(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({}); The thread that was the shining light of the last two debating sections(ugh, really?) that was God vs Fact has been trashed or something(ugh, again) so this thread is here to take the place of that one.

Some extremely basic terminology...

Theist: believes in a god(s).
Deist: believes in a god(s) that created the universe but subsequently abandoned it and/or believes that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of god(s).
Atheist: does not believe in a god(s).
Agnostic: does not claim to know if a god exists or believes that such knowledge cannot be known, depending on the definition. Typically when I personally use this label I'm referring to the former.
Gnostic: claims to know one way or the other if a god exists.

There are some more but that's the basics down. I'm an agnostic atheist. What are you and why?

Edit: Thanks to whichever mod/admin butchered the thread's title and poll. The poll now makes no sense whatsoever.

There's no proof that God does exist, nor is there any proof that he's not real. It's just impossible to know for sure, but we do have strong proof that Big Bang was the main thing responsible for the creation of our our entire universe. However, whatever started this Big Bang will always be subjective and open to interpretation.

Regarding religions, I respect them and I understand why certain people are religious. For example, when people hit the bottom (grief, depression, stress, etc.), being religious can actually help themselves move on. Being religious makes them feel more positive about thier lives too. It's similar to false hope; some non-religious people use false hope to ignore pain and carry on living. There's nothing wrong with that. We're all human after all.

There are a few things that I don't like about the whole 'Religion vs Science' thing: people arguing to each other about whose Religion is better. People mouthing off to religious people that thier religions are fake and that God doesn't exist, etc. Religious people trying hard to convert pure individuals to thier Religion. I also disagree with the holy books that views pure (non-religious) people as the "weak".

All I can say is just enjoy your life as much as you can. Why waste time arguing about religions/gods? The arguments will always become endless and ultimately pointless.

Well if there is a God/Gods, its would be just about the most important thing in a persons life. My weekends would be filled with beer and women if there was a God watching me.

As much as I agree with your overall premise on this topic (your last paragraph said it all, by the way...lol), I want to remind folks that Science is ALSO made up greatly of hypothesis', hyperboles, and theories. You'd be surprised about how comfortable we're made to feel based on what we "KNOW", and then come to find out we don't really know...lol.

The burden of proof is with the theist.



Correct.



Correct.



Wrong. That's a claim you need to back up.



Although that's fair from the perspective of the religious person, I think it's wrong to respect religion itself for that. They're basically preying on the weak - come to think of it, that's how the vast majority of religions operate, whether it's replacing a drug addiction with a new one or indoctrinating children.



I'll stop criticizing religion as soon as it stops doing such abominable things.



Wrong. Many people are converted and deconverted through debate, I'm an example of that.

It needs arguing as otherwise religion gets away with all sorts of horrid things. As I said, as soon as it stops doing that, I'll be a metric f*ckton more lenient and calm about it. Until then, I'll criticize it just like I would anything else that does what it does.

Wow. "Religion gets away with all sorts of horrid things"? I mean, don't get me wrong, it isn't any more "holy" than McDonald's or EA (microtransactions? Child please...), but this is HATE you have for religion, it sounds like. Do you know Cardinal Keith O'Brien, by any chance? lol

I'm sorry, I just thought about that. That's not really that funny...*smh*

Unless...D=

Well said.



---------- Post added at 08:58 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:54 AM ----------

It does bear some mention... that not all believers are actually religious.
Religion has, and will continue to do some horrific things... no different than the pursuit of science has.
The problem with religion... is that it is full of people... and people are infinitely flawed...
However, that same statement could be applied to any organization, belief or culture.

Thats relationship with God the Father as the quran doesnt have. Now that you didnt answer the questions let me present it this way

1. Muhammad calls himself a Prophet
2. Muhammad calls Jesus a Prophet
3. Muhammad says a Prophet of God cannot lie
4. If Muhammad believed this then he would have to reject what Jesus said in John 14:6 “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.'
5. So if Muhammad believed Jesus didnt lie then He is accepting the fact that Jesus is God. If he says Jesus lied then Muhammad would lie because he called Jesus a prophet which in turn Muhammad wouldnt be a prophet because he lied.

Science says a lot more than the Bible.
Science can prove stuff that Religion can not.

How are the catholics like the Christians?

Catholics worship an idol and believe salvation comes from works provided by the church (i.e. praying to saints, sacraments)

So if it is the same then the catholics would believe in this verse alone Epehsians 2:8-9 "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast."

How is this Christianity again?

---------- Post added at 07:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:59 PM ----------



Science cant prove moral law!