Would there ever be enough evidence to refute religion?
Yes
Side Score: 24
|
 |
No
Side Score: 36
|
|
|
|
|
2
points
It's very possible to point out the inconsistencies in religious beliefs, destroying it's very foundation, but they always have a "back-up-phrase" to respond with. >.> Most religions are already faulty and easily refuted. You don't really have to disprove the existence of God to do so. I guess as long as they believe in their god, then they will continue to willful ignorant. Unable to see the inconsistencies themselves. It's really a sad sight. Side: Yes
2
points
Certainly yes. Literally thousands of religions have come and gone and as science, education and access to information continue to plug the gaps where religious ignorance festers (like the Middle East and the southern United States), the number of deluded individuals who cling to ancient dogma will continue to dwindle. Religion is well on its way to becoming extinct in the civilized world. The question remains how long can the Islamic world keep progress at bay. Side: Yes
1
point
Science is the only way forward as people become more educated ,they realise the stupidity of believing in these nonsensical religions , the younger generation certainly in my country ,I'm glad to say are so not so easily bullied and forced into believing in the biblical dictator in the sky .I think the biggest battle will be in the Islamic tradition where they seem to force there brand of lunacy with a fist of iron Side: Yes
Religion yes, God no. Religion is the elements that deal with particular ways of viewing God, and often in the ways that they have thought to have been active within the course of nature and society. Such elements can be disproven through natural means (historical research and science as well as logic and theological reason). The concept of God itself cannot be however, that is a topic based on probability and evidenced through philosophy. Side: Yes
1
point
Would there ever be enough to support it? How many people believe in science? IF there is the argument of irreducibly complex THEN if something (the bacterial flagellum) is too complex to have evolved it might be too complex to be created. Evolution is my argument, by the way. Side: Yes
1
point
God would have used evolution to create us. The "six days" the bible refers to as the creation of our universe could be the millions of years of our evolution from an empty planet after the big bang. The six days is derived from the Hebrew word "Yom" which does not necessarily translate to a 24 hour day. It could also mean time, years, decades, etc. Not enough information was given in that part of the bible to translate it efficiently enough. Side: No
1
point
1
point
I don't think it is really a matter of sufficient evidence against religion, as religion has set itself set up to nearly impossible to disprove, and it will merely go further in this direction as knowledge keeps growing. I think it is more of matter of advancing beyond our holding onto ancient mythologies as truth, and learning that we don't need religion. Side: Yes
|
1
point
"Religions are, for the most part, bad—but religion is not." - Kurt Gödel I don't have much patience for dogmatic religions that don't evolve and require ignorance to function. I think it's rather awkward that some religious sects preach love while the practictioners hate anyone outside their belief system. Blind faith will always be blind and thus out of tune with reality. Obviously, religion needs to incorporate science into their world view. Don't make the fault of thinking that everything related to beliefs in God are the only things religious. Communism is arguably pseudo-religious, so is American exceptionalism, and so is shamanism. The common denominator among most, but not all, of religions is that they make followers blind and naïve. But if a religion accepts science, accepts all kinds of evidence and challenges it's own belief system, then there isn't much reason to refute it. I think religions tend to make people more shortsighted, but religion doesn't. I don't think it's possible to ever find "evidence" to "refute" religion, but that doesn't mean religions won't be reformed again and again the coming years because they will. People will start to realise that passive-aggressive, egocentrical anger problems won't save the rest of the world from sin. Side: No
1
point
1
point
1
point
No there really isn't because no matter how many people spoke against spiritual beliefs in deities. These religious people speak out on theirs believes. And as long as it suits them, I'm fine. And it's their decision on what to believe. And no bother trying to reconvince them in the existence of "The all mighty." - Religion is a belief for something and gets worshiped (Most religions follow by that). Church is a system for managing and manipulating people who believe in them. That's why churches were built in the medieval times. In modern days many religions disputes caused war, following deaths and evokes the need of being right. Even if it's is a personal thing to have their own believes. And shouldn't be interacted by a majority of the group. Side: No
1
point
1
point
|
