(for example: seeing a real person before your eyes perform miracles unexplainable by science while claiming to be the god of another religion, or perhaps undisputed fossil evidence that proved the world was older than your religious book claimed it was)
If no specific evidence could ever convince you that your religious beliefs are wrong, is it accurate to say that your religious beliefs lack a rational basis (they are faith only, not based on facts and evidence)?
2007-10-11 15:25:02 · 23 answers · asked by Cosette 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
There is no form of evidence that would both; 1) suggest a deity, and 2) have no other logical explanation. Therefore, the question of whether a deity exists or not is not an empirical one. Therefore, we cannot "know" whether there is a deity with any level of certainty (although certain forms of deity, such as the Abrahamic deity, can be ruled out for other reasons). So, rationally, I am an Agnostic by necessity.
2007-10-11 15:33:13 · answer #1 · answered by neil s 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That's an awfully hypothetical question, and I don't know that I can answer it honestly for just that reason. Whatever evidence you produce, it would have to be something that had (in my opinion) no other explanation, and definitely contradicted something I believe that I consider foundational to my faith.
If, for instance, a body were found that could be conclusively proved to be the body of Jesus, that would probably do it. In honesty, I have to say that I don't see any way for that to happen, but I guess I can be forgiven for giving a hypothetical answer to a hypothetical question.
The fact that that's all I could come up with should in no way be taken to imply that that's the only thing that will do it. About the only thing it should indicate is the poor state of my imagination at the moment.
2007-10-11 15:30:38 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, I did shift from my previously held religious believes to my currently held believes. (I used to me a fundamentalist Evangelical and am now mainline Presbyterian. Not an all that far shift, but substantial enough to make me agonize for a while.) - What had me change my believes was that certain promises (In my specific case: Your marriage will improve as long as you are obedient to your husband.) that came along with the fundamentalist teaching I received didn't come true, but rather resulted in the opposite of what was promised (The whole situation ended up even more abusive.). However other parts of the teaching 'Trust in Christ and Love your Neighbor and the Result will be Joy ad Peace' worked out for me, so I did not discard them.
2007-10-11 15:39:54 · answer #3 · answered by LGM 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
None. I believe in the One True God.
It is unwise to prove the existence of God using science because science cannot disprove it either.
I can give you philosophical proofs but not scientific. Philosophical proofs are good proofs but it doesn't have to be scientific.
St. Thomas Aquinas, one of the doctors of the Church, wrote the Quinquae Viae (Five Ways )in his Summa Theologica. These are five proofs for the existence of God. With this, he then points his readers to the One True Church, which is the only Church during his time, the Catholic Church.
These are just one of the proofs to say that the Catholic Church is not a blind faith. It is also based on historical facts and evidences.
2007-10-12 15:20:11 · answer #4 · answered by jake 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I have to say that the entire purpose of christianity as a whole is to rely on faith and not on facts and evidence which can be easily fabricated one way or the other. There is no evidence that could boost or lower my personal faith in God because I know that I know that I know that he is my savior and that is all the assurance I will ever need. A good example is I see a magician dissappear but it was only a trick and I know that he could stand right in front of me and dissappear and it still would not cause me to belive the fact that he has the power to dissappear. I hope this helps!!!
2007-10-11 15:39:56 · answer #5 · answered by dmmdmustang 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋
My Mormon faith would cease if someone cannot locate a Mormon atlas for me. I have read the accounts of the Niphites and the Lamenites in the book of Mormon and I can't seem to locate any of the settings.
My faith will also cease to be if it is proved that the Rosetta stone findings contradict the translations of Joseph Smith.
2007-10-11 15:30:08 · answer #6 · answered by Just a guy 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
All I would need is for the above-mentioned miracle worker to restore the fingernail on my pinky that I lost in an industrial accident. Nothing much, no big deal, just a simple fingernail, and a small one at that. Then I would believe.
2007-10-11 15:34:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't look for anything to GIVE UP my belief (I'm an agnostic atheist), but rather evidence that would SUPPORT some other belief. One cannot disprove atheism without proving something else, and you've not given anything to point to my supposed newfound belief.
2007-10-11 15:32:44 · answer #8 · answered by NHBaritone 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
One bit of evidence that would work for me would be if my dead friend's daughter, who was rendered quadriplegic in a car accident about a year and a half ago would be healed, and able to mover her hands and feet again. If Christians would pray for her, and she was subsequently healed, that would certainly move me.
2007-10-11 15:33:26 · answer #9 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some solid, repeatable, empirical evidence that there is a god. I haven't the slightest idea what that would even be.
Just because science can't explain something doesn't automatically equal magic sky faerie.
2007-10-11 15:28:59 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋