Is there any religious argument that actually stands when scrutinized with reason?

[Theunis]

Scientific theories are facts assembled into reasonable pictures. The Theory of Gravity uses the facts about gravity to produce the most comprehensive picture that can be formulated.

A theory is no longer a theory when it becomes a fact or is discarded.
.It reminds me of what Dr Isaac Asimov said. A theory is not wrong it just needs updating'.
Like the theory that there was nothing, just a vacuum, in outer space. This theory was totally discarded when it was found that there were magnetic and other fields unseen by humans.

 

[Tomorrows_Child]

Test or text?

No, atheists need not provide any reasons for what exists. Honest people admit when they don't know.

texts*

And you may not feel the need to provide reason but any atheist scientists do and they have written about it. Read what they have written.

 

[prometheus11]

A theory is no longer a theory when it becomes a fact or is discarded.
.It reminds me of what Dr Isaac Asimov said. A theory is not wrong it just needs updating'.
Like the theory that there was nothing, just a vacuum, in outer space. This theory was totally discarded when it was found that there were magnetic and other fields unseen by humans.

Scientific theories don't ever become facts. Scientific theories are facts collected into the most sensible "picture."

A scientific theory is not at all like a singular hypothesis.

The singular idea that space was empty wasn't ever a scientific theory.

 

[prometheus11]

texts*

And you may not feel the need to provide reason but any atheist scientists do and they have written about it. Read what they have written.

I have read a lot and am not debating the issue because it's undebatable. Atheists need provide no reason for existence, they only need acknowledge existence as obvious fact.

 

[Theunis]

Scientific theories don't ever become facts. Scientific theories are facts collected into the most sensible "picture."

A scientific theory is not at all like a singular hypothesis.

The singular idea that space was empty wasn't ever a scientific theory.

I based my argument on the following.-- viz proven or rejected-- Thanks for the additional info -

***** quote *****
The evolution of a scientific theory

A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

*** unquote ***

 

[prometheus11]

I based my argument on the following.-- viz proven or rejected-- Thanks for the additional info -

***** quote *****
The evolution of a scientific theory

A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

*** unquote ***

Yep. Theories produced by the most sensible collection of facts can be rejected or improved and modified.

For example, one might collect all the facts of gravity together in a silly way to assert that it is caused by invisible unicorns. Such a theory would only be a SCIENTIFIC theory if it included all the known facts, but it would be rejected rather than modified.

 

[outhouse]

A theory is no longer a theory when it becomes a fact or is discarded.

False

 

[outhouse]

I based my argument on the following.-- viz proven or rejected-- Thanks for the additional info -

***** quote *****
The evolution of a scientific theory

A scientific theory is not the end result of the scientific method; theories can be proven or rejected, just like hypotheses. Theories can be improved or modified as more information is gathered so that the accuracy of the prediction becomes greater over time.

http://www.livescience.com/21491-what-is-a-scientific-theory-definition-of-theory.html

*** unquote ***

And no where does it say a theory graduates into something else

Your own link states the opposite of what you posit

 

[Mister Emu]

Personal experience is valid evidence for personal belief.

Thank you. All I was ever after.

 

[prometheus11]

Thank you. All I was ever after.

I hope you're after more than that. A lunatic believes his delusions because of personal experience.

 

[cambridge79]

Which atheistic idea of the formation of the universe stands to scrutiny in light of reason? Name me one.

The formation of our universe is quite well described from just tiny instants after the big bang. What was before the big bang is still object of debate.
But even if it will remain an unanswered question forever this doesn't give the right to people to come up with completely random explanations pretending they have an actual answer. All they have done is writing a fictional novel.

 

[Thief]

Lol you mean the lack of it.

no....I got it right....

 

[Thief]

Test or text?

No, atheists need not provide any reasons for what exists. Honest people admit when they don't know.

honest people would admit that faith is a matter of reasoning
and out of reasoning we become sure of what we know

 

[prometheus11]

honest people would admit that faith is a matter of reasoning
and out of reasoning we become sure of what we know

Faith is an aspect of reasoning.

 

[outhouse]

honest people would admit that faith is a matter of reasoning

There is NO reasoning when one believes in things with no evidence. It is a complete lack of reason.

 

[Theunis]

Yep. Theories produced by the most sensible collection of facts can be rejected or improved and modified.

For example, one might collect all the facts of gravity together in a silly way to assert that it is caused by invisible unicorns. Such a theory would only be a SCIENTIFIC theory if it included all the known facts, but it would be rejected rather than modified.

I found the info in the following link quite fascinating -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superseded_scientific_theories

 

[prometheus11]

I found the info in the following link quite fascinating -
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superseded_scientific_theories

And?

 

[Thief]

There is NO reasoning when one believes in things with no evidence. It is a complete lack of reason.

reasoning lays in your head....
you would be that person who denies the sound a tree makes when it falls.....and you weren't there to hear it.

there is no record....no testimony....
if you weren't there it did not happen.

 

[Thief]

Faith is an aspect of reasoning.

switching the word ...aspect/matter..... gained you what?

 

[leibowde84]

Wisdom is reason ++.
Regards

Actually, you are mistaken on this. Reason is one of the tools we have to obtain wisdom. Without reason, there is no wisdom. (See below)

wis·dom
ˈwizdəm/
noun
The quality of having experience, knowledge, and good judgment; the quality of being wise.

rea·son
ˈrēzən/
noun
the power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgments by a process of logic.