Its lack of sources and its abundance of followers. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the most aggressive offenders.
Its lack of sources and its abundance of followers. Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the most aggressive offenders.
ah i see, the Bible didn't footnote or use citations...
The Bible does not prove anything. Thats the problem with it. im not knocking it, but the whole basis is to prove there was a got, and unfortunately it really does not offer any concrete evidence.
to me it sounds like you think the whole basis for the Bible should be to prove that there is a God.
unfortunately for many people the Bible is a lot different than you'd think it is, i think that's why a lot of people think just reading the Bible should get you to convert. in truth it isn't something it isn't.
what, they talk about killing in the Bible!? THERE IS NO GOD! kind of thing. not saying that's you or anyone, but you get my drift.
the idea of believing in God is more of a philosophical issue than a scholarly issue though, as believing in God is always about faith. it just depends how rationally you base this faith.
Religious faith has nothing to do with rationality. Theologians and apologists just try to apply rationality and logic when inventing new reasons to be irrational and illogical.Originally Posted by Koolish
Whats dangerous - is how we have a world full of Christians that are using the powers of the Universe to make "Bible Prophecy" become a reality with the power of thought. The original "occultists" that re-translated this book knew of this: now have 1/3 of the world thinking "praying" about the final events of the bible, which is a scary thought.
The power of creation combined with billions of thoughts is not a good thing when many believe we will destroy ourselves - is "Jesus" suppose to be made manifest as well with this thought process? Will the majority of white Christians manifest a "white" Jesus? Or will the Creator send another Master being?
Break fast is served
I'm not sure what any of this is supposed to mean but the real threat is that we have a world full of religious people who have possession of nuclear weapons and many of them literally believe the end times prophecies of centuries past.
That's what's entirely frightening.
thats exactly what i was saying in a way.
Break fast is served
i'm glad you promote having no bias.
Rationality and faith are antonyms. Faith is not rational. Faith is basis-less, its putting all your eggs into a basket you aren't sure really exists, and have no evidence of its existence besides heresay.
Never promised that.
But if you like, I'll try to word it more neutral.
Faith by its very nature is not rational. It's accepting something without evidence. And what theology and religious apology does is take a faith-based premise and use rational thought to come up with rational explanation as to why one should believe this. In the end, it is still empty because the basic premise ("my god is real," "this is how god wants us to act," "this is the evidence for god," "this is how you reconcile an all-loving god with the notion of evil") is unprovable through any empirical observation.
not everyone requires empirical observations for a belief, do you feel this is an unintelligent notion?
In general, yes.
Of course there are exceptions, but most can be traced back to empirical evidence. You can make accurate predictions about things that will happen in your day to day life or how people will behave without conducting a study, but it's not really faith since you had to experience that event or human behavior first to make the prediction. There are also useful items of what you might call "faith", such as an optimistic state of mind in order to accomplish a task.
But as far as a concept as big as God, especially if you're implying that the Biblical god is real, then I have to say, accepting that without empirical evidence is unintelligent.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks