God's Little Green Children.
- Thread starter razz
- Start date
Yes, it would also be an indication that Islam is false unless there were a Muhammad and a Qur'an on every other planet. It doesn't do much to discredit Hinduism, as this religion is very diverse and its adherents do not worship one true deity those of Xianity and Islam do. It would also provide nothing to disprove Confucianism, since this is primarily a system of ethics, rather than a religion.
No one suggested that life on other planets would disprove faith. As has been made apparent several times in this thread, it raises valid points against Xianity. As you indicated, Xianity raises more questions than it answers, and is therefore not a very good answer to the mysteries of the universe.
I said that no one in this thread suggested that life on other planets would disprove faith. The suggestions in this thread are that life on other planets would be a strong blow against Xianity. Although Xianity requires faith, faith does not require Xianity since faith is an element of all religions.
Because, as has now been indicated to you three times, this thread is about how life on other planets is indication that Xianity is false. Furthermore, I have already addressed your questions about how life on other planets would affect the validity of Islam, Hinduism, and Confucianism.
Making arguments about Xianity does not make one a bigot. You, on the other hand, seem to hold intolerant and prejudiced views of atheists (as indicated by your name-calling), which would make you the bigot here.
With respect to Xianity, you stated that life on another planet would not disprove faith, but would only deepen the mystery. You have therefore acknowledged that Xianity only makes things more complex, rather than providing any sort of good explanation.
Okay, fine then. However, my original point about Xianity only adding more complexity to the issue still stands. And you yourself have acknowledged that faith (which Xianity requires) further deepens the mystery.
I know what atheism is. So what point are you trying to make by clarifying the definition of atheism? This clarification does not change the fact that you earlier equated atheism with immaturity.Originally posted by stu43t
I have no bad feelings towards atheists, an atheist is someone who doesn't believe in any god at all, not just the Christian version.
So what if they have faith? Are you implying that if other beings on other planets have faith, then that legitimizes this method of epistemology?
You stated, "A very immature or should I say atheist view of the possibilities of creation." You therefore equated an atheist view with an immature view.
And I don't hate any faith. I simply believe it is an invalid way to attain knowledge. This applies equally to Xian faith, Muslim faith, Hindu faith, or any other type of faith. Just because I don't believe something is true does not mean that I hate it. In this thread I am arguing against Xianity, because that is the subject of this thread (as has now been mentioned to you four times).
Last edited:
This was posted in error. I don't seem to be able to delete it.
Yes, they are both hypothetical situations. Neither of them, if true, would demonstrate the validity of faith in attaining knowledge. The former (i.e. the original post of this thread) would also make it even more improbable that Xianity, in particular, is true.