Posts: 2501
Threads: 158
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
19
Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 4:57 am
(This post was last modified: October 23, 2016 at 5:02 am by purplepurpose.)
Religion survives with all its corruption only because its postures itself as a guide on how to become less greedy and lustful and become a more compassionate person. Its the core. If you think that your living a noble/right/caring life, then what religious doctrine is behind it and especially scientific evidence dont matter at all. Because your living a "perfect life".
In conclusion, blind faith is supported in average sane religious person by noble motives, which legitimize the whole doctrine. And I agree with sane believers, compassion is really painful to accept and "sin" is what keeps me going.
Posts: 12231
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 5:08 am
If religion doesn't need evidence then I don't need religion.
Posts: 19881
Threads: 324
Joined: July 31, 2016
Reputation:
34
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 5:26 am
(October 23, 2016 at 4:57 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Religion survives with all its corruption only because its postures itself as a guide on how to become less greedy and lustful and become a more compassionate person. Its the core. If you think that your living a noble/right/caring life, then what religious doctrine is behind it and especially scientific evidence dont matter at all. Because your living a "perfect life".
In conclusion, blind faith is supported in average sane religious person by noble motives, which legitimize the whole doctrine. And I agree with sane believers, compassion is really painful to accept and "sin" is what keeps me going.
"sane" is a reach for most people. Innocuous is not the same thing.
Posts: 57
Threads: 12
Joined: July 4, 2015
Reputation:
1
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 5:46 am
(October 23, 2016 at 4:57 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Religion survives with all its corruption only because its postures itself as a guide on how to become less greedy and lustful and become a more compassionate person. Its the core. If you think that your living a noble/right/caring life, then what religious doctrine is behind it and especially scientific evidence dont matter at all. Because your living a "perfect life".
In conclusion, blind faith is supported in average sane religious person by noble motives, which legitimize the whole doctrine. And I agree with sane believers, compassion is really painful to accept and "sin" is what keeps me going.
There is such a thing as a "sane" believer? Where can I meet one? Wouldn't they be atheist as well if they were "sane"?
Posts: 1633
Threads: 33
Joined: March 14, 2016
Reputation:
23
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 6:17 am
(This post was last modified: October 23, 2016 at 6:17 am by RozKek.)
Religion needs evidence if it's going to fucking teach you that a zombie man is watching you masturbate.
Posts: 29107
Threads: 218
Joined: August 9, 2014
Reputation:
155
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 6:32 am
(This post was last modified: October 23, 2016 at 6:33 am by robvalue.)
Why do you keep saying "noble motives"? Why do you keep generalising people?
Most people come to religion through indoctrination, then stay because of fear. That's hardly noble.
Posts: 2501
Threads: 158
Joined: April 19, 2013
Reputation:
19
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 6:56 am
(October 23, 2016 at 6:32 am)robvalue Wrote: Why do you keep saying "noble motives"? Why do you keep generalising people?
Most people come to religion through indoctrination, then stay because of fear. That's hardly noble.
I met alot of people who practice religion not so much out of fear but because they believe they are becoming more caring because of it and less egotistical. And because of such perfect improvement they believe that there is a God.
Posts: 46352
Threads: 540
Joined: July 24, 2013
Reputation:
109
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 7:08 am
Religion certainly does need evidence if it's going to make evidentiary claims. For instance, there are those religious franchises which claim that Hell is an actual, physical place. All well and good, but if they expect me - or anyone else with functioning cognition - to accept their claim, they'd better be prepared to provide more than a say-so.
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Posts: 7259
Threads: 506
Joined: December 12, 2015
Reputation:
22
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 8:32 am
(October 23, 2016 at 4:57 am)purplepurpose Wrote: Religion survives with all its corruption only because its postures itself as a guide on how to become less greedy and lustful and become a more compassionate person. Its the core. If you think that your living a noble/right/caring life, then what religious doctrine is behind it and especially scientific evidence dont matter at all. Because your living a "perfect life".
In conclusion, blind faith is supported in average sane religious person by noble motives, which legitimize the whole doctrine. And I agree with sane believers, compassion is really painful to accept and "sin" is what keeps me going.
I think that religions, such as Catholicism, have influence today because they had influence in the past. They are like cars traveling down the freeway that have run out of gas. In time, they will slow down and become less and less relevant. Religion helps some people cope, such as with death and dying, but more and more "believers" are coming to the conclusion that they don't need organized religion to have those mental comforts. As an atheist, of course, I have no time nor tolerance for make-believe or fantasy; I enjoy too much living (and someday, dying) in the real world.
Posts: 19881
Threads: 324
Joined: July 31, 2016
Reputation:
34
RE: Religion doesn't need evidence
October 23, 2016 at 8:38 am
Religion doesn't need evidence or rationality or consistency or anything else but a will to believe in something that doesn't have evidence, or rationality or consistency.
|
