What makes you think that all have been debunked already?
(of course there are some) you yourself said that you are on the "i believe there's no God" side..unless you really know that there is NO God...
notice the term mythology? obviosuly that one has been debunked.
statistics shows that Christianity is currently the largest Faith followed by Islam..and if getting debunked is the fate of the Christian faith..we still can't judged it to be a hoax,at least not just yet
as a suspect of a crime is presuumed innocent until proven guilty.
what makes you think otherwise? even the Hardcore Aetheist, antony Flew now writes a book "there is God"
if i tell you that most of the reasons for my faith is personal experience
'cause i bleieved first before i studied the scripture..
would you give credit to that?personally you might but obviously in general you woudn't.
so granted that my proof is not valid, though that is just another POV, as i too do not,cannot and will not know the fullness of everything..
so what's your proof then? Limited discoveries?(though wide and great but still limited) we are trying to grasp something with infinite value, and we are using finite measurement..now that makes sense,doesn't it?
i think you need to do your part in researching about what Christians or the Vatican says about the 6 day creation..
though initially some folks took the bible pretty literal..but it doesnt mean that
it is really the whole church's stand about the subject.(though there was a time that it was taken pretty literal by the church...well thanks to science)
Like not all muslims wanted to blow non-islamic nations.
as what the psalmist said in psalm90:04
For a thousand years in your sight
are but as yesterday when it is past,
or as a watch in the night.
If God created time, then clearly He is not bound by time..
personally i would not take the 6day creation literally..
perhaps this link might give insights...
If God is Omnipotent (All Powerful) Why Did He Need to Take Six Days to Create the Universe? (please check the link bai, even if you won't buy it...it really is a nice read..considering that you love science,reason and logic
)
about the earth being the center of the universe, there was really a time that
Catholics thought that was the case..until Galileo's theory was proven and made sense..same concept of how a scientific theory is being replaced by a new one..
and besides, does the bible really indicated that the earth is the center of the universe? that was clearly a Misinterpretation..i know that the reaction towards criticism by early Catholics were not really civilized but i hope you will not hold that against Christianity 'cause how the religious behave cannot and should not be used to discredit the religion the religious follows...such as Islam is labeled as the religion of terrorists...the muslim extremist really painted a negative picture on Islam but we don't really know if Islam really teaches terrorism...
what do you call the study that deals about heavenly bodies?(stars and planets)
astronomy right? didn't theism accounts have records about astronomy?about stars and the universe? of course some were disproven when a New idea was accpeted and proven(scientific theories) therefore a relationship is really obvious.
as the theistic idea about a Creator was the accepted theory about the beginning of all things...science later came up with the idea that everything was just a product of chance...therefore it is natural that the theory of a creator must be disproven first. we both know that it hasn't been yet.
besides, why would early astronomy bother disproving the church's theory of geocentricity(sun and other planets revolve around the earth)
if it does not deal with any scientific matter at all?
personally i've accepted that early church taught incorrect details about some of the scientific accounts but all the more it strengthens the realtionship between scientific and religious theories..
geoctricicism was later replaced with heliocentricism, what do you think is the Vatican's stand on this?if you think they would disagree with heliocentricity
then like i said earlier you might wanna research about Christan's stand about these things..so what if geocentricity was debunked,does that necessarily disprove the bible? when even the bible doesn't exactly wrote about it, as it was clearly a product of misinterpretaion of early Christian theologists.
and it most certainly does not discredit the existence of God
yes, i agree that aetheism just means non-belief.
so why do you continue to argue if that's the case? if you really do not believe that God exists,why continue to defend your stand granted that you as an aetheist is one step ahead from theists? preha gud anang makasugat ka ug buang unya balikason kag kalit,diba di nimu patulan kay kahibaw ka nga wa siya kasabut ug kahibaw sa iyang gipang yaw2x? diba that should be our reaction when we find no logical reason to engage ourselves with something?so why continue to argue or defend your non belief?could it be that there is really a logical case in theism?(though para nimu wala but your actions are contradicting)?or worst, aetheism has become your religion...
otherwise you just wouldn't care...
if you don't believe in something, clearly no proof about it will ever be valid to you..in the same way that deny biblical facts and proofs presented by theists
then how can you be sure in an absolute way that proof has not really been laid over?is it the absolute truth that no proof has already been laid over?
kay from a theist POV, everything almost serves as proof...of course from your POV it doesnt...how would you reconcile both claims?is it rightful to say that
a belief in God is absolutely wrong? if so, what happens to the non-belief in God but not stating there is no God?
in Christianity, apart from faith and the amazing things about the universe,earth even in the human body, historical accounts confirmed the new testament writings..many actually served as proof that Christianity is authentic
and that the bible is credible..however it is also given that to non-believers
maski pag unsaon ug present sa proof kung dili jud mutoo ang tao...wala jud nay bili..
i was once a God,church and religious hater, had i not open my mind with another perspective...i would have remained hateful till now..
no offense taken bai, i also hope i haven't offended you in any way..if i have.i apologize..
anyway if i am right in saying that you just don't believe there is God but you do not really know if He does not exist...and if trust is based with something tangible, and faith isn't..
basing on the observations about God being inexistent, you trust that there is no God..but apart from tangible observations we also cannot deny that there is a vast information which we do not have access to.
so basing on the fact that you do not possess the fullness of knowledge about the argument whether God does or doesn't exist..
by believing there is no God.there is no logical reason for it..but still by faith.
in the same way a muslim and christian would consider their religion to be the truth...apart from both party's tangible proofs but by faith with what isn't.
by saying such, it could work the other way around..
that it is irrational to presuppose the inexistence of a god given that there are claims and evidences from those who believe.
therefore, you must disprove all claims about God's existence first before not believing in the existence of God.otherwise, it would also be irrational.
might as well say, i do not know what i believe. Theists somehow do have the right to say there is God 'cause whether true or not, we have our faith to support such belief.
kasabut man ko sa imung gisulti bai but i just wouldn't agree with it..
come to think of it, not believing in God is a lack of faith towards believing there is God...however it would also imply that you have faith that there is no God only for the reason that you do not hold an absolute truth about God being inexistent..for sure you have solid basis,observations and personal conclusions..but other than those.
there is NOTHING absolute about your claim,by what you said...you are just asserting,claiming NOT Stating..
that's why it is called FAITH because we cannot see it but we believe in it.
have you actually seen and know that God really does not Exist?has anyone ever have?
of course, you do not have faith in God...but you have Faith that He does not exist..otherwise you wound't have taken sides..might as well label yourself as searching...in that way, it would show that you lacked the faith in both God's existence and inexistence..that for me, best describes the "suspension of belief". 'cause whether you like it or not, believing that there is no God is still a belief, from the word believe. unless you would say "i know there is no God"..which we both know that is not the case.
Logical possiblity,
is it logical to believe that God does not exist despite of Not knowing everything about His existence?
to be fair with Scientific discoveries that seem contradicts biblical accounts the Vatican put up a Science academy.a research team compose of both believers and non-believers in an attempt to remove biases from the research..
see:
Pontifical Academy of Sciences - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
if you really wanna be logical about your conclusion..
you should have at least studied Religion.get a master's or doctor's degree about theology..so that you can have a logical comparison.
otherwise, you are still taking your unbelief by Faith (Faith that there is No God..klaro na na ha...dili na na under sa "double speak"
)
How about educated guess? Critical deliberation? Iterative testing and observation?Experientially driven prediction?
--unless you CAN get the fullness of everything from the processes mentioned then faith is no longer needed.
diba there were instances that a theory was accepted for a long period of time then gets debunked by a new one?with science continually growing in its understanding..that is the only way to move on.debunk initially accepted theories..
didn't the debunked theories also went through educated guess,Critical deliberation, Iterative testing and observation,Experientially driven prediction? to formulate a theory then get a conclusion?but still gets debunked.
we both know that when we say scientific theory it does not work as a layman's theory do..as scientific theories are almost proven by several tests...
but since we also know that science is evolving overtime, discoveries are being made every now and then..though that certain theory is currently accepted in fact both of us and the whole scientific community would agree that the theory even with its supporting details..cannot be considered as the ABSOLUTE TRUTH,that's why we have dubunked or improved scientific theories throughout history..just like how early science thought that the earth was a flat disk..
until then faith is needed in everything that we do not ENTIRELY know.
Faith does not only consist of a belief of te unknown but also in the unbelief of the unknown. you might not personally agree with it..but logically you will. i know you get the point.
basing on what you said that you just believe there is no God but do not really know if that belief is true..then why are you discrediting faith in what you believed in? and if you say you do know that there is No God..then i will no longer argue with you about faith in non-belief BUT we both know that it is not the case, i think we can even both agree that no one alive today knows 100% with full honesty and sanity that God really does not exist...
both camps are just speculating..unless you're somewhere in between..i might
not argue with you anymore.
you are questioning Theism for believing in God using faith and relative proofs
yet you do not question aetheism for not believing despite of not knowing everything if God really exists? if you're saying that you are just suspending judgement for the time being 'cause you cannot consider anything as proof for God's existence then you stay in between.
once you take sides between a believer and a non-believer you gotta present proofs.
of course the belief in God came in first,early science even thought that earth was a flat disk and that it has pillars supporting it from its core..
of course they were taken from biblical scriptures which was clearly a product of misinterpretation..then why did Science debunked that theory?
therefore there is an obvious connection betwween them.
therefore, before i consider your claim to be correct, i would have to ask a proof from you? not a personal one but if there is such term...
a proof that can be considered absolute from all perspectives.the problem is, naay kay kaila nga nakahibaw TANAN?
Science may have debunked many belief systems..that's why others are categorized in the myth order..but has Science debunked Christianity?
science has not even reached the fullness of everything..mao bitaw naay term nga known universe 'cause there's a whole lot of studying,discovering,observing that has to be done..so don't get too excited.
about creation, now may be the time for you to check the link i posted above about God and science if you havent checked it yet.
someone who has not heard of anything about God would obviously NOT have a reason for believing in a God because that person doesn't even have the slightest idea about God.in other words, that person does not have a choice but to not believe. therefore, your example is not valid.
pero ikaw, kahibaw man ka about God yet you chose not to believe 'cause
it seems that you cannot consider anything as a proof for His existence..
and at the same time you would also agree that you do not fully know that God does does not really exist...as you are just claiming and not making a statement of absolute truth..what makes you think that you are not using FAITH?
faith by definition is
--Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing.
you are confident, you think what you believe is true..
diba haum tanan sa definition sa faith imung stand towards God?
diba you believe that there is NO God? keyword there bai is BELIEVE.
for an All knowing God, of course nothing is Hidden from Him.
but to answer why He did not Stop Eve from the act of disobedience would be unknown. and yes, freewill has everything to do with it
my answer in this part would be an assumption as there is really no way that i can fathom God's ways...
i too searched for some answers in both personal and online. both in past and present.
i seem to agree with what this guy said about the subject.
Why did God let Satan into the Garden knowing what would happen? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry
would you agree? all the evil you see in the world today would be stopped if each and every citizen of the world would Love their neighbor as themselves
forgive and Love their enemies.
it is also a choice to do so, and i know you agree that freewill has everuthing to do with it.
exactly my point why i said you are still a faith practitioner.
which is simply for the reason that you do not hold the absolute truth...
again, faith in the sense that you believe God does not exist.
maski pag muingun ka nga nagbrain storming ka come up with a personal conclusion that God does not exist.it still does not take away the fact that you are NOT 100% sure about the absoluteness of your conclusion..therefore
you are still excercising FAITH in your disbelief.
when you said that your conclusion was based on observable facts, in critical thinking and of constant assessment and deliberation.
does it follow that ALL people who believe in God Lacked the ability
or skipped the processes you just mentioned?
take a good look on this LIST
this is a list of ALL aetheists who converted to CHRISTIANITY.
also examine what kind of lives they lead and if they are the type who would just take everything what was taught in sunday school. remember, they once held the same idea that you do now..
List of converts to Christianity from atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
and here is the LIST of the many Christian Thinkers
most of them are scientists if not all..but one way or the other..i believe we can agree that when it comes to observable facts, in critical thinking and of constant assessment and deliberation, logic and even science itself..these guys know way too much compared to what we have.
now tell me, did they missed somthing that YOU didn't?
List of Christian thinkers in science - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
if what you say about God is true then all of them
believed on a fictional mythical being from an old piece of literature created by man.
did i say that without religion,it is impossible to be good and lead a good life?
its either you misunderstood or you assume too much.
i did not even mention religion in my post did i? i said faith in Jesus' teachings
about life and salvation.
Re: Kinsa jud imo gituohan kung diin jud tah gikan, ang Bible or Science?
Originally Posted by Xian120
Reply With Quote
Posting Permissions
