Bill Nye and Ken Ham Debate is live on youtube right now

[Gunkata]

Respect is earned, it's not a right. Empiricism is respected because it flys is to the moon, faith isn't because it flies us into buildings.

There is a marked difference between these two statements:

I believe in God.

God exists.

I can respect the first and not the second.

you're being trolled by Chicago proper.

 

[TheMKVI]

There is a marked difference between these two statements:

I believe in God.

God exists.

I can respect the first and not the second.

Without evidence to support the first statement it is not respectable either. Logically the burden of proof for belief should rest on the positive claim, unsupported beliefs are irrational and irrational beliefs don't deserve respect any more than UFOs or the belief that we are actually in the Matrix

 

[StigsFatAmericanCousin]

There is a marked difference between these two statements:

I believe in God.

God exists.

I can respect the first and not the second.

So you are ok with people believing in God as long as they don't push those beliefs on you?

 

[troyguitar]

Eh, I'm fine with letting people believe whatever they want as long as it is stated as belief rather than fact.

Beliefs don't require proof, facts do. That's pretty much the definition of faith.

So you are ok with people believing in God as long as they don't push those beliefs on you?

It is one step further than that. Not pushing beliefs is required for me to not be directly offended, but not stating beliefs as facts is required for me to actually respect said beliefs.

 

[Gunkata]

So you are ok with people believing in God as long as they don't push those beliefs on you?

I am, but the problem is, it's not happening...


when abortion, vaginal probes, and gay marriage are still issues.. we are far far from it.

 

[StigsFatAmericanCousin]

Eh, I'm fine with letting people believe whatever they want as long as it is stated as belief rather than fact.

Beliefs don't require proof, facts do. That's pretty much the definition of faith.



It is one step further than that. Not pushing beliefs is required for me to not be directly offended, but not stating beliefs as facts is required for me to actually respect said beliefs.

Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you cannot see.

I see what you are saying but you are asking something kind of tricky of people.

 

[TheMKVI]

Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you cannot see.

I see what you are saying but you are asking something kind of tricky of people.

Exactly, that is illogical and the complete antithesis of critical thinking, empiricism, science, etc. It deserves nothing but ridicule.

 

[troyguitar]

Faith is being sure of what you hope for and certain of what you cannot see.

I see what you are saying but you are asking something kind of tricky of people.

Faith is believing something without having factual proof.

If something is factually true then you do not need faith to believe it.

Believe the book is all true via faith all you want, but the moment you state it as factually true you are removing the protection of faith from the equation and putting the burden of proof squarely upon your back like a massive wooden cross.

 

[mfdave]

I'm fascinated when I hear people of faith saying that they are "ridiculed". I don't care what any INDIVIDUAL person thinks. When I go batsh*t is when their ridiculous beliefs start seeping into policy and institutions. Intelligent Design being taught in a science class is just this. So yah, in this day and age, considering all of the problems our world and society face (in which science may be our saving grace), why should we sit idly by and let religious nuts undermine science and critical thinking for our future generations?

 

[corydd]

Religious people are always saying "You just need to have faith", but I still don't understand the point. Why would I convince myself to believe in something of which there is no actual proof? That sounds like a pretty slippery slope to me.

 

[Gunkata]

So yah, in this day and age, considering all of the problems our world and society face (in which science may be our saving grace), why should we sit idly by and let religious nuts undermine science and critical thinking for our future generations?

because science has facts and may tell us things we don't like to hear.


religion - we can knit pick what we do and don't like, use it against others, and have the ultimate hope that we go to heaven or other eternal country club after our death and/or the rapture, etc, which is not crucial to preserving the earth in any way. that's why.

 

[KYGTIGuy]

That's because it is. It is the word of god. Please dont disparage my faith.

Why is your faith special and we arent allowed to disparage it?

If you do not like the conversation, please feel free no to click on the thread.


Some people like to debate and discuss the merits of holy text and faiths. If you arent one, OT signature thread is available for your consumption.

 

[StigsFatAmericanCousin]

because science has facts and may tell us things we don't like to hear.


religion - we can knit pick what we do and don't like, use it against others, and have the ultimate hope that we go to heaven or other eternal country club after our death and/or the rapture, etc, which is not crucial to preserving the earth in any way. that's why.

I'm not going to defend religion in general, but the point of Christianity is not to pick and choose what you like. At some point you may not understand why something is that way or accept something you didn't initially believe.

 

[KYGTIGuy]

The problem the Creation Musuem guy has is the same as all bible literalist have, if they concede that one minute detail of the book is worng, then the whole book comes into question.

Either the earth was created as it is in 7 days or it wasnt. If it wasnt, why believe anything else in the book.

Hence they make exhibits where a triceratops has a saddle because Dinosaurs had to have been coexisting with man...

 

[krische]

because science has facts and may tell us things we don't like to hear.


religion - we can knit pick what we do and don't like, use it against others, and have the ultimate hope that we go to heaven or other eternal country club after our death and/or the rapture, etc, which is not crucial to preserving the earth in any way. that's why.

But science can't always give us absolute answers, because science is adjusting theories as evidence is gathered. This changeability is what some people seem to struggle with.

For example, we can't be 100% certain how the universe was created without a time machine. Whereas a religion can just say "God created it". And some people feel comfortable with that because it is absolute and unchanging.