-
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!
Corvus
- Thread starter Corvus
- Start date
There are numerous reasons people convert to theistic religions, but most people just grow up in them. I think 'Learning about a religion' is a terrible reason to convert. The best reason to convert is if you really want to be with the people and be involved in their story. We have a lot of threads inquiring about why people convert, and I think they tend to be confusing. If you search us using google like this: "why do people conver" site:religiousforums.com you will get numerous search hits.
Greetings!
Note that hostility is the norm here.
Now, join us for free grub in the RF cafeteria.....
The gagh is particularly fresh.
Welcome to RF. 
Corvus
Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Analytical chemistry is my day job, it pays enough to live on. However my real passion is for cosmology and the earth sciences in particular.Hello Corvus! Welcome to the forum! You are a scientist? What do you specialise in?
I too am interested in the field of Cosmology, though currently I have been taking classes in Sociology
YmirGF
Bodhisattva in Recovery
God is outside of the observable Universe. He can not be verified by any physical experiment.
He sends Prophets and Messengers were clear guidance for mankind. Those whose hearts are opened, are shown very real and clear signs. This for us is enough to believe.
Corvus
Feathered eyeball connoisseur
If he cannot be verified, then he effectively does not exist, in any meaningful interpretation of the word, exist. Prophets and messengers are subjective human beings, who have neither proved nor demonstrated God(s) exist, there is absolutely no logical reason to believe a single word they say or write. If you do, you accept articles of blind faith. Which is illogical.
Last edited:
Corvus
Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Without empirical evidence or any testability, a claim about some aspect of reality is worthless. Since it cannot be substantiated or verified independently. It is utterly alien and inconcievable to me that you could disgaree on this important point. If a claim is therefore worthless, then there is absolutely no need for me to give it a pico second's worth of consideration. Which I don't where Islam or any theism is concerned. I wish to understand how others ''circumnavigate'' this absolute logical barrier to articles of faith.
Last edited:
The Prophets were believed due to their good standing in the community and the miracles that accompanied them.
Corvus
Feathered eyeball connoisseur
Means nothing to me or anyone who demands evidence to back claims.
You originally asked why people believed. I briefly explained, and now you are doubting the sources for the information we rely on. Your question has been answered, so good day to you.
Salam/Peace
Perhaps you mean "holstein" rather than "Rammstein"?Sweet.
Ohhhh, and a Rammstein lover....
Still thyself my beating heart...
MOO!
Corvus
Feathered eyeball connoisseur
My question is far from answered. The question tailored to you is, WHY do you believe in articles of faith as espoused by a specific holy book? Additionally in context of the question just mentioned, WHY the Quran and NOT the Bible, as your source of 'infallible' knowledge?
I appreciate that have you told me you DO believe in articles of faith. I want to know WHY you do, given that it is entirely irrational to do so.
I wish to understand what makes you reject empirical evidence and resultant theory when it is convenient to do so, when or if that evidence conflicts with your articles of faith. That is something that simply does not compute, I do not understand, how you can do that. Belief in the supremacy of article of faith is the tacit rejection of reason and logic, an implied denial that empirical evidence is the highest form of evidence possible.
Last edited:
A lot of what we experienced isn't going to be substantiated with empirical evidence. So what can be proven and validation to your satisfaction, fine. Accept what's be validated, but for the rest of it, why not believe according to what you feel like believing?
You can't invalidate God so if believing in God makes you happy, why not. If it makes you unhappy, don't.
I guess that's the point. If it make you happy, feel comfortable and secure, why not go through life believing in God. If you're more comfortable disbelieving in God, do that.