Quote:
Originally Posted by gabriel12
Just curious, and it may have been answered in the 1000 plus posts that I don't feel like reading, but why is everyone trying to convince people that there is a God, when no matter what you say, the non-believers just want to twist it around to saying that there isn't...? In fact, how in the world can an agnostic or atheist prove that there is not a God?
So, I think it comes down to faith for the non-believer or uncertain that they will continue their life not believing and not end up in Hell. It comes down to faith that the believers will continue believing and end up in Heaven. Either way, non-believers and believers are basically using the same theory of Faith, just in opposite directions. Blaise Pascal, a mathematician, physicist, and philosopher, had a theory on belief called Pascal's Wager. "Wager posits
that it is a better "bet" to believe that God exists than not to believe, because the expected value of believing (which Pascal assessed as infinite) is always greater than the expected value of not believing." Either way, believing or non-believing is based on Faith alone because according to this thread, you can't prove either way.
And, yes, mutual respect should be given to everyone, but you don't have to respect anyone and everyone's beliefs....just their right to have them. Everyone is entitled to what they would like to believe, but someone shouldn't be forced to respect what they feel is morally wrong.
|
First of all, this is a discussion. People can discuss things without forcing their beliefs on others. This thread is apparently an interesting topic. Both sides here lately have been trying to show that they are not out to convert each other. I don't care if someone worships Jesus or a tree, just as long as legislation is not passed forcing me to adhere to their beliefs. I personally enjoy discussing the philosophy involved with this subject.
Since we can't prove that Santa Claus doesn't exist: is it based on faith, or probability and rationality in which we don't believe in him? I don't believe in leprechauns because I have never seen conclusive evidence to suggest they exist. If a person believes in leprechauns without evidence of their existence that is faith. Not having a belief is not synonymous with faith. I have no belief in leprechauns based off of zero evidence and common sense. I do not claim that I know if there is a higher power or not. However, when religion comes into play and starts making claims about this "supernatural being" they can be judged by logic and rationality. It is at this point that religions start to fall apart. So yes, I do not believe in any religion based off of close scrutiny of their history, morals, followers, holy books or texts, and their various messiahs to the reality I know and logic.
So in closing, I do not know if there is a higher power. I have not seen evidence of one, so I currently don't believe in one. I don't actively walk around trying to not believe in one.
Once again Pascal's Wager shows up. Pascal's Wager is a logical fallacy.
Pascal's Wager
Also so people can stop calling everything faith, here is the definition.
faith - Dictionary definition and pronunciation - Yahoo! Education