Agnostic no more

If there is tons of evidence to prove the theories right then they wouldnt be theories

Perhaps we need to step back a moment in order to get some clarification. A theory is an organized system of accepted knowledge explaining a specific set of phenomena. As more observations and experiments bring forth more data, those theories get tweaked. In most cases, support for the theory becomes strengthened.

Its about faith.

That is true. Unfortunately, faith cannot explain anything. Faith is simply a belief in the supernatural.

I reject the THEORY of evolution.

Then you reject the overwhelming evidence which supports evolution. Is that rational ?

Im not leaving "half-cocked." That statement actually upsets me. Am I coming off like a mean little Jesus freak already?

Sorry to upset you, that was not the intention. My remark was centered on your statement that gluons have not been observed.

What you have shown me is theory. What I have shown you is theory.

Perhaps, but there is a clear distinction between a theory with overwhelming supportive evidence and a theory based solely on faith. If you wish to pursue a "Theory of God," please do so and provide whatever reasoning and evidence which might support your theory. As well, try to figure out a way in which to test your theory. This may not only add to the discussion, but may as well help to enlighten you in your quest. It's a win-win situation.
 
CC

I'm curious, were there any discussions or members on this message board which influenced your decision ? If so, please let me know.
 
Coffee, congratulations! Your rewards will far outweigh the torment delivered by those who oppose you for your decision. I cannot speak for religions other than Christianity, however, if I can help in any way with your daily walk, please contact me.




'Faith is the highest passion in a human being. Many in every generation may not come that far, but none comes further.'

~ Soren Kierkegaard ~



><>
 
Quotes you say...

"For centuries, theologians have been explaining the unknowable in terms of the-not-worth-knowing."

Henry Louis Mencken

"Pray, n:. To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single petitioner confessedly unworthy."

Ambrose Bierce
 
Originally posted by (Q)
[Perhaps, but there is a clear distinction between a theory with overwhelming supportive evidence and a theory based solely on faith. If you wish to pursue a "Theory of God," please do so and provide whatever reasoning and evidence which might support your theory. As well, try to figure out a way in which to test your theory. This may not only add to the discussion, but may as well help to enlighten you in your quest. It's a win-win situation.
Click to expand...

Yes thats why NATURE AS "RANDOM CHANCE" IS ILLOGIC, AND INTELLIGENT DESIGNER HAS OVERWHELMING EVIDENCE AND IS PROVEN..IT CAN BE DEMONSTRATED, OBSERVED AND STUDIED TO BE RESPONSIBLE OF COMPLEX AND ORDERED EXISTENCE, A FACT....


Originally posted by (Q)
[
That is true. Unfortunately, faith cannot explain anything. Faith is simply a belief in the supernatural.
Click to expand...

faith ( P ) Pronunciation Key (fth)
n.
1. Confident belief in the truth, value, or trustworthiness of a
person, idea, or thing.
2. Belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence. See Synonyms at belief. See Synonyms at trust.
4. Loyalty to a person or thing; allegiance: keeping faith with one's
supporters.
5. often Faith Christianity. The theological virtue defined as secure
belief in God and a trusting acceptance of God's will.
6. The body of dogma of a religion: the Muslim faith.
7. A set of principles or beliefs.




What is faith? For the learning children (atheist)


Another misconception atheist use as an attack against Christianity is the word “Faith”. Faith= Trust; loyalty; belief on something without a need of proof; reliance; pledged word. For example, a close family friend approached you and asked if she can borrow your car for 2 days and promised to return it back, however, she gave you her credit card incase if the car gets totally wrecked you can take all the money out of her bank and keep it to replace your car. But because you have “faith” in her, you just told her “its ok, you don’t need to give me a blank check, you’re my best friend and a good driver for many years now and I know you’ll return the car on time safely, I trust you”. That’s faith. People use faith in many aspects in life. People put faith in family and friends, neighbors, experts, etc. We even put faith in science, otherwise if no one does, then people will not listen to it, will give no support and donation to it, therefore science wouldn’t exist today. Here’s another example of faith; when you buy a Toyota Truck, since your not a mechanic, you have no idea how the engine works, but you have faith in the car that it will take you places, it has a good reputation, many people testified that Toyota trucks have engine that last forever, even most mechanics recommend Toyota, because of their testimony, you put faith in Toyota trucks and rely on it, even if you have no clue how the engine works. And when your car breaks down, you take the car to them and get it fixed, and because that’s their profession, you have faith that they will get the job done. I can probably set over 100 more examples of faith. (By the way, you don’t call mechanics, brain surgeons, God, biochemist, and computer engineers “the magicians”, just because of the knowledge you don’t have.)

Atheist meanwhile got the word “faith” mixed up with “myth’. They think that to have faith on something is to believe on myths. How stupid. So if I have faith in family and friends, it means that they are myths? Their own definition of faith is “belief on something that cannot be proven; in other words, “Faith=belief on myths and non-existence”. Atheists are stupid like that; most of them are so ignorant. Hey cone heads! Yeah I’m talking to you atheist people, to have faith is to believe on something without a need of proof because of loyalty and reliance. Some may even put faith in mythical U.F.O’s, they may want or may not want proof, this may not even be proven at all! Or put faith in mythical Zeus the Greek god, you may want or may not want proof, but you can have faith in that as well, even if it’s existence have no proof thus making it a ‘myth’, your still entitled to that mythical belief, you can be that extremely loyal (to believe on something that have no proof, such as toothfairy and atheism). But once again, faith is NOT to believe on something that cannot be proven, but belief on something that you need no proof of because of loyalty and reliance. Stupid atheist kids… Whether God’s love is proven or not, you believe in Him because you trust Him, that’s what faith is. Confused or not, in good times and in bad, you remain loyal and faithful. Christianity requires faith because of its deep mystery each individual cannot comprehend, from the sacraments, Holy Trinity, laws and tradition, to the commandments and canonized books, faith doesn’t mean that God and religion cannot be proven.
 
Last edited:
CC, Whatsupyall is listing nothing but the rewards of religion, Christianity in general. It's true, they have plenty of rewards, and overall make life easier to live. But if you are in search for truth, he can offer nothing but claims... As can athiests... This is why agnosticism seems like the most logical stance. I'm sure you knew all of this already, but claiming to know anything is just arrogant, and ignorant... As whatsupyall so blatently displays... As do many athiests as well... You seem to still be agnostic but leaning towards the existance of a God. This is still agnostic. I am agnostic but lean towards there being no God. But I still don't know, as you don't either... All we have is claims, opinions, beliefs, dogmas, rituals, etc... On both sides...
 
Originally posted by CounslerCoffee


Part of article I have saved.

With ample evidence discovered by science, the thesis of an "infinite universe" was tossed onto the scrap-heap of the history of scientific ideas. Yet, more important questions were forthcoming: what existed before the Big Bang? What force could have caused the great explosion that resulted in a universe that did not exist before?

There is a single answer to be given to the question of what existed before the Big Bang: God, the All-powerful and the Almighty, Who created the earth and the heavens in great order. Many scientists, be they believers or not, are obliged to admit this truth. Although they may decline to admit this fact on scientific platforms, their confessions in between the lines give them away. Renowned atheist philosopher Anthony Flew says:

Notoriously, confession is good for the soul. I will therefore begin by confessing that the Stratonician atheist has to be embarrassed by the contemporary cosmological consensus. For it seems that the cosmologists are providing a scientific proof of what St. Thomas contended could not be proved philosophically; namely, that the universe had a beginning. So long as the universe can be comfortably thought of as being not only without end but also beginning, it remains easy to urge that its brute existence, and whatever are found to be its most fundamental features, should be accepted as the explanatory ultimates. Although I believe that it remains still correct, it certainly is neither easy nor comfortable to maintain this position in the face of the Big Bang story. (Henry Margenau, Roy Abraham Vargesse, Cosmos, Bios, Theos, La Salla IL: Open Court Publishing, 1992, p. 241).

Some scientists like the British materialist physicist H. P. Lipson confess that they have to accept the Big Bang theory whether they want it or not:

If living matter is not, then, caused by the interplay of atoms, natural forces, and radiation, how has it come into being?… I think, however, that we must…admit that the only acceptable explanation is creation. I know that this is anathema to physicists, as indeed it is to me, but we must not reject that we do not like if the experimental evidence supports it. (H. P. Lipson, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution", Physics Bulletin, vol. 138, 1980, p. 138).

In conclusion, science points to a single reality whether materialist scientists like it or not. Matter and time have been created by a Creator, Who is All-Powerful and Who created the heavens, the earth and all that is in between: Almighty God.

It is God who created the seven heavens and of the earth the same number, the Command descending down through all of them, so that you might know that God has power over all things and that God encompasses all things in His knowledge. (Surat at-Talaq: 12)


More soon.
Click to expand...
 
whatsup

Another misconception atheist use as an attack against Christianity is the word “Faith”. Faith= Trust; loyalty; belief on something without a need of proof; reliance; pledged word.

The concept of faith when used in discussing religion is faith in the supernatural. Most likely numbers 5 and 6 of your definition.

I can probably set over 100 more examples of faith.

First, you must provide at least one example of faith which describes your relationship with God. None of your examples is relevant. In fact, they are not based on faith at all but are instead based on observational evidence. Try again.

They think that to have faith on something is to believe on myths

Not really, a myth is a traditional story used to explain the world view of a people. IMO, I don't think you can consider God a myth. God is considered a supernatural being.

Christianity requires faith because of its deep mystery each individual cannot comprehend, from the sacraments, Holy Trinity, laws and tradition, to the commandments and canonized books

Of course, anything that makes no sense would require faith in its belief. On this we agree.
 
personally, i prefer to be agnostic, if i say i am thiest i feel i am cheating my brain,and when i say i am athiest i feel i am cheating my heart, and yet i dont even give it a thought when i say i am agnostic.
 
I'm curious, were there any discussions or members on this message board which influenced your decision ? If so, please let me know.

Yes, Many of the people who influenced me were actually atheist, to list them would embarrass them and me. But one post out of all of them caught my attention.

"If they are beliefs, they cannot be proved to exist. If they cannnot be proved, then they cannnot be dissproved either." -YoungWriter

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?threadid=12942]Click here to view original post.
 
Sorry (Q) I skipped over your last post by accident.

Perhaps we need to step back a moment in order to get some clarification. A theory is an organized system of accepted knowledge explaining a specific set of phenomena. As more observations and experiments bring forth more data, those theories get tweaked. In most cases, support for the theory becomes strengthened.

Yes, but its still just a theory. Its not accepted until you have evidence. So up until that point your believing something that's necessarily not true.

That is true. Unfortunately, faith cannot explain anything. Faith is simply a belief in the supernatural.

Im not so sure about that. Im sure that plenty of scientists have faith in science. Faith to me is believing in something that cant be proven, sorta like that theory of evolution thing.

Then you reject the overwhelming evidence which supports evolution. Is that rational ?

To me it is very rational. The theory of evolution is stupid. Why do they call it the theory of evolution anyways if its the truth? Probably because its a theory.

Perhaps, but there is a clear distinction between a theory with overwhelming supportive evidence and a theory based solely on faith. If you wish to pursue a "Theory of God," please do so and provide whatever reasoning and evidence which might support your theory. As well, try to figure out a way in which to test your theory. This may not only add to the discussion, but may as well help to enlighten you in your quest. It's a win-win situation.

I would pursue a Theory of God. But my only evidence to prove that he existed would be to come back from the dead. Which, no one would believe me anyway. Science would explain that away, along with why cigarettes are healthy. But i think that I will pursue that... its a interesting idea.
 
Counsler,

Yes, but its still just a theory. Its not accepted until you have evidence.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by JUST a theory? A scientific theory is a theory because there is evidence to support it. A theory is not some form of inferior fact. You are confusing ‘theory’ with “speculation”.

So up until that point your believing something that's necessarily not true.
Click to expand...
No it isn’t a matter of unfounded belief but a strong indication that the process (theory) proposed might well be true BECAUSE of the evidence.

Im sure that plenty of scientists have faith in science.
Click to expand...
That is a misuse of the word “faith”. You are confusing the usage that really means proven trust, with the form that means belief without evidence (i.e. religious faith). Please be aware of the distinction.

Faith to me is believing in something that cant be proven, sorta like that theory of evolution thing.
Click to expand...
That is an invalid analogy. Evolution is fact, however, the processes that describe how evolution has occurred are still being developed and some are incomplete. Religious faith doesn’t enter into considerations of science.

To me it is very rational. The theory of evolution is stupid. Why do they call it the theory of evolution anyways if its the truth? Probably because its a theory.
Click to expand...
I think this is because you do not know what is meant by the term 'theory'. Try this link that explains the scientific method that includes a definition of ‘ theory’.

http://phyun5.ucr.edu/~wudka/Physics7/Notes_www/node5.html

I would pursue a Theory of God. But my only evidence to prove that he existed would be to come back from the dead. Which, no one would believe me anyway.
Click to expand...
In which case you have no way to KNOW that a god exists, so why believe something like that?
 
Originally posted by (Q)
Then you reject the overwhelming evidence which supports evolution. Is that rational ?
Click to expand...

A little note on this statement. A rational person can reject the Theory of Evolution.

But just as long as he does not deny the facts, this "evidence" could be for it or for another theory.

Rejecting the Theory of Evolution does not make anyone "irrational."

But rejecting the facts that the theory tries to explain is indeed irrational.
 
Chosen

But rejecting the facts that the theory tries to explain is indeed irrational

Thanks, that was exactly my point.

CC

Cris responded with most of what I would have stated. He even provided a link which should help you better to understand the scientific method.

In addition, I would ask you to peruse the following website which should help to clarify any misnomer you may have about evolution. Please feel free to bring up any issues or concerns you might have and we'll discuss them. As well, if you wish to provide a link to a website which you feel might strengthen your resolve, I'd be happy to look it over.

http://www.talkorigins.org/
 
The theory word makes more sense now, thanks Cris.

Im not rejecting the facts, if I did that then I would be a complete moron, like muscleman. I reject the theory of evolution, not the facts that support it.
 
Sorry Q, I hope you didn't mind me jumping in like that.
 
Cris

No problem. Hopefully, by working together, we can pull CC back to the "dark side." hehe
 
You cant pull me back to the dark side (atheism)! Not when I have my trusty light saber(faith)! Im going to go kill Jar Jar now...
 
*readies the black light saber of doom*
Come hither, thou feeble mortal. Face the dark side of the force!

__________________________________________
There is no god, afterlife or divine love. There is only Entropy, the mother from which we were all born. She tugs our souls with the beautiful, maternal love of chaos. Why do you keep Her waiting?

-central philosophy of Zero, Sage of Chaos
 
hey coffee

I see you used my post in your main idea lol, i like it. Congradulations on your revelation. I would be interested in talking to you since I may be able to get answers on your beliefs that noone here that responded to me could give me. If you are looking for a respectable person to teach you about islam I do recommend Markx, I am most appreciative of him in that part. My aim sn is stefan719 if you have the time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top