Study: Religion may become extinct in nine nations

[dumpthemonarchy]

With Canada taking in millions of religious immigrants from Asia, there is no chance of religion dying here.

 

[Corduroy]

If the religous were going to back up their claims that god exists, than Bar sinister would have to back up his claims that god doesnt exist....

Well, I shouldn't be volunteering Bar Sinister for that. Feel free to back up the claim that god exists and I'll back up the claim that god doesn't exist with the same standard of evidence.

 

[Johnnny]

Your right you shouldnt be volunteering Barsinister, he is a bog boy...

Feel free to back up the claim that god exists and I'll back up the claim that god doesn't exist with the same standard of evidence.

I dont remember saying i wanted too....I was just correcting you

 

[Corduroy]

The challenge would apply to any argument. I'm not trying to resolve any of the claims being made. Just making a point about standards of evidence.

 

[Bar Sinister]

I agree with Colpy, back up the claim. In the mean time I'm roflma at the ignorance displayed in the above. Suspending rational thought eh......:lol:

Call it suspension of rational thought or suspension of disbelief. The fact is that to believe almost anything in any religious text, whether it be Christianity or any other religion you have to be prepared to accept an incredible amount of what any rational thinker would regard as utter nonsense. Perhaps when you get up from collecting dirt from your carpet you could explain how anyone can give any credence to the claims that supernatural events are responsible for everything that exists in spite of the fact that there is not a shred of scientific evidence for any of them. I repeat - accepting any religious beliefs requires the suspension of rational thought and I challenge you to prove otherwise.

Well, I shouldn't be volunteering Bar Sinister for that. Feel free to back up the claim that god exists and I'll back up the claim that god doesn't exist with the same standard of evidence.

That is a complete non sequitur. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the burden of proof rides on the shoulders of the one making the claim. I do not have to prove the non-existence of an imaginary deity - you have to provide evidence that one exists.

 

[gerryh]

Hopw about you back up the claims of black holes and the big bang. While you're at it, explain where all the matter from the big bang came from to begin with. Remember, you need to prove it all using the criteria that courderoy laid out.

 

[Cliffy]

There is no way to prove the Big Bang or Black Holes just as there is no way to prove god exists. All of it is on faith and faith is not even explainable. It just is. I don't care who a person thinks they are or what beliefs they hold, unless they experience something first hand, everything in our life is held on faith. We have faith that when we get up in the morning that we will return to our homes and bed that evening. Sometimes we don't make it, but we still have faith we will. Everybody has their personal reasons to believe or not. There are about as many ways to view divinity or lack thereof as there are people. Proof is really not a factor, at least in the general sense. Proof comes from experience. It cannot be found in books and it is impossible to convince another that you are right. Faith is a completely personal opinion and it is Universal in that everybody has it.

 

[gerryh]

well put Cliffy.

 

[Colpy]

The challenge would apply to any argument. I'm not trying to resolve any of the claims being made. Just making a point about standards of evidence.

There can be no standard of evidence in this discussion....it is based on faith......

Although I often make the argument that the idea that all the universe, ourselves, all life itself in all its amazing variety, to believe all of that was some kind of a colossal accident.....well, I'm sorry, I'm just not capable of the kind of faith required to accept that.

I'll stick with God.

 

[Corduroy]

That is a complete non sequitur. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the burden of proof rides on the shoulders of the one making the claim. I do not have to prove the non-existence of an imaginary deity - you have to provide evidence that one exists.

Atheists say this all the time. I got a little bored of it. So now my offer is just what you quoted. For some reason no one wants to take me up on it.

There can be no standard of evidence in this discussion....it is based on faith......

Although I often make the argument that the idea that all the universe, ourselves, all life itself in all its amazing variety, to believe all of that was some kind of a colossal accident.....well, I'm sorry, I'm just not capable of the kind of faith required to accept that.

I'll stick with God.

OK, so it's based on faith, but according to you the idea that the universe was an accident requires too much faith. Obviously then, for you faith isn't enough because you can distinguish between two faith-based beliefs and have chosen the one that you believe requires less faith. You must have some other standard. Could you elaborate on what that is?

 

[El Barto]

There is no way to prove the Big Bang or Black Holes just as there is no way to prove god exists. All of it is on faith and faith is not even explainable. It just is. I don't care who a person thinks they are or what beliefs they hold, unless they experience something first hand, everything in our life is held on faith. We have faith that when we get up in the morning that we will return to our homes and bed that evening. Sometimes we don't make it, but we still have faith we will. Everybody has their personal reasons to believe or not. There are about as many ways to view divinity or lack thereof as there are people. Proof is really not a factor, at least in the general sense. Proof comes from experience. It cannot be found in books and it is impossible to convince another that you are right. Faith is a completely personal opinion and it is Universal in that everybody has it.

Well at least they are experimenting by crashing atoms together to help prove that theory of the big bang ....... on the flip side ......creationist only have words on a text from only one book to go on by.

 

[Colpy]

OK, so it's based on faith, but according to you the idea that the universe was an accident requires too much faith. Obviously then, for you faith isn't enough because you can distinguish between two faith-based beliefs and have chosen the one that you believe requires less faith. You must have some other standard. Could you elaborate on what that is?

Elementary, my dear Watson.

Logic.

Accidental creation is, to my mind, impossible, and when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

 

[mentalfloss]

Well at least they are experimenting by crashing atoms together to help prove that theory of the big bang ....... on the flip side ......creationist only have words on a text from only one book to go on by.

There is also a pretty hefty chronological history of philosophical discussion about the topic which throws intelligent design out the window by using critical thought and minimizing logical fallacies. Existentialism in particular has made great strides in proving that the existence of a deity - for instance - has more to do with a human desire for being, rather than any actual attempt to objectively validate that deity's existence.

This is where religion will falter.

It's the relationship between man and God that fuels man's desire to validate God's existence. Once man ceases to need God to live a perfectly healthy, fruitful life, it really won't matter if God exists or not.

The whole argument then becomes a charade. It becomes laughable. Both the aggressive atheists and religious zealots will focus on the pragmatic issues at hand, rather than fighting over this nonsense.

 

[El Barto]

There is also a pretty hefty chronological history of philosophical discussion about the topic which throws intelligent design out the window by using critical thought and minimizing logical fallacies. Existentialism in particular has made great strides in proving that the existence of a deity - for instance - has more to do with a human desire for being, rather than any actual attempt objectively validate that deity's existence.

This is where religion will falter.

It's the relationship between man and God that fuels man's desire to validate God's existence. Once man ceases to need God to live a perfectly healthy, fruitful life, it really won't matter if God exists or not.

The whole argument then becomes a charade. It becomes laughable. Both the aggressive atheists and religious zealots will focus on the pragmatic issues at hand, rather than fighting over this nonsense.

I can go with that...... what is more important ? believing , or being ? Good that is , for the sake of being good .

 

[mentalfloss]

I can go with that...... what is more important ? believing , or being ? Good that is , for the sake of being good .

Exactly.

And for generations, God supplied that "good" - that moral compass. He was a moral God. But now we don't need that God to be good anymore. So his dwindling relevance starts to chip away his existence in a completely natural manner.

 

[Colpy]

There is also a pretty hefty chronological history of philosophical discussion about the topic which throws intelligent design out the window by using critical thought and minimizing logical fallacies. Existentialism in particular has made great strides in proving that the existence of a deity - for instance - has more to do with a human desire for being, rather than any actual attempt to objectively validate that deity's existence.

This is where religion will falter.

It's the relationship between man and God that fuels man's desire to validate God's existence. Once man ceases to need God to live a perfectly healthy, fruitful life, it really won't matter if God exists or not.

The whole argument then becomes a charade. It becomes laughable. Both the aggressive atheists and religious zealots will focus on the pragmatic issues at hand, rather than fighting over this nonsense.

Exactly.

And for generations, God supplied that "good" - that moral compass. He was a moral God. But now we don't need that God to be good anymore. So his dwindling relevance starts to chip away his existence in a completely natural manner.

Mothers, don't let your Babies grow up with Philosophy........it'll ruin their minds.

BTW, love the signature line.

 

[Avro]

There can be no standard of evidence in this discussion....it is based on faith......

Although I often make the argument that the idea that all the universe, ourselves, all life itself in all its amazing variety, to believe all of that was some kind of a colossal accident.....well, I'm sorry, I'm just not capable of the kind of faith required to accept that.

I'll stick with God.

Yeah, cons do have problems with science, facts and evidence.

Here's one for the fairytale believers.......

YouTube - 1 -- History of the Universe Made Easy (Part 1)

Many more to come......:smile:

 

[Colpy]

Yeah, cons do have problems with science, facts and evidence.

Here's one for the fairytale believers.......

YouTube - 1 -- History of the Universe Made Easy (Part 1)

Many more to come......:smile:

Geez...I never realized you were Aesop.....

Oh, so all the universe was a colossal mistake, an accident, without logic, without purpose, without meaning, without any design other than accident.

Gee Whiz, I guess nothing matters then, huh?

Do What Thy Wilt is then the essence of philosophy.......Nihilism the correct path, narcissism the ultimate truth.........natural selection the only rule, and Science itself the only God.

And all this based on a leap of faith that would leave my backwoods Baptist parents in awe........

Well, carry on.

If it makes you feel superior.

 

[YukonJack]

Colpy, I always thought that saying, with condescending certainty that everything we see around us came about with helter-skelter randomness, rather than due to intelligent design, is a heck of a lot greater leap of faith than my belief in a superior being.

 

[Avro]

Geez...I never realized you were Aesop.....

Oh, so all the universe was a colossal mistake, an accident, without logic, without purpose, without meaning, without any design other than accident.

Gee Whiz, I guess nothing matters then, huh?

Do What Thy Wilt is then the essence of philosophy.......Nihilism the correct path, narcissism the ultimate truth.........natural selection the only rule, and Science itself the only God.

And all this based on a leap of faith that would leave my backwoods Baptist parents in awe........

Well, carry on.

If it makes you feel superior.

See.....cons and science...don't go togetther.

It dosen't make me feel superior at all.

So got any facts for me?

Proof?

Evidence?

Anything other than words written in a book?

Here's more......

YouTube - 2 -- History of the Universe Made Easy (Part 2)

You can't comment on any of it...so you throw out some homilies that you learned in Sunday School.

Do you even go to church?

Which of the many Gods do you believe?

Which one is real?

Are Jews imperfect Christians?

Children believe in Santa because they are told he's real based on nothing at all.....then they grow up and take evil science classes.

Want something funny to watch....this is the competition to real science......

YouTube - BBC report on Creationist Museum

Jesus land strikes again.

Hooo doggy.....I stand corrected.....:lol:

YouTube - Red State Update: Night at the Creation Museum