Something about Religion (come on everbody express your opinion!!!)

[soulpatch]

Originally Posted by phizix

no, not in a traditional sense. but they both have the same foundation......faith.

aethism is not having faith. There is no "faith" in not having a god so not the same. They do not need faith in it at all as there is no after death reprecussions in their minds....

[Magician]

I don't play golf, so I guess "not playing golf" is a sport.

[Bryan]

Originally Posted by soulpatch

aethism is not having faith.

Atheism most certainly is a religion. It takes a hell of a lot more faith to believe that there is no possibility of a deity than it takes to be open to it.

Perhaps you meant agnostic?

[phizix]

Originally Posted by soulpatch

aethism is not having faith. There is no "faith" in not having a god so not the same. They do not need faith in it at all as there is no after death reprecussions in their minds....

Ok cool, if they don't have faith then please provide scientific proof that god(or any form of inteligent design) doesn't exist.

ps: For the record, i am not a religious person.

[Swedish goalie]

Originally Posted by phizix

Ok cool, if they don't have faith then please provide scientific proof that god(or any form of inteligent design) doesn't exist.

How in hell can you prove that something doesnt exist? If you understand how science works you would know that its impossile to 100% prove something for exampel we cant prove that the flying spaghetti monster doesnt exist but scientist says it very likely the monster doesnt exist.

[soulpatch]

Originally Posted by Bryan

Atheism most certainly is a religion. It takes a hell of a lot more faith to believe that there is no possibility of a deity than it takes to be open to it.

Perhaps you meant agnostic?

no agnostic you are open to a higher power but can not directly relate to it or a specific religion.

Being aethiest uses no faith whatsoever. There are no consequences for it and thus you do not have to have fear or a need for faith that you are right....

[soulpatch]

Originally Posted by phizix

Ok cool, if they don't have faith then please provide scientific proof that god(or any form of inteligent design) doesn't exist.

ps: For the record, i am not a religious person.

They do not need proof that a gfod does not exist ust like religious folks have no proof that he does exist.

Neither are right. neither are wrong.

[wjmurray]

Originally Posted by phizix

Ok cool, if they don't have faith then please provide scientific proof that god(or any form of inteligent design) doesn't exist.

ps: For the record, i am not a religious person.

The burden of proof does not lie with the person who lacks a belief in god. The burden of proof lies with those who claim that their imaginary friend in the sky exists, be it zeus, god, jeebus or any of the other thousands of gods that man has created to help with his/her irrational fear of death.

[wjmurray]

Originally Posted by Swedish goalie

How in hell can you prove that something doesnt exist? If you understand how science works you would know that its impossile to 100% prove something for exampel we cant prove that the flying spaghetti monster but scientist says it very likely the monster doesnt exist.

Ignore it because it is a ploy used by many. You cannot prove a negative, but the truth remains that you don't have to prove a negative in order to show that a god or even that imaginary teapot in orbit around the sun does not exist. The only proof that must be provided is by those who make extraordinary claims, ie "believers". As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The fact remains that the faithful have been unable to come up with even the slightest of evidence none-the-less something extraordinary to prove their beliefs to be correct or even worthy of note.

[Swedish goalie]

Originally Posted by wjmurray

Ignore it because it is a ploy used by many. You cannot prove a negative, but the truth remains that you don't have to prove a negative in order to show that a god or even that imaginary teapot in orbit around the sun does not exist. The only proof that must be provided is by those who make extraordinary claims, ie "believers". As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." The fact remains that the faithful have been unable to come up with even the slightest of evidence none-the-less something extraordinary to prove their beliefs to be correct or even worthy of note.

You forgott to quote Richard Dawkins

[phizix]

Originally Posted by soulpatch

no agnostic you are open to a higher power but can not directly relate to it or a specific religion.

Being aethiest uses no faith whatsoever. There are no consequences for it and thus you do not have to have fear or a need for faith that you are right....

your definition of agnostic is off. Here it is for reference:

a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Now lets address faith. Here are the definition:

1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions
2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust
3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>

Part 2b directly relates to the subject at hand, no?

[TAS33]

Originally Posted by Magician

I don't play golf, so I guess "not playing golf" is a sport.

You sort of missed on your analogy. It should read playing golf is an action, not playing golf is also an action.

And this thread was best when it was about how much better my imaginary freing is than yours.

[soulpatch]

Originally Posted by phizix

your definition of agnostic is off. Here it is for reference:

a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god

Now lets address faith. Here are the definition:

1 a: allegiance to duty or a person : loyalty b (1): fidelity to one's promises (2): sincerity of intentions
2 a (1): belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2): belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust
3: something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs <the Protestant faith>

Part 2b directly relates to the subject at hand, no?

yes faith relates to religion. Not to aethiests. You can not call it faith by not believing in something that has no proof it exists. Faith is only used for believeing in an unproven. You are construeing the definition of faith to use for your religious arguement. The religious play for the word faith is not to be used for aethiests. DO they have faith? Sure.....but everyone does. I have faith I am n ot going to die tonight but I can not prove that.......

I like to think of aethiests as more realists.

My bad about the agnostic definition.......but then again I was not too far off and did not need to run to a dictionary.


Point is religion will never be proven, You have faith in something you will never know about.


I personaly am an aethiest. I think religion is a shame by those that need that extra somethign in their lives. Nothing wrong with hat but not for me.

[jbgd825]

Praise be to Passmore!

At least we have prrof HE exists!!

[hammbone]

Originally Posted by jbgd825

Praise be to Passmore!

At least we have prrof HE exists!!

If Passmore was a loving deity, he'd help Matt keep his job and protect him from his crazy wife.