Time to Get Rid of Religion?

[Centrism'sVoice]

Religion is probably dying a slow death. A smaller percentage of Americans attend weekly services today than a century ago. Also, when people in general are better educated, the trend is that they find organized religion less attractive. After all, religion (any religion) holds to many beliefs in spite of indisputable evidence to the contrary.

 

[amrchaos]

It's impossible to know there isn't a God. You'd have to have all knowledge and power to travel throught the universe in milliseconds to possibly determine that there isn't a God somewhere out there. In other words, in order to know God doesn't exist, you have to be God.

Not at all. It is always possible to prove a negative, IF you can demonstrate the opposite (that there is a God) and demonstrate a logical contradiction. For example, Euclid used this method to prove that there is no largest prime number. For the record, I'm not aware of any such proof about the non-existence of God. I'm claiming only that it would be possible to prove.

On the other hand, you can know there is a God. And that is by testing. Searching. If God exists, it's possible to know about it.

I wouldn't disagree. Unfortunately, many of the greatest minds in history have tried to prove the existence of God through logic and reason alone. And so far it hasn't happened.

To prove that a particular God does not exist is not as hard one would think. The Euclid method is an interesting way to do it. I suppose it goes as follows:

1) Define the characteristics of the object in question.
2)Show contradictions that arises from the definition.
3)Surmise that the object does not exist, as defined.


Thus, depending how you define God, there are some God's that can not possibly exist.

For instance, the God Apollo is a fabrication. Apollo characteristics includes him being the sun, and driving a chariot across the sky. Since we have learned that the Sun is not a fliery chariot led by some superhuman entity, the God Apollo does not exist.

Try this with other religious concepts. Try it with your own. You would be amazed with how much nonsense that theologians have created through the years when they are not questioned directly.

 

[JBeukema]

You mean like the impossibility of omniscience and omnipotence?

 

[Avatar4321]

[q

Also, Saying "You're argument is weak" is not a valid response to substantive points. In fact, it's a rather large cop out.

Not if your points AREN'T substantive....

True, but that's not really an issue in this thread.

 

[Avatar4321]

Religion is probably dying a slow death. A smaller percentage of Americans attend weekly services today than a century ago. Also, when people in general are better educated, the trend is that they find organized religion less attractive. After all, religion (any religion) holds to many beliefs in spite of indisputable evidence to the contrary.

I've found that evidence is rarely indisputable. It also usually doesnt support what it's used to support completely.

 

[Centrism'sVoice]

Religion is probably dying a slow death. A smaller percentage of Americans attend weekly services today than a century ago. Also, when people in general are better educated, the trend is that they find organized religion less attractive. After all, religion (any religion) holds to many beliefs in spite of indisputable evidence to the contrary.

I've found that evidence is rarely indisputable. It also usually doesnt support what it's used to support completely.

Some evidence is indeed indisputable (apart from the logic behind Euclid's method as mentioned above).

In addition, there can also be a preponderance of evidence that overwhelmingly supports one point of view over another. An example might be how fossils of earlier life forms are strong indicators that the earth is not 6000 years old.