• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

"We don't know" - why can't religions except that?

psychoslice

Veteran Member
Most religions to me is based on fear, they are too frightened to own up to not knowing something, as this will make them feel that their faith is not solid, sad really.
 

George-ananda

Advaita Vedanta, Theosophy, Spiritualism
Premium Member
And why do you believe that?
First, my study of the paranormal shows me more than the physical level exists. Secondly, the sages and seers of the eastern traditions have described these things and they dovetail well with an analysis of the paranormal. Thirdly, I personally know of one particular spiritual master who I esteem above any doubts with evidence beyond any doubts.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
First, my study of the paranormal shows me more than the physical level exists. Secondly, the sages and seers of the eastern traditions have described these things and they dovetail well with an analysis of the paranormal. Thirdly, I personally know of one particular spiritual master who I esteem above any doubts with evidence beyond any doubts.

Can you provide any of this evidence?
 

Geoff-Allen

Resident megalomaniac
Weather the belief is shared or not is irrelevant as it is true nonetheless.

Can you quote any prominent biologist?

I can do even better ... can direct you 2 an entire book - just search 4 John Ashton In Six Days.

It has 50 top scientists answering the question of why they don't accept evoution.

There are so many holes in the theory that it would take dozens of posts 2 list them all.

Something isn't true just because a lot of people "believe" it - applies 2 evolution and to religions.

Have a good one!
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
I can do even better ... can direct you 2 an entire book - just search 4 John Ashton In Six Days.

It has 50 top scientists answering the question of why they don't accept evoution.

There are so many holes in the theory that it would take dozens of posts 2 list them all.

Something isn't true just because a lot of people "believe" it - applies 2 evolution and to religions.

Have a good one!

1) Please use proper English.

2) As I do not have the time, money or inclination to read the book can you please tell me some of these "plot holes"?
 

HonestJoe

Well-Known Member
Scientists are happy with admitting they don't know all the answers (usually with the rider, "but we're looking into it") why do most (every?) religion have to have an answer for everything? Even if they make the answer up.
To be fair I think this is a human thing rather than a specifically religious thing, though a number of religious beliefs could be seen to have developed from this basis. Even in science we have concepts of assumptions and probability to create intermediate answers we can work with even though they might not be accurate. Fear of the unknown is one of our greatest limitations so we come up with all sorts of ways of establishing explanations for things we don’t know, some more rational than others.
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
Perhaps that goes far to explain why you feel safe ignoring the religious convictions of your neighbors. In the town I live in, that's not a luxury.

Oh don't worry in return we have Islamists. But then again I am smart enough not to live next to them.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
Oh don't worry in return we have Islamists. But then again I am smart enough not to live next to them.

Ironically where I am they tend to be nicer and more understanding than the Christians. Probably because they have been forced to live as an easily identifiable minority, it tends to make people more empathetic.
 

djhwoodwerks

Well-Known Member
Scientists are happy with admitting they don't know all the answers (usually with the rider, "but we're looking into it") why do most (every?) religion have to have an answer for everything? Even if they make the answer up.

I can't speak for all Christians, but for myself, I don't need an answer for everything to have faith in God. I have many questions and things I don't understand, but I still have faith the Bible is true and Jesus Christ is Lord and God is still on His throne.

Romans 1:16-17 (ESVST) 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."

2Co 5:5-7 (ESVST) 5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee. 6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.
 

Taylor Seraphim

Angel of Reason
I can't speak for all Christians, but for myself, I don't need an answer for everything to have faith in God. I have many questions and things I don't understand, but I still have faith the Bible is true and Jesus Christ is Lord and God is still on His throne.

Romans 1:16-17 (ESVST) 16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 17 For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith for faith, as it is written, "The righteous shall live by faith."

2Co 5:5-7 (ESVST) 5 He who has prepared us for this very thing is God, who has given us the Spirit as a guarantee. 6 So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, 7 for we walk by faith, not by sight.

By definition faith is belief without evidence.

How do you think that is a good way to determine if something is true?
 

Altfish

Veteran Member
.

It has 50 top scientists answering the question of why they don't accept evoution.

Really! Top scientists?

The first two I looked at

Jeremy L Walter has various engineering degrees - their relevance to biology?
Dr. Bergman has a BSc in Pyschology; a PhD in Human Biology from Columbia Pacific University - the second bit sounds promising until you look that University up, "Columbia Pacific University (CPU) was an unaccredited nontraditional distance learning school in California."

You get the idea.

I think I need to refer to Project Steve, " NCSE's "Project Steve" is a tongue-in-cheek parody of a long-standing creationist tradition of amassing lists of "scientists who doubt evolution" or "scientists who dissent from Darwinism."
Creationists draw up these lists to try to convince the public that evolution is somehow being rejected by scientists, that it is a "theory in crisis." Not everyone realizes that this claim is unfounded. NCSE has been asked numerous times to compile a list of thousands of scientists affirming the validity of the theory of evolution. Although we easily could have done so, we have resisted. We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!
Project Steve pokes fun at this practice and, because "Steves" are only about 1% of scientists, it also makes the point that tens of thousands of scientists support evolution. And it honors the late Stephen Jay Gould, evolutionary biologist, NCSE supporter, and friend.
We'd like to think that after Project Steve, we'll have seen the last of bogus "scientists doubting evolution" lists, but it's probably too much to ask. We hope that when such lists are proposed, reporters and other citizens will ask, "How many Steves are on your list!?""
"

http://ncse.com/taking-action/project-steve
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
What effective way do you judge that there is no God? Belief without evidence?
Oh, that question.

May I, @Taylor Seraphim ?

That is not even a meaningful question to ask. The concept of God is nowhere near delimited enough or meaningful enough for its acceptance to be presumed as you imply.

For more detail, google for "Russell's Teapot".
 
Top