Is reason in any debate concerning religion impossible.?

Answer 1

No, if:
- you perfectly know, respect and understand the other speakers
- you realize that everyone has the right to disagree with what other believe in, and the necessity of differences between you
- you are intelligent, eloquent and don't get angry easily

T'works.

Answer 2

Ibe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 the be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ictiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ry, the main commobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678efibe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678itiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 of religiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 is somethibe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678g like, “the provider be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 worship of Gobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 or the superbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678turbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678l.” by potential of this be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678efibe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678itiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678, Atheism is clebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678rly be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ot and religiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678. although, the Ube5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678itebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 Stbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678tes very best court docket hbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s repebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678tebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ly stbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678tebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 thbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678t Atheism wbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678rrbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ts the sbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678me protectiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ll different religiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s, be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 hbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s spokebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 of “religiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s bbe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678sebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 obe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 and concept ibe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 the existebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ce of Gobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 [be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678] religiobe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678s foube5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 obe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678 be5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678ifferebe5d5d37542d75f93a8794459f76678t ideals."

Answer 3

83: THE FOUR METHODS OF ACQUIRING KNOWLEDGE

297
There are only four accepted methods of comprehension—that is to say, the realities of things are understood by these four methods.
The first method is by the senses—that is to say, all that the eye, the ear, the taste, the smell, the touch perceive is understood by this method. Today this method is considered the most perfect by all the European philosophers: they say that the principal method of gaining knowledge is through the senses; they consider it supreme, although it is imperfect, for it commits errors. For example, the greatest of the senses is the power of sight. The sight sees the mirage as water, and it sees images reflected in mirrors as real and existent; large bodies which are distant appear to be small, and a whirling point appears as a circle. The sight believes the earth to be motionless and sees the sun in motion, and in many similar cases it makes mistakes. Therefore, we cannot trust it.
The second is the method of reason, which was that of the ancient philosophers, the pillars of wisdom; this is the method of the understanding. They proved things by reason and held firmly to logical proofs; all their arguments are arguments of reason. Notwithstanding this, they differed greatly, and their opinions were contradictory. They even changed their views—that is to say, during twenty years they would prove the existence of a thing by logical arguments, and afterward they would deny it by logical arguments—so much so that Plato at first logically 298 proved the immobility of the earth and the movement of the sun; later by logical arguments he proved that the sun was the stationary center, and that the earth was moving. Afterward the Ptolemaic theory was spread abroad, and the idea of Plato was entirely forgotten, until at last a new observer again called it to life. Thus all the mathematicians disagreed, although they relied upon arguments of reason. In the same way, by logical arguments, they would prove a problem at a certain time, then afterward by arguments of the same nature they would deny it. So one of the philosophers would firmly uphold a theory for a time with strong arguments and proofs to support it, which afterward he would retract and contradict by arguments of reason. Therefore, it is evident that the method of reason is not perfect, for the differences of the ancient philosophers, the want of stability and the variations of their opinions, prove this. For if it were perfect, all ought to be united in their ideas and agreed in their opinions.
The third method of understanding is by tradition—that is, through the text of the Holy Scriptures—for people say, “In the Old and New Testaments, God spoke thus.” This method equally is not perfect, because the traditions are understood by the reason. As the reason itself is liable to err, how can it be said that in interpreting the meaning of the traditions it will not err, for it is possible for it to make mistakes, and certainty cannot be attained. This is the method of the religious leaders; whatever they understand and comprehend from the text of the books is that which their reason understands from the text, and not necessarily the real truth; for the reason is like a balance, and the meanings contained in the text of the Holy Books are like the thing which is weighed. If the balance is untrue, how can the weight be ascertained?
Know then: that which is in the hands of people, that which they believe, is liable to error. For, in proving or 299 disproving a thing, if a proof is brought forward which is taken from the evidence of our senses, this method, as has become evident, is not perfect; if the proofs are intellectual, the same is true; or if they are traditional, such proofs also are not perfect. Therefore, there is no standard in the hands of people upon which we can rely.
But the bounty of the Holy Spirit gives the true method of comprehension which is infallible and indubitable. This is through the help of the Holy Spirit which comes to man, and this is the condition in which certainty can alone be attained.

Answer 4

Yes and no. You can have a reasonable debate about religion. However, people who believe in religions only have emotional arguments to draw from, so that doesn't tend to lend itself to reason. Religious people get quite uncomfortable with the harder questions. Still, I have had discussions with religious people that have been civil, even if they defaulted to "Well, I just believe it".

Answer 5

No, it is not impossible. But, you have to keep in mind that the human power of reasoning is very limited. It is reason that helps us develop our faith and belief in a sense but many things, just for instance, the Blessed Trinity, is a mystery of faith and cannot be explained by reason. So yes reason is possible, but in a limited way due to our limited knowledge. I love the statement by Father John Corapi "God has placed obvious limits on our intellect...but none whatsoever on our stupidity"

Answer 6

As far as I know religion is motivated by faith.

Faith is an opinion or conviction.

Reason is the power of intelligent and dispassionate thought.

These two seem to be opposites.

Answer 7

No but what 1 man thinks is resaonable there will be 10 other men that disagree

Answer 8

religion is very powerful. defending it creates an emotional struggle that people can't deal with very well. some decide the act violently while others just kneel down and prey.

Answer 9

Ya it possible only if you convinced muslims that mohammad decieved them and he is a big silly Liar and a hard sex worker ******* his 9 wifes everyday I cannot believe that such a person acn force women to cover thier heads outside the prayer places and they just obey him

Answer 10

as long as those discussing and debating keep respecting the rights of others to free will and their right to their differing religious belief systems discussion should lead to more wisdom and knowledge for all.