Prove me wrong.
2006-09-23
17:18:04
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
Ratbrain,
So you believe, and you are expressing it. That's an act of Faith.
2006-09-23
17:21:08 ·
update #1
J T,
So you could not admit to having faith in the idea that you have faith in.
Cop out noted.
2006-09-23
17:22:01 ·
update #2
azazel,
You didn't state you answer to my question.
2006-09-23
17:22:37 ·
update #3
papaofgirlmegan,
No, there is faith in a lot of things without God. The Greek words are ; Apisteo, apistis, apisteou. Which is faith away from the things of God, basically.
2006-09-23
17:24:15 ·
update #4
jim♥darwin,
LOL! So you just HAVE to believe! I get it!
2006-09-23
17:25:15 ·
update #5
Satanist_highschoolchick,
Good example of faith.
2006-09-23
17:26:08 ·
update #6
Waltz #2 (XO),
You didn't answer my question.
2006-09-23
17:26:57 ·
update #7
Jimbo, I am a Libertarian, sort of. So wrong again!
2006-09-23
17:32:13 ·
update #8
Yuri,
I'm not trying to preach Creationism. I preach Christ crucified. The Evolutionists are in denial about their religion, and I am just trying to show that. I think that I have done that. If you want to be saved, let me know in an EDIT. I'll look from time to time. Don't wait too long.
2006-09-23
17:34:33 ·
update #9
joseph s,
I agree with almost everything you said. Except the point that we would never have come up with a concept of God. I think that that's built in by God. And we would never exist without Him. I'm sure you knew that though. Good answer.
2006-09-23
17:41:16 ·
update #10
J T,
You should write "EDIT" so that I don't miss the new stuff you write. I find that interesting that you have another take on the subject. I am getting that "Always Existed" theory 3x tonight, the first time from a pastor on the radio. Interesting. Yet faith is required to believe in what you believe too.
I never denied being a hypocrite, though in this case your accusation would need to be a little more convincing in order to apply it here.
2006-09-23
17:45:20 ·
update #11
Alan Turing,
You look at what was written before your post. I think that you'll find that those siding with Evolution were being anything but scientific.
People believe things often that they are not discounted for. You come close to defending Evolutionists as "Scientific" but you fall short because the people that believe in Evolution are still going on the "Gut Feelings" that it is true, right?
2006-09-23
17:49:33 ·
update #12
Some scientist believe that we will lose our pinky toe within 1 to 2 million years from now...
2006-09-23 17:22:42
·
answer #1
·
answered by Z ten 3
·
1⤊
2⤋
Science is not a matter of belief. The important difference that you seem to be ignoring is that a scientific hypothesis has to be a testable hypothesis. Beliefs are not testable. So this is a very important difference between what religions do and what science does.
Then once science has a testable hypothesis it must test it and verify the truth of that hypothesis. Again, religion doesn't have the capability of testing any belief. So beliefs cannot be verified. So the truth of beliefs can never be determined.
This means that there is no way to separate true beliefs from false beliefs. That is a very important idea that believers tend to ignore because they don't want to acknowledge that their beliefs might just be silly nonsense. This means that their beliefs are little more than wishful thinking at best, and murderous justifications of religious wars at worse.
Now it is time for you to grow up and stop playing silly games.
2006-09-24 00:36:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Alan Turing 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Who cares if faith exists. It doesn't prove Jesus was sent from God. I'm only focused on things I know exist like the books I read, the movies I watch, the songs I hear...none of which claim divinity. (There's honesty in that.)
P.S. I'm not in denial that I have faith in evolution, but whether or not you choose to believe is irrelevant. It has a brilliant, magnificent design yet I don't live by it like you live by religion. Theory of evolution has no say on what I do with my life.
2006-09-24 00:22:56
·
answer #3
·
answered by Xo 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
Why bother?
You don't rely on evidence to support your own beliefs, so why would you require evidence for anything else?
I do not believe evolution to be an accurate representation of events in that I do not believe life was "created" or "originated." Life & the universe have always existed, so there is no reason for either creation or evolution.
But, that does not alter the fact your beliefs do not require evidence so you are being a hypocrite when you demand others provide evidence. You don't apply it to your own beliefs, so it is obviously irrelevant to you.
2006-09-24 00:20:45
·
answer #4
·
answered by Left the building 7
·
0⤊
2⤋
Let's make your claim a little more explicit. We'll define "evolutionists" (a title used exclusively by people who reject the theory of evolution; no reasonable person who holds that evolution is a valid theory refers to him/herself as an "evolutionist") as people who claim that the theory of evolution is valid and well-supported.
Argument 1: Evolutionists believe in evolution. There is no proof of evolution. Evolutionists' belief in evolution must therefore be based on faith.
Argument 2: Faith is belief in something for which there is no proof. Evolutionists believe that faith is not a valid reason to believe in something. If faith is not a valid reason to believe in something (according to evolutionists), and evolutionists' belief in evolution is based on faith, then evolutionists' belief in evolution must be invalid by their own argument that faith is not a valid reason to believe in something.
OK, the first premise in argument one is true: evolutionists do believe in evolution. Premise 2, however, is untrue. There is lots of evidence supporting the theory of evolution. Even if the theory of evolution is completely incorrect, there is evidence for it. Argument one is therefore unsound.
Now, the first premise in argument 2 is true: belief in something for which there is no proof is a valid definition of faith. Premise 2 has a problem, though. There are Christians who believe in evolution. Since Christians have faith in God, and must believe in God based on faith, they must believe that faith is a valid reason to believe in something. Premise 3, "evolutionists' belief in evolution is based on faith," as stated above, is untrue, due to there being evidence that supports evolution. Premise 2 is debatable, and premise 3 is false, which makes the argument unsound.
I'll even restate my arguments for examination:
Faith is belief in something for which there is no proof. There is proof supporting evolution. Therefore, belief in evolution does not require faith.
Christians have faith in God. There are some Christians who believe in evolution. Therefore, there are some evolutionists who do not reject the idea of faith.
2006-09-24 01:17:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by RabidBunyip 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
With such creative questions I'm nearly succumbing to Creationism. Do you have more of this kind? It would be a creative way to creatively convince everyone of (creative) Creationism.
2006-09-24 00:30:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Yuri 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I believe we are evolving. We may never physically change, but the way we behave certainly evolves over time; making for a better species.
2006-09-24 00:19:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
you can't change them, they are LOST, go ride a wave and be safe....the water always makes me feel closer to God...silly, I know but I know you are not a hypocrite, you are too hard on yourself.....kingreef777, you are a good person.
2006-09-25 23:28:17
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
my believe in evolution doesn't require me to convince you one way or the other,
just to try and persuade you to not vote cause your party is messing things up, stasticially you are a
republican
2006-09-24 00:21:46
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is no faith without Jesus
2006-09-24 00:21:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by papaofgirlmegan 5
·
1⤊
0⤋