McBell
Admiral Obvious
So you got nothing?
-
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!
What religion is scientifically proven?
- Thread starter why_islam
- Start date
ConfusedKuri
Active Member
II'd follow the religion with which I can identify most.
Scientific proofs are nothing that convinces me, as science constantly changes and progresses.
Scientific proofs are nothing that convinces me, as science constantly changes and progresses.
So proof doesn't convince you,seems a strange thing to say,science proves and is progressive seems better than something that cannot be proven IMO
sublime001
Member
Belief is about what you feel is necessary to help you live a better life and contribute something to society. What good is it in believing in a religion and then committing crime and creating hatred for other religions, you simply turn into a hypocrite. First determine what you want in life, how will it help you and others, then turn to whichever religion helps you achieve it.
ConfusedKuri
Active Member
Religion/Spirituality is not restricted, science however has its borders, so it does not help me with fundamental questions concerning life.
ashes_to_ashes
Non-religious Theist
I don't know if pantheism counts as a religion, but if laws of physics are "proof" enough for you, then I would say pantheism has some potential scientific backing. But it is really open to the individual to decide; concrete proof is near impossible when it comes to religion.Hello guys.
I wonder which religion is scientifically proven, i mean are the stuff written in hindu scriptures or the things that are in bible or in any other scripture of any religion scientifically proven. i guess what i am trying to say is, would you be rather believing in something that is scientifically proven or would you rather be believing in myths and majic...
That's why the two don't mix. Science progresses as we learn, religion stands still as we learn. You either have faith or you don't. You either need a god or you don't, or at least can find no evidence for one outwith the material. Out of idle curiousity, what does "identify with" mean exactly? Does the religion suit your morality and/or worldview with or without the god that goes with it?
The Sum of Awe
Brought to you by the moment that spacetime began.
None are proven, neither is Islam.
ConfusedKuri
Active Member
Well to me I could not deny God's existence ever I think... to me it is about in which way I best comprehend God, so I choose a religion/philosophy that makes it easy to get to Him, to understand His essence.
I do not doubt people can uphold good morals without God, my best friend certainly does and she is Agnostic.
I do not doubt people can uphold good morals without God, my best friend certainly does and she is Agnostic.
Autodidact
Intentionally Blank
I used to think this way. I assumed that God existed, and asked myself what His or Her nature was. Then one day I asked myself whether God existed. It changed my life.
JustWondering
Jerk
Question #1 - Why does an all-powerful god even need a prophet?
Question #2 - If god had no problem providing magics and miracles then why does he have a problem with doing it now?
Did you not read post 47?
JustWondering
Jerk
The universe wasn't created. The universe has always existed and always will.
waitasec
Veteran Member
McBell
Admiral Obvious
Only if you shamelessly abuse using the Forer Effect.
But this fact has already been beaten to death on this forum.
McBell
Admiral Obvious
I suspect that his attitude towards it will be more along the lines of: "why are you attacking god?"
Hello guys.
I wonder which religion is scientifically proven, i mean are the stuff written in hindu scriptures or the things that are in bible or in any other scripture of any religion scientifically proven. i guess what i am trying to say is, would you be rather believing in something that is scientifically proven or would you rather be believing in myths and majic.
To copy my reply to a similar question..
In order to be verified then they need to make testable claims. I know that the effectiveness of praying for a complication-free and quick recovery following surgery has been tested and found to make no statistically significant difference (Actually some of those prayed for did worse).
Of course like homoepaths when they don't get the results they want they claim that the test was flawed and give a list of feeble excuses as to why their claims can't be tested by standardised tests. Presumably they can only be tested through means that guaruntee a positive result.
Martin John
Member
As far as scientific proof of God... I guess by that you mean verifiable evidence? Well to begin with God is beyond our limited sense perception and we will not be able to prove his existence using our limited faculties. Bit like a tiny microbe trying to comprehend the workings of a computer or even a lightbulb... simply not equipped.
Only if he sees our sincerity in trying to reach him or contact him might he reveal himself. The word commonly used is revelation. So How do you qualify for that revelation.
The answer is simple. Become religious, enter into a life of prayer and give up trying to be happy without him.
If we are not prepared to do that then we are not serious or sincere about contacting him. So why should he reveal himself.
It takes much more than a laboratory experiment. It's not so cheap.
Only if he sees our sincerity in trying to reach him or contact him might he reveal himself. The word commonly used is revelation. So How do you qualify for that revelation.
The answer is simple. Become religious, enter into a life of prayer and give up trying to be happy without him.
If we are not prepared to do that then we are not serious or sincere about contacting him. So why should he reveal himself.
It takes much more than a laboratory experiment. It's not so cheap.
Well the feeble excuse didn't take long to materialise
Last edited:
JustWondering
Jerk
So in order to get some kind of evidence to prove your gods existence so nonbelievers can believe the nonbelievers need to brainwash themselves into believing in him first? Sure, that makes perfect sense. In bizzaro world.
