sure
but its still fun to argue
2007-04-10 07:27:16
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
3⤋
Okay, let's test your rationalism. I assume you believe you are a rational, scientific-like person.
1) Do you believe that, somewhere in this universe there must exist extraterrestrial life?
2) Do you believe this life could be intelligent, even more intelligent than humanity?
3) Do you believe that this intelligent life could be far more advanced than humanity?
4) Do you believe this intelligent, advanced race could have abilities that go beyond what we understand as humans?
If you answered yes to these questions, why does the concept of God seem so irrational to you? If you break the concept of God into its most basic idea, you end up with an extremely powerful, intelligent extraterrestrial.
Are you actually trying to rationally say, without any proof whatsoever, that you are positive that there could not possibly exist such an entity in all the universe?
2007-04-10 14:35:33
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is no point in answering this question as the asker appears to be closed minded and would not accept anything but an agreement. No one can prove with out a doubt that there is a God to every ones satisfaction, but then neither can anyone prove without a doubt that there isn't. Rationality really doesn't have all that much to do with belief or non-belief.
2007-04-10 14:33:15
·
answer #3
·
answered by meg3f 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
God exists within the land of imagination, outside of reality. We can argue if a God exists within reality once someone makes a claim like that. As long as s/he keeps it within the land of make believe (ie, in their minds), then it's no problem.
God doesn't exist within reality and we can't know what exists outside of existence. God shares his home with square circles.
2007-04-10 14:45:49
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree to some extent. I am not christian or anything like that, but I do have beliefs and ideals. I do have gods and goddesses, if you would like to call them that, but I created them. They are ideas, Archetypes. Does that make them not real, just because I look up to and count on beings that I created in my own mind? They help me. My prayers are always answered no matter how improbable it its that they will be. Maybe the power comes from within and believing that some force being out there is going to answer them generates enough faith to make it happen. Maybe pouring out your soul your emotions to something that's " not there " makes it happen. I honestly don't know and I not going to pretned to know how things work, just something to think about.
2007-04-10 14:36:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by rep206 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
There is no platform in science to explain the Spiritual or Supernatural form of God & the Heavenly Realm.
Science cannot "supplant" the belief in God......In Christ <><
2007-04-10 14:33:49
·
answer #6
·
answered by Barbara J 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Until a few weeks ago I would have agreed with you. Now my view is that true believers (whether they know it or not) universally adopt a philosophical perspective called Solipsism. This causes them to assume that their own perceptions actually are reality. Their own thoughts amount to what they call reality. In this context, religious belief seems natural and obviously infallible. Solipsism is what I call the "default" philosophy of the human species. By assuming that what we think we see is real, we are able to correctly respond to physical dangers.
Unfortunately, most people never think about how they are thinking. While Solipsism is what we need to correctly react to an emergency, it fails miserably when used for logical analysis. Educated people know that their brains create the illusion of reality in our mind's eye and that objective reality is external to our minds. For example, electromagnetic radiation begins with long-wave radio and extends up through short-wave, microwave, infrared, visible, ultraviolet, x-rays, gamma rays, to cosmic rays. It's really all the same thing, an electromagnetic disturbance that propagates through space-time and only the frequency (energy) varies. Humans can only perceive about 1% of all electromagnetic radiation because we only see visible light. The other 99% is absolutely real and was discovered by scientists who did NOT rely on Solipsistic thinking. Only by getting a higher education and learning to extend one's thinking beyond solipsistic assumptions, can one to learn to understand objective reality correctly. Unfortunately, it is far easier and more emotionally satisfying to simply wallow in religious superstition than it is to get a fact-based education and learn how to reason properly.
2007-04-10 15:15:35
·
answer #7
·
answered by Diogenes 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
People have been saying what you just posted for thousands of years.
Also, you'll get no argument from me. You believe what you want to believe. I'll go about my life knowing the truth. I am not one of those who worries about sharing with you. What was available to me for the past 39 years is also available to you, especially with the advent of the internet. At least that is the case in the USA.
2007-04-10 14:31:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by Wayne 3
·
2⤊
0⤋
In a sense, yes. God and religion belong to the non-rational side of nature . . . the same area that art, music and emotion belong to. You can never prove or disprove the existence of god regardless of whether it exists or not. But to experience god, rationality must stop. Rationality is a product of the left side of your brain. To ignore your irrational side would be to reject beauty and emotion, art and religion . . . none of which can be proved.
2007-04-10 14:29:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Runa 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
wean people think that way because they our very unhappy in their life they fell that God let them down and cant find the way The truth is that God is hear and God did not let anyone down they Let God down and until they get back on their feet and ask God for help they our always going be down and going of God but no one
2007-04-10 14:32:55
·
answer #10
·
answered by brothermikegoestenkors2 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
It's truer to say that rationality stops where the argument starts. Your assertion holds no more fact than the reverse argument.
2007-04-10 14:26:55
·
answer #11
·
answered by Dharma Nature 7
·
3⤊
0⤋