Here are a few questions I've always wondered about (no need to make a new thread, I think):
1) Is it possible to believe that there was a "purpose" behind the creation of the universe without believing there is a God?
2) Can something end that does not have a beginning?
are there 20 gods?
is god alive?is he dead?
does god even exhist?
the fact you can't provide concrete information besides your own faith inspired by a book is not good enough.
I do however believe science can't explain why life happened. it can explain the processes of life but it can't explain why it occurred.
football injury terms on my view of life
belief in a higher being-questionable, it's possible but a christian GOD seems highly unrealistic.
belief in religion-OUT,I believe religion was created as a tool by man to control man,and to give people a set of common rules of decency to live by. how many times in history have wars been over religion and power?take away natural causes and religion is the #1 killer in human history . religion has some good life virtues,but asides from that it's been used to instigate death and destruction.
For example, please construct a repeatable trial that proves that Abraham Lincoln was the President during the Civil War. Oh sure, science can help around the edges (dating artifacts and such), but ultimately, that's a matter of history, not science.
Likewise, the existence of God is properly a matter of philosophy, not science. For one thing, God (should He exist) by His very nature transcends (and is the cause of) science. It would be impossible to create a test that would find Him, especially if He doesn't want to be found (not out of the realm of possibility).
Philosophy, on the other hand, has quite a lot to say about the existence of God, and I would argue there are substantially good reasons (not just faith) to believe in His existence. In this relam too, actually, science can help (pointing to the status of the creation of the universe, telling us that certain documents are a certain age, and so on). it just can't (and shouldn't) be the primary tool. It's not the right one.
Only believing things that can be proven by science is self-defeating anyway. Please observe:
Premise: Only things that can be proven by science should be believed.
Simple enough, right?
Okay, now construct a repeatable trial that proves that this premise is true, so that we can believe it. :)
I can see the wisdom in not wanting to know, but human instinct gets the best of me.
Tell me more.
I'm an idiot.
I'd be an idiot imo if I didn't at least listen to this so called proof.
*EDIT* And reading further, I may have missed your point. Oops.
*EDIT 2* If your point was that you'd want to know, which is what the poll was asking, and not that you're actually asking for the proof.
I believe the POINT of this entire thread is "Faith" would be ended due to "Proof".
Said proof would be a billion year old tiny blue alien type swooping in as you have done at the end of this thread without reading it and slamming everyone.
Not a carbon dating of a piece of wood from a mountain in 2010.
Further, I not only participated earlier, but I can assure you, I did indeed read the entire thing very carefully, as one might suspect given my activities here. ;)
Further, at most I "slammed" two people, not everyone.
What are you talking about?
I have been thinking about coming back into the fold (Catholicims)after 7 years as an atheist.
Its a strange feeling though, a hope is all. I don't feel guilt or shame, really, I feel I've suffered enough. I don't agree with alot of the Church's teachings. And the punishment/reward thing doesn't do it for me. So I don't even know. Something to hold onto maybe. It would be hard to explain to people. Like the secular Jews with Israel (the ones that aren't Israeli citizens anyway). It may not be entirely rational, but no one is.
I dont believe they're is a guy floating on a cloud