Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor Geoffrey
I do believe in God. I just have a very different view of Him as of late. I have been doing a lot of research over the past few months. After certain influences have come and gone, certain happenings in my life, I knew I had to change what I was believing. For example, there is a lot in the Old Testament - and some things in the New Testament - that really should be looked over and reconsidered. Not reconsidered as in getting rid of parts of the Bible (unless we want to make another Jefferson Bible, or anything of the sort), but rather thinking, "Is this really what I believe in? Is this really relevant? What is God saying here?'
|
Agreed. That's a good part of the point that I'm trying to convey, but also to a much broader scale as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Professor Geoffrey
Awful argument? I actually find it ingenious on our behalf, and part of the reason why faith in general - any faith at all - is still alive. Your counterargument for this is rude and condescending. You knew what he meant. Though it may be a scientifically sound statement you have there, God is - to my belief - a being that is elusive, covering up His trail with science and leaving people to believe what they want to believe. How can you prove that? God said, "Prove all things: hold fast that which is good." Believe with mind, not with sight. That is the very foundation of faith, is it not? The choice to believe in something - not knowing, which is an entirely different thing - is our own. To criticize this choice - no matter how asinine it may seem - is pointless, because every human has his or her right to exercise it. Though it may not be that way everywhere in the world, they can still believe what they want to believe, because we have free will.
|
My thought process for this matter is already there in the last paragraph of my last post. There will never be a proof of a supreme being of any sort under the laws of science because it never strives to look for it. So looking for proof is a fallacy just as using a lack of proof as counterproof is in itself a fallacy.
Let's not get into the free will problem, shall we?