• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Future of Religion

bilbus said:
A simpler solution would be for the Muslims to get it though their head .. not everyone wants to be a Muslim. Once that happens all of the current problems will go away.

nearly all of the current wars are between Muslims and someone else. If Muslims could just get along with others their would be more or less peace.

Outside of a very tiny fringe, Christians and Jews don't start problems.
Click to expand...

Do you know what Islam's goals are?
 
OxymoronP said:
By whom, I gain my knowledge through exprience and openess not through a misunderstood book.
Click to expand...
However baseless you find my claim to be, it is still 100 light years close to truth than the claim you've made about atheists.
Also, relying on "openess" does not neglect brainwash, but rather embraces it.
Pick your words carefully.
 
Lachean said:
How so? By whom and to believe what?
Click to expand...

By the orthodox scientific community, who want to have exclusivity in providing answers and proper questions. Basically they preversed the scientific method to gain control over the populace. Just like the Organized Churches took over spirituality to gain control over peoples lives.
 
Apocalypse said:
However baseless you find my claim to be, it is still 100 light years close to truth than the claim you've made about atheists.
Also, relying on "openess" does not neglect brainwash, but rather embraces it.
Pick your words carefully.
Click to expand...

IN the context I used open, it does not embrace brainwashing.
 
OxymoronP said:
By the orthodox scientific community, who want to have exclusivity in providing answers and proper questions. Basically they preversed the scientific method to gain control over the populace. Just like the Organized Churches took over spirituality to gain control over peoples lives.
Click to expand...
To say this honestly, all of the atheists I know (Including myself) have made their opinions out of their own rational thought, contrary to anything that society has thrown at them.
If anything, this is the opposite to being brainwashed.
 
OxymoronP said:
Even in science if you think something is false dont you need proof. If scientist think something is false they say, most likely or without further evidence we cannot accept it as fact.

Most likely your an agnostic, most athiests are.
Click to expand...
Science claims that an unproven factor is a non existing factor, hence any superior entity is fully rejected by science.
The Spaghetti monster is on the same level of existence as any other superior entity by Science rules.

And I do not go by science rules when I say that Theism is a falsehood in my eyes, I just realize that there is no sense in an existence of something that would be fitting a fairy-tale story for kids.
 
OxymoronP said:
Even in science if you think something is false dont you need proof. If scientist think something is false they say, most likely or without further evidence we cannot accept it as fact.

Most likely your an agnostic, most athiests are.
Click to expand...

no. This argument that keeps coming up to try to redefine atheists as something else needs to go the way of the dinosaurs. Atheists don't believe in gods. I don't believe in gods, I'm an atheist. Gods most likely do not exist, I see no proof of them nor do I think the probability of magical beings actually existing being anything pointing to maybe being realistic. To me, the whole of it seems like fantasy. I don't believe in it. I can't claim 100% proof, maybe gods exist; but fat chance on that. I don't believe in gods, I won't believe in gods unless I see much much much greater and direct proof of their existence. I am an atheist, I reject theism and the notion of gods as plausible beings. Agnosticism is a much more middle of the road, they don't apply weight to either side. There could be gods, there could not be gods; they can't say. I say, there could be gods, there could not be gods; but the probability that there are gods seems damned low and I put no amount of faith or stock in these invisible, magical figments of humanity's imagination actually existing. Thus I am an atheist. Most atheists are not agnostics, atheists have made a choice.
 
OxymoronP said:
Even in science if you think something is false dont you need proof. If scientist think something is false they say, most likely or without further evidence we cannot accept it as fact.

Most likely your an agnostic, most athiests are.
Click to expand...
Also, science does prove that Theism is false, in many many ways.
For example, it's a Scientific proven law that energy cannot be created, and yet, Theism claims that a superior entity has created the entire world.
 
Last edited:
Apocalypse said:
Also, science does prove that Theism is false, in many many ways.
For example, it's a Scientific proven law that energy cannot be created, and yet, Theism claims that a superior entity is created the entire world.
Click to expand...

Like I said the religions based on such concepts are blind, thus I would prefer people be athiests or agnostics rather then Catholics and Muslims.
 
OxymoronP said:
I see, fair enough.

Would you be open to possibilities, if given evidence?
Click to expand...
An evidence for God's existence does not exist, if it were to exist there would be no Theism and Atheism, as there would be no "belief".
God would be proven, and hence anyone that would reject him would be in denial.
Of course, that is not the case.
 
OxymoronP said:
I see, fair enough.

Would you be open to possibilities, if given evidence?
Click to expand...

As I said, I would require large amounts of direct proof to rethink my position. But considering that we've defined our gods to be immeasurable (as measurable gods have been disproven), I don't see that proof as a likelihood.
 
Apocalypse said:
Also, science does prove that Theism is false, in many many ways. For example, it's a Scientific proven law that energy cannot be created, and yet, Theism claims that a superior entity has created the entire world.
Click to expand...
This is really a bad argument, on many different levels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom