others, and why we would need to treat the opinion of Larry in Inner Mongolia as credibly as we would the Catholic Church? Christianity writ large? That makes no sense.

I'm not sure what you're really trying to say here. The Catholic Church is known through out history to be corrupted and it's motives clearly were not in the religion it clams to be.
http://www.adherents.com...

Indeed, I wonder why the rejection of inductive reasoning is so strong in this case that we would posit THOUSANDS of religions like there is a huge dilemma to sort through.

Most people are born into their religion and they blindly follow it.
There are four religions that take up the vast majority of religious positions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, (We could add non-religious as a fifth, but atheists tend to get persnickety when you call atheism a religion - best avoided).

Yes if you look through history you can clearly see why.
I am curious why this position, again a common claim in atheism, is unable to define simple criteria that would separate wheat from chaff and tackle the issue? Instead relying on faith, apparently blind faith as you present zero evidence in support of the No God conclusion, to believe there is no God?

It's not that I don't believe there could be a god, I'm encouraging people to do research and maybe try to experience things themselves instead of basing everything on a book that they were forced to read as a child which is full of contradictions.
There are just too many religious claims? Obviously, the vast majority of religious people disagree. Odd that.
Not really sure what you're saying here. I would like to hear some claims actually.
matt.mcguire88
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 4:35:42 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Faith in the Bible is not "blindly following" and neither is faith in a Christians life supposed to equate to that. Faith is not the problem, the propaganda is... Faith has nothing to do with believing the existence of God or believing in one religion over the other. Faith is just one aspect of Christian teachings, in the link below I provided verses to show it's meaning and purpose.
http://www.debate.org...

And yes God is a Spirit, this should be old news.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 4:43:21 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 4:35:42 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Faith in the Bible is not "blindly following" and neither is faith in a Christians life supposed to equate to that. Faith is not the problem, the propaganda is... Faith has nothing to do with believing the existence of God or believing in one religion over the other. Faith is just one aspect of Christian teachings, in the link below I provided verses to show it's meaning and purpose.
http://www.debate.org...

And yes God is a Spirit, this should be old news.

It's rather that 'spirit' should be considered a 'god' is what I was trying to say at the end there.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 4:55:23 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 4:27:28 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
At 6/20/2014 3:38:49 PM, neutral wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Inductive logic.

Really it works. Its how you sort through THOUSANDS of claims and arrive at those that have a HIGHER probability of truth than others. Its the same process that leads you to God, as there is no definitive proof. Yet you reject ALL the other claims merely because there are other claims? Well, that is fallacious.

Excuse me? When did I do that? I addressed other things too such as contradictions and origins of the religion. Infact near the end of my paragraph I even explained how beliefs could co-exist indirectly.
Some are clearly better than others, and why we would need to treat the opinion of Larry in Inner Mongolia as credibly as we would the Catholic Church? Christianity writ large? That makes no sense.

I'm not sure what you're really trying to say here. The Catholic Church is known through out history to be corrupted and it's motives clearly were not in the religion it clams to be.
http://www.adherents.com...

Indeed, I wonder why the rejection of inductive reasoning is so strong in this case that we would posit THOUSANDS of religions like there is a huge dilemma to sort through.

Most people are born into their religion and they blindly follow it.
There are four religions that take up the vast majority of religious positions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, (We could add non-religious as a fifth, but atheists tend to get persnickety when you call atheism a religion - best avoided).

Yes if you look through history you can clearly see why.
I am curious why this position, again a common claim in atheism, is unable to define simple criteria that would separate wheat from chaff and tackle the issue? Instead relying on faith, apparently blind faith as you present zero evidence in support of the No God conclusion, to believe there is no God?

It's not that I don't believe there could be a god, I'm encouraging people to do research and maybe try to experience things themselves instead of basing everything on a book that they were forced to read as a child which is full of contradictions.
There are just too many religious claims? Obviously, the vast majority of religious people disagree. Odd that.
Not really sure what you're saying here. I would like to hear some claims actually.

Its a very simple claim: Faith is inductive reasoning. Its an argument based on probability, not certainty. That's it.

Yet here you are screaming about thousands of religions, while ignoring that all of four choices encompass the vast majority of religious choices ... as if this proves something?

You are free to research and experience for yourself, but you are sure as hell not encouraging anyone to explore much of anything when you are screaming about thousands of choices! Its too hard! Quite the opposite.

The problem is TOO BIG for you, yet ... well, most of humanity, disagrees and can explain to you why their religion makes sense, at least for them ... despite the existence of THOUSANDS of other religions.

Not sure what else to tell you, but that line is common from atheists these days, and it proves ... not a thing. Save that inductive reasoning is not well understood.
PureX
Posts: 1,525
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 9:17:37 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others?

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 10:46:33 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 4:55:23 PM, neutral wrote:
At 6/20/2014 4:27:28 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
At 6/20/2014 3:38:49 PM, neutral wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Inductive logic.

Really it works. Its how you sort through THOUSANDS of claims and arrive at those that have a HIGHER probability of truth than others. Its the same process that leads you to God, as there is no definitive proof. Yet you reject ALL the other claims merely because there are other claims? Well, that is fallacious.

Excuse me? When did I do that? I addressed other things too such as contradictions and origins of the religion. Infact near the end of my paragraph I even explained how beliefs could co-exist indirectly.
Some are clearly better than others, and why we would need to treat the opinion of Larry in Inner Mongolia as credibly as we would the Catholic Church? Christianity writ large? That makes no sense.

I'm not sure what you're really trying to say here. The Catholic Church is known through out history to be corrupted and it's motives clearly were not in the religion it clams to be.
http://www.adherents.com...

Indeed, I wonder why the rejection of inductive reasoning is so strong in this case that we would posit THOUSANDS of religions like there is a huge dilemma to sort through.

Most people are born into their religion and they blindly follow it.
There are four religions that take up the vast majority of religious positions: Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism, (We could add non-religious as a fifth, but atheists tend to get persnickety when you call atheism a religion - best avoided).

Yes if you look through history you can clearly see why.
I am curious why this position, again a common claim in atheism, is unable to define simple criteria that would separate wheat from chaff and tackle the issue? Instead relying on faith, apparently blind faith as you present zero evidence in support of the No God conclusion, to believe there is no God?

It's not that I don't believe there could be a god, I'm encouraging people to do research and maybe try to experience things themselves instead of basing everything on a book that they were forced to read as a child which is full of contradictions.
There are just too many religious claims? Obviously, the vast majority of religious people disagree. Odd that.
Not really sure what you're saying here. I would like to hear some claims actually.

Its a very simple claim: Faith is inductive reasoning. Its an argument based on probability, not certainty. That's it.

Yet here you are screaming about thousands of religions, while ignoring that all of four choices encompass the vast majority of religious choices ... as if this proves something?

You are free to research and experience for yourself, but you are sure as hell not encouraging anyone to explore much of anything when you are screaming about thousands of choices! Its too hard! Quite the opposite.

The problem is TOO BIG for you, yet ... well, most of humanity, disagrees and can explain to you why their religion makes sense, at least for them ... despite the existence of THOUSANDS of other religions.

Not sure what else to tell you, but that line is common from atheists these days, and it proves ... not a thing. Save that inductive reasoning is not well understood.

I'm not screaming buddy. Well yeah most people are born into their religion. There is 4 major religions because of history. But okay, believe in something full of contradictions within it's own texts. I never see people explain why their religion makes sense, it always ends in "you're going to hell god has abandoned you".
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 10:47:06 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 9:17:37 PM, PureX wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others?

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.

Yes but why do you believe what you believe?
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 11:36:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
Lol Christians. "Let's kill all of the pagans and have inquisitions and threaten people with hell if they don't convert. Then they can have children and brainwash them". Hypocritical in every aspect. Yes there is a lot of Christians, and there is a clear reason why. People were born into it and they are afraid to convert because of hell. That is all. Or they are afraid and insecure, sort of like stopping the belief at Santa Clause at first. It can be uncomfortable for little kids.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 11:38:49 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
The same applies with Islam. It was all gained with conquest or threats. Especially death threats. There you go two major religions thrown out of the equation.
silverxseed
Posts: 64
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/20/2014 11:55:04 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 4:35:42 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Faith in the Bible is not "blindly following" and neither is faith in a Christians life supposed to equate to that. Faith is not the problem, the propaganda is... Faith has nothing to do with believing the existence of God or believing in one religion over the other. Faith is just one aspect of Christian teachings, in the link below I provided verses to show it's meaning and purpose.
http://www.debate.org...

And yes God is a Spirit, this should be old news.

John 20:29 - Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

The bible heavily teaches that it's followers should just believe what they are told by god, to blindly put their faith into the "word".
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 12:22:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 11:55:04 PM, silverxseed wrote:
At 6/20/2014 4:35:42 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Faith in the Bible is not "blindly following" and neither is faith in a Christians life supposed to equate to that. Faith is not the problem, the propaganda is... Faith has nothing to do with believing the existence of God or believing in one religion over the other. Faith is just one aspect of Christian teachings, in the link below I provided verses to show it's meaning and purpose.
http://www.debate.org...

And yes God is a Spirit, this should be old news.

John 20:29 - Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

The bible heavily teaches that it's followers should just believe what they are told by god, to blindly put their faith into the "word".

Is faith in things unseen so abhorrent to you?

Do you drive? When you come to an intersection and look both ways, you see no car in the cross lane. You don't see a car and you have believe there is no car there. Atheism is like that. But is it impossible that when you cross the traffic you get side swiped by a car you did not see? Faith, believe of something unseen.

When you take a trip somewhere new, you look on the map, or gps, and follow the directions to a road you never been on. You have never seen the road but you have faith it is there. You believe it will be there when you turn left or right. Sure other people might have been on that road and say it is there, but have you ever met them face to face? And who wrote the maps how long ago was it when they said the road was there.

Faith is not a foreign concept. It is the natural human response to a rational process of weighing different sources of information. Balancing these sources against your very own sensory perception or your eyes.

You put your faith in different things every single day. the weather station, the scientist, the political leaders, your friends, etc..

You are saying faith is bad, yet you are intellectually dishonest because you are selectively picking faith in God as bad, but faith in other people and your perception as good. But you are avoiding calling it faith or even recognizing it as faith. But that is what it is and you aren't admitting it.
Dogma-Is-Disgusting
Posts: 23
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 1:48:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 12:22:17 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/20/2014 11:55:04 PM, silverxseed wrote:
At 6/20/2014 4:35:42 PM, matt.mcguire88 wrote:
At 6/20/2014 1:06:17 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
If you tackle religion from a faith standpoint it makes no sense. There are thousands of religions, so what makes yours more likely than others? And to further add on to that many religions are bastardized versions of much older ones (Christianity would be an example of that). Many are also filled with contradictions. Unless you've had a significant experience (not jesus helped me find my cookies) then you're just flat out irrational and you're just following cultural or social standards. Or you're scared of hell (I find that the most amusing). Of course some religions seem more likely than others, because you can actually put the teachings in use and see real results (Buddhism,Voodoo,etc). If there is a god out there I think he would be rather disappointed that you would blindly follow anything. Also if you're spiritual in nature or into esoteric concepts I highly recommend looking up thoughtform/godform creation, parasitical entities, or just advanced multi-dimensional beings. Those are what most 'gods' are. Thank you for reading this, I look forward to your responses. Please no ad-hominem it's rather unpleasant and contributes nothing to the discussion.

Faith in the Bible is not "blindly following" and neither is faith in a Christians life supposed to equate to that. Faith is not the problem, the propaganda is... Faith has nothing to do with believing the existence of God or believing in one religion over the other. Faith is just one aspect of Christian teachings, in the link below I provided verses to show it's meaning and purpose.
http://www.debate.org...

And yes God is a Spirit, this should be old news.

John 20:29 - Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed [are] they that have not seen, and [yet] have believed.

The bible heavily teaches that it's followers should just believe what they are told by god, to blindly put their faith into the "word".

Is faith in things unseen so abhorrent to you?

Do you drive? When you come to an intersection and look both ways, you see no car in the cross lane. You don't see a car and you have believe there is no car there. Atheism is like that. But is it impossible that when you cross the traffic you get side swiped by a car you did not see? Faith, believe of something unseen.

When you take a trip somewhere new, you look on the map, or gps, and follow the directions to a road you never been on. You have never seen the road but you have faith it is there. You believe it will be there when you turn left or right. Sure other people might have been on that road and say it is there, but have you ever met them face to face? And who wrote the maps how long ago was it when they said the road was there.

Faith is not a foreign concept. It is the natural human response to a rational process of weighing different sources of information. Balancing these sources against your very own sensory perception or your eyes.

You put your faith in different things every single day. the weather station, the scientist, the political leaders, your friends, etc..

You are saying faith is bad, yet you are intellectually dishonest because you are selectively picking faith in God as bad, but faith in other people and your perception as good. But you are avoiding calling it faith or even recognizing it as faith. But that is what it is and you aren't admitting it.

We're not hear to argue semantics. We are here to argue why your faith is irrational.
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 3:12:07 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 10:46:33 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:


I'm not screaming buddy.

Agh, yeah, the bolded parts in the OP indicate emotion more than objective assessment - which is kind of the point I was making.

Well yeah most people are born into their religion.

Right, an some point they never actually make the decision as adults. Of course, atheists, despite making the same unintelligible arguments, like there being THOUSANDS of religions and not being able to use inductive reasoning to widdle it down ... therefore atheism being one of those THOUSANDS of positions on the spectrum of religion is just right.

Common atheist argument isn't it? And absolutely fallacious.

There is 4 major religions because of history.

Again, people don't choose religion, some intangible historical process made it so through magic. Pay no mind to the fact that all the major world religions, at some point in their history, were challenged by other religious choices and ... beat them. Several older religions have been COMPLETELY falsified. Somehow.

But really, we will continue unthinking ascribe unthinkingness to religious people.

Great argument.

But okay, believe in something full of contradictions within it's own texts.

I love it when atheists do this, claim contradictions and list none. Or when they do, in another COMMON atheist claim, like evilbible.com, even a casual perusal indicates not only that the claims are non-contextual and presented in the worst possible light. In short they are induced through deliberate misunderstanding.

So, I would rather believe in something that requires someone to use their brain to understand something vs. something that requires one to abandon contextual reasoning in favor of hyperbole.

How is it again that you guys make the same 'arguments' over and over again ... while claiming its others that are indoctrinated?

I never see people explain why their religion makes sense, it always ends in "you're going to hell god has abandoned you".

Right, that is all over this forum. And Apologetics doesn't exist either. Two more statement flown in defiance of evidence.

Again, common argumentation from modern atheists. Its pretty much just anti-theism.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 3:12:07 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/20/2014 10:46:33 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:


I'm not screaming buddy.

Agh, yeah, the bolded parts in the OP indicate emotion more than objective assessment - which is kind of the point I was making.

Well yeah most people are born into their religion.

Right, an some point they never actually make the decision as adults. Of course, atheists, despite making the same unintelligible arguments, like there being THOUSANDS of religions and not being able to use inductive reasoning to widdle it down ... therefore atheism being one of those THOUSANDS of positions on the spectrum of religion is just right.

Common atheist argument isn't it? And absolutely fallacious.

There is 4 major religions because of history.

Again, people don't choose religion, some intangible historical process made it so through magic. Pay no mind to the fact that all the major world religions, at some point in their history, were challenged by other religious choices and ... beat them. Several older religions have been COMPLETELY falsified. Somehow.

But really, we will continue unthinking ascribe unthinkingness to religious people.

Great argument.

But okay, believe in something full of contradictions within it's own texts.

I love it when atheists do this, claim contradictions and list none. Or when they do, in another COMMON atheist claim, like evilbible.com, even a casual perusal indicates not only that the claims are non-contextual and presented in the worst possible light. In short they are induced through deliberate misunderstanding.

So, I would rather believe in something that requires someone to use their brain to understand something vs. something that requires one to abandon contextual reasoning in favor of hyperbole.

How is it again that you guys make the same 'arguments' over and over again ... while claiming its others that are indoctrinated?

I never see people explain why their religion makes sense, it always ends in "you're going to hell god has abandoned you".

Right, that is all over this forum. And Apologetics doesn't exist either. Two more statement flown in defiance of evidence.

Again, common argumentation from modern atheists. Its pretty much just anti-theism.

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.

You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.

Typical atheism.

Absurdity.

YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!

Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!

I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:23:32 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:26:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:23:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

I am just reporting the troll. This is ridiculous.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Right, that is not an insult AT ALL.

Atheists, you condone this crap?
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:37:27 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:26:43 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:23:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

I am just reporting the troll. This is ridiculous.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Right, that is not an insult AT ALL.

Atheists, you condone this crap?

Of course it's not an insult.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:39:59 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:37:27 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:26:43 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:23:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

I am just reporting the troll. This is ridiculous.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Right, that is not an insult AT ALL.

Atheists, you condone this crap?

Of course it's not an insult.


Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Are you honestly so daft and selfish that you think:

a. People want to engage with you when you behave like an insanely irrational and insulting jerk?

b. That ANYONE else wants to watch you behave in such a cravenly vicious manner?

I think you need to have a discussion with airmax. Again.
bulproof
Posts: 25,221
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 4:43:25 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 4:39:59 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:37:27 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:26:43 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:23:32 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:18:18 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 4:09:03 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:59:35 AM, neutral wrote:
At 6/21/2014 3:56:06 AM, bulproof wrote:

Apologetics is just making excuses for the contradictions that exist in the bible and they're only effective with the believers.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Another absurd insult laden tirade.
Once again, quote the insults and the tirade.
You claim there is no logical explanation and then dismiss it - ladies and gents - I give you a logical contradiction.
Show me where I made such a claim.
Typical atheism.
What is? The disbelief in gods? Yes.
Absurdity.
Religion? Whatever you think.
YOU don't have that! Yes, we do. Well, its stoopid!!!
Are you still in this thread?
Atheism in a nut shell. Just add a few more insults and sprinkle of derision, viola!
Once again quote the insults and derision and voila!
I mean, why are you atheists not publishing this trove of insight in science journals? Right. We ALL know why.
No you don't! Because atheism has nothing to do with science, I don't know how often you need to be told that.
BTW, I don't remember the word science being used until you erroneously inserted it.

I am pretty sure you are just trolling.

You may as well just write, "I will unerringly disagree with anything any theist writes and utterly lack the ability to concede a point ... or even make one."

You cannot be rational with the irrational.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

I am just reporting the troll. This is ridiculous.

For those of us capable of independent thought we just see apologetics as more lies used to defend the stupidly unrealistic stories in the great book of spells.

Right, that is not an insult AT ALL.

Atheists, you condone this crap?

Of course it's not an insult.


Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Are you honestly so daft and selfish that you think:

a. People want to engage with you when you behave like an insanely irrational and insulting jerk?

b. That ANYONE else wants to watch you behave in such a cravenly vicious manner?

I think you need to have a discussion with airmax. Again.

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Quote the insults LIAR

Or withdraw your lying charges.
Religion is just mind control. George Carlin
civilbuthonest
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 5:17:19 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 12:22:17 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Is faith in things unseen so abhorrent to you?

When you take a trip somewhere new, you look on the map, or gps, and follow the directions to a road you never been on. You have never seen the road but you have faith it is there. You believe it will be there when you turn left or right. Sure other people might have been on that road and say it is there, but have you ever met them face to face? And who wrote the maps how long ago was it when they said the road was there.

You put your faith in different things every single day. the weather station, the scientist, the political leaders, your friends, etc..

You are saying faith is bad, yet you are intellectually dishonest because you are selectively picking faith in God as bad, but faith in other people and your perception as good. But you are avoiding calling it faith or even recognizing it as faith. But that is what it is and you aren't admitting it.

You are only telling half the story. There are two very different types of faith, evidence-based faith and blind faith.

Let's talk about evidence-based faith first, which you have conveniently chosen for all your examples. This is a form of trust, based on firm evidence that the trust is warranted. So yes, you have faith (trust) in your GPS system, compass, aircraft navigation system, weather forecast, and your friends that you actually know from experience are trustworthy and reliable.

However, religious faith is quite specifically not of that type, in fact it is the very opposite, and you are being either naive or tricky in equating the two. Religious faith is and always has been a form of blind faith , where the believer has to take on trust, based almost entirely on spiritual feeling alone, that the religious belief is correct. Many high-ranking members of the Church have explained their faith in exactly this way, and many confess to having doubted their faith at times, precisely because it is a spiritual-based faith rather than evidence-based faith. When the faith is doubted, then invariably what is called for is even more faith, to remain 'strong'.

PureX explains it well :-

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what :we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.

I respect theists and have spoken to and heard enough of them to know that religious faith really is a form of blind (or near blind) trust. That's what religious faith is! I am not here to criticize theists for that. Faith in something that you believe in dearly, and that you believe to be loving and good, is something to be admired and respected, not attacked.

That said, I have never understood personally why people cling so strongly to blind faith. We are all different. Some people are strongly evidence-based in what they believe, others are strongly faith-based.

I could rave on and on. I have spoken to a very great number of theists (mainly Christians), and I know what religious faith is. I remember once politely pointing out to my cousin that there was actually very little evidence to back up his religious beliefs, which he conceded, and finally said as a defence 'well it IS a faith'.

We are all different. It makes the world go around.
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 5:30:58 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 5:17:19 AM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:22:17 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Is faith in things unseen so abhorrent to you?

When you take a trip somewhere new, you look on the map, or gps, and follow the directions to a road you never been on. You have never seen the road but you have faith it is there. You believe it will be there when you turn left or right. Sure other people might have been on that road and say it is there, but have you ever met them face to face? And who wrote the maps how long ago was it when they said the road was there.

You put your faith in different things every single day. the weather station, the scientist, the political leaders, your friends, etc..

You are saying faith is bad, yet you are intellectually dishonest because you are selectively picking faith in God as bad, but faith in other people and your perception as good. But you are avoiding calling it faith or even recognizing it as faith. But that is what it is and you aren't admitting it.

You are only telling half the story. There are two very different types of faith, evidence-based faith and blind faith.

Let's talk about evidence-based faith first, which you have conveniently chosen for all your examples. This is a form of trust, based on firm evidence that the trust is warranted. So yes, you have faith (trust) in your GPS system, compass, aircraft navigation system, weather forecast, and your friends that you actually know from experience are trustworthy and reliable.

However, religious faith is quite specifically not of that type, in fact it is the very opposite, and you are being either naive or tricky in equating the two. Religious faith is and always has been a form of blind faith , where the believer has to take on trust, based almost entirely on spiritual feeling alone, that the religious belief is correct. Many high-ranking members of the Church have explained their faith in exactly this way, and many confess to having doubted their faith at times, precisely because it is a spiritual-based faith rather than evidence-based faith. When the faith is doubted, then invariably what is called for is even more faith, to remain 'strong'.

PureX explains it well :-

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what :we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.

I respect theists and have spoken to and heard enough of them to know that religious faith really is a form of blind (or near blind) trust. That's what religious faith is! I am not here to criticize theists for that. Faith in something that you believe in dearly, and that you believe to be loving and good, is something to be admired and respected, not attacked.

That said, I have never understood personally why people cling so strongly to blind faith. We are all different. Some people are strongly evidence-based in what they believe, others are strongly faith-based.

I could rave on and on. I have spoken to a very great number of theists (mainly Christians), and I know what religious faith is. I remember once politely pointing out to my cousin that there was actually very little evidence to back up his religious beliefs, which he conceded, and finally said as a defence 'well it IS a faith'.

We are all different. It makes the world go around.

The car analogy with intersection. Is that evidence-based-faith or blind-faith?
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 6:03:56 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/21/2014 5:30:58 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
At 6/21/2014 5:17:19 AM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/21/2014 12:22:17 AM, Mhykiel wrote:
Is faith in things unseen so abhorrent to you?

When you take a trip somewhere new, you look on the map, or gps, and follow the directions to a road you never been on. You have never seen the road but you have faith it is there. You believe it will be there when you turn left or right. Sure other people might have been on that road and say it is there, but have you ever met them face to face? And who wrote the maps how long ago was it when they said the road was there.

You put your faith in different things every single day. the weather station, the scientist, the political leaders, your friends, etc..

You are saying faith is bad, yet you are intellectually dishonest because you are selectively picking faith in God as bad, but faith in other people and your perception as good. But you are avoiding calling it faith or even recognizing it as faith. But that is what it is and you aren't admitting it.

You are only telling half the story. There are two very different types of faith, evidence-based faith and blind faith.

Let's talk about evidence-based faith first, which you have conveniently chosen for all your examples. This is a form of trust, based on firm evidence that the trust is warranted. So yes, you have faith (trust) in your GPS system, compass, aircraft navigation system, weather forecast, and your friends that you actually know from experience are trustworthy and reliable.

However, religious faith is quite specifically not of that type, in fact it is the very opposite, and you are being either naive or tricky in equating the two. Religious faith is and always has been a form of blind faith , where the believer has to take on trust, based almost entirely on spiritual feeling alone, that the religious belief is correct. Many high-ranking members of the Church have explained their faith in exactly this way, and many confess to having doubted their faith at times, precisely because it is a spiritual-based faith rather than evidence-based faith. When the faith is doubted, then invariably what is called for is even more faith, to remain 'strong'.

PureX explains it well :-

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what :we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.

I respect theists and have spoken to and heard enough of them to know that religious faith really is a form of blind (or near blind) trust. That's what religious faith is! I am not here to criticize theists for that. Faith in something that you believe in dearly, and that you believe to be loving and good, is something to be admired and respected, not attacked.

That said, I have never understood personally why people cling so strongly to blind faith. We are all different. Some people are strongly evidence-based in what they believe, others are strongly faith-based.

I could rave on and on. I have spoken to a very great number of theists (mainly Christians), and I know what religious faith is. I remember once politely pointing out to my cousin that there was actually very little evidence to back up his religious beliefs, which he conceded, and finally said as a defence 'well it IS a faith'.

We are all different. It makes the world go around.

The car analogy with intersection. Is that evidence-based-faith or blind-faith?

Blind Faith: A pejorative use of the term faith used to highlight the lack of information involved in matters of faith. From an Atheist favorite rational wiki. http://rationalwiki.org...

Faith: complete trust or confidence in someone or something. http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...

Faith: Hebrews 11:1 "Now faith is being sure of what we hope for and certain of what we do not see."

When you come to an intersection, and you look both ways for traffic. After seeing no cars you drive forward. Is it possible to be slammed in the side by a car you did not see?

1) saw no car. lack of evidence. things unseen
2) Drove forward on the belief "no car coming" is true.

Driving cross traffic Blind-faith? or evidence-based-faith?
PureX
Posts: 1,525
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/21/2014 6:15:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/20/2014 10:47:06 PM, Dogma-Is-Disgusting wrote:
At 6/20/2014 9:17:37 PM, PureX wrote:

It's not about what's "more likely", it's about what works for us. Faith isn't about what we know. It's about what we don't know, but need to believe, to live well.

Yes but why do you believe what you believe?

Because it works for me. Just the same as you believe as you do because it works for you. I want and need to believe that there is more to existence than material processes. And I find that in believing and trusting that there is more to existence then that, my life is significantly improved.

And there is no good reason not to believe it. As there is certainly no proof that life is nothing more than a collection of material processes.