"Based on faith" is a phrase that means "batshit fucking loco."
You can't cop out like that.
You can't cop out like that. watch me | |
Agnosticism is a cop out. You can't justify actually "believing" in God, yet you still have this nagging doubt, or fear, that he does, so you play it safe and say you can't be sure. Tidbit: God, if he exists, will cast you out for such blasphemy. There is no safe spot save Salvation. ;p
On the other hand, if God doesn't exist, then you're being overly cautious for no reason. Of all the religious choices to make, yours is about the worst. At least Fundamentalists are secure in their beliefs. Athiests could care less, they have more immediate things to do than impress the other monkeys around with their safe spot in the debate. | |
See, when I say "You can't cop out like that," there's an implied "and still retain any sort of credibility" tacked onto it.
| |
Mine implies a lack of backbone, or common sense, whichever way you chose to slide. XD
| |
OFD pretty much nailed it.
The "right" religion isn't about facts, it's about faith. It's about how you feel. Again, lack of proof=/=lack of existance, I've proven that thouroghly enough to Garthor, regardless of whether or not he accepts it. There are millions of examples of things we didn't know and had no evidence of until someone discovered them, but they still existed before then. Jest because we don't have the means to discover god doesn't mean that he doesn't exist. And no, Agnosticism isn't a copout. It is the understanding that either side is possible. But really, you are treating Agnosticism or Christianity like they are choices people make, but they really aren't. People don't choose what they believe, and if you believe they do, you are truly ignorant about the world. It isn't a matter of do I want to believe this or not, it's a matter of I believe it or I don't. | |
The reason people don't feel like they can choose what they believe is becuase they have been manipulated by those around them into only having one choice for a belief system. If you were raised in a christian family, surrounded by christian friends and neighbors, attednded a christiain school, you'll see little alternative than to be a christian as well. Funny how children of christain parents never seem to believe in the jewish tenens. Hindu children don't suddenly find they can't belive in Hinduism. They were force-fed their beliefs by thier family and community. Many people make reasonable and educated decisions about their religious beliefs, and can change their beliefs based on logic and reason. Your problem isn't about not being able to change your beliefs, it's that you don't even know what your beliefs are, so you ride the fence on the issue and say you can't know. Then you back up your position with the faith srgument, when yours requires no faith at all. Cop out!
| |
Except the thing about God isn't that there's no evidence, it's that it's unfalsifiable, which si a big no-no when it comes to science. If there's no way to prove something wrong, then the theory is invalid. God's supposedly omnipotent, and so is innately unfalsifiable (after all, any proof against his existance could just be him playing silly buggers). Thus, he's invalid as a theory.
| |
I don't believe in higher beings.
| |
agnosticism doesn't have to be a cop out. if you're agnostic because you can't decide, then it might be. but if you're agnostic because you just don't care strongly either way and you're going to live your life the same way whether God exists or not, then its not a lack of backbone.
any choice here could be a cop out. whether you're playing it safe and sticking with whatever religion your parents were, or not being able to make up your mind and calling yourself agnostic, or considering something impossible until absolute concrete evidence is provided. anyone can make a decision for bad reasons. | |
but seriously, "burden of proof" doesn't really matter here because christianity doesn't have to prove anything to anyone. if you're trying to prove christianity, you're missing the point. and if you're trying to disprove it, you're missing the point too. its based on faith. people that want to believe will believe, and people that don't, won't. and those that don't understand that will argue about it.