• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Search results

  1. scott777

    No one should believe in evolution!

    I would agree that no one should accept a scientific theory by faith. But scientists and logically minded people don't usually accept evolution as a certainty. It's the best theory that exists for the diversity of life.
  2. scott777

    Is the vestigial organ argument a vestige of poor science

    While there's some difference in definitions of 'vestigial', the word 'vestige' seems universally to mean something that has been reduced or has 'less' function than it used to. So it makes sense to extend that to 'vestigial'.
  3. scott777

    Is the vestigial organ argument a vestige of poor science

    As I said before, vestigial means degenerate, not useless. So there are still vestigial organs.
  4. scott777

    Nature is a planned system rather than a planner

    Perhaps, but even going crazy would be useful for animals. Gorillas, for example, have to dominate and fend off competition.
  5. scott777

    Nature is a planned system rather than a planner

    Firstly, I don't believe people do 'at almost any price'. If, on occasion people are obsessive, it would be explained by inheriting sexual drive from ancestors, whose drive enabled the passing on of their genes. Whereas homosexuality among nature does not enable passing on of genes.
  6. scott777

    Nature is a planned system rather than a planner

    Well, I suppose it is hard to imagine how nature created homosexuals, and all the homosexual activity among animals. I guess that one was God. (No offense meant to homosexuals):sunglasses:
  7. scott777

    I've Sacrificed my belief in Evolution for Religion

    May I suggest that every time you have one of these 'logical' thoughts, repeat the words: Donald Trump, Donald Trump, and hit your head with some rhubarb. Why am I telling you this? God told me that he helps those who help themselves. So darn well help yourself!
  8. scott777

    Is the vestigial organ argument a vestige of poor science

    Your confusing 'vestigial' with 'useless'. Vestigial in the biological sense means degenerate. The appendix is not much use in the average human.
  9. scott777

    Is religious thinking something all people do?

    Very true, except that lots of people are still spiritual.
  10. scott777

    The Rational Reason Why All Atheists are Murderers

    No doubt there are times when a rationalist will come to the conclusion that killing people is right. (Well, plenty of western politicians do, and Hitler did), but I'm sure a whole load more people through history have been killed due to irrational or religious thinking.
  11. scott777

    Is religious thinking something all people do?

    Apart from the religions which have many gods, or those that have none (Budhism).
  12. scott777

    Is religious thinking something all people do?

    For me, religion (not mine) has faith at it's core, and so is a system of beliefs which have no rational or scientific basis. By that definition, you don't have to be religious, though clearly most people of the world are. But if you question things, and refuse to fully accept things with...
  13. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    I don't deny he did it because he believed in God. How many millions of people do extraordinary things because of religious belief? That is sufficient. I don't know why you're telling me this. I haven't asked for proof. I keep asking for a speciic thing, but you won't give one. So I'll...
  14. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    Difficult or not, motive or not, it's possible. People can believe in extraordinary things. Therefore it's not evidence. Unless certain things can be independently verified, such as prophecies. But anyway, I don't know which bits you are calling evidence. You have to be specific. Just give...
  15. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    It's still unclear what the evidence is for God. Couldn't he have just made it all up?
  16. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    But your given prophecy is not evidence at all. So out of the four things you suggest are the best evidence, which one is the best?
  17. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    Can you give an example? I don't call everything faith. Atheism isn't. Science isn't. Taoism is, according to its description and definition. You said: "Nowhere does anyone worth their salt say that 99.9% were religious according to a mass of historical evidence." So therefore you think...
  18. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    It's relevant because if a dog can communicate something like submission, then surely a prehistoric man can communicate a lot more. Perhaps. Today's spread of religion is evidence that as quality of life improves, religion declines. What evidence is there that Vikings had no religion? I've...
  19. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    It doesn't predict the wars and even if it did, that's not evidence of any god. It could be educated guesses, or even a supernatural ability to see the future, like Nostradamus is supposed to have had. Why don't you just say what the very best evidence is?
  20. scott777

    Is Faith/Religion needed to live -- my analysis of Jordan Peterson

    I didn't say that was enough. I explained how even dogs have language. If a belief can be taught like that, then that belief can be a doctrine. Therefore rudimentary religion could have existed for at least 64,000 years. It's irrelevant whether a belief had a drug or fever induced origin...
Top