Religion is an Opinion

[muhammad_isa]

Believing is used once we have no evidence..

That might be true for some .. but not for me.
I wouldn't be 'a believer' if I had no reason to believe that God exists. There is much confusion about the word 'evidence'. Some people seem to think that only that scientific proofs are the only form of evidence which have any weight. I would have to disagree, although without any evidence of this type, I couldn't hold as strong a belief as I do. I do not refer to the scientific detection of God .. Almighty God clearly does not want to be 'seen' (in a physical sense) so it would be futile!

..so, as far as I'm concerned, belief is what people believe to be true. That doesn't make it true, and people have various different reasons why they believe what they believe (or what they say they believe) .. some evidence based .. some psychological .. some for personal gain etc.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Believing is used once we have no evidence,if evidence is shown up then in turns to be a fact.

Do we have any beliefs that we keep without evidence? Believers say there is evidence in their faiths just as non believers have evidence to support their debates. We translate love and other abstract words with things people do and/or say that defines them. By themselves, they are just words.

EDIT

Basically, is there such thing as beliefs if our evidences are only based on concrete facts and five sense knowledge?

 

[Desert Snake]

Religion is not necessarily an ''opinion''. An opinion, renders the subject matter, to be largely, personally arbitrary. Whereas, many things related to religious belief can be personally objective, yet subjective as per the individual. This is why these words like opinion, etc, can be tricky when trying to describe religious adherence.

 

[Mackerni]

You said "it's a fact that humans can't fly." I showed you a picture to the contrary, humans flying.

Technically speaking, airplanes can fly. Humans cannot.

I'd say we all believe in something, whether it's the Bible or evolution or global cooling or global warming, free markets or socialism.

The strength of faith is acknowledging our personal beliefs as such, blind faith is faith which does not recognize itself.

I think I agree with your conclusion, the ultimate best prediction of the future is desire, purpose, will, because this is the only phenomena that can truly create anything-
I see that as entirely consistent with the BIble though, that our existence and all we see around us is the result of purpose, intent, not an accident

I believe all social sciences are a matter of opinion. One of the first things you learn about in sociology is that most crimes are committed in the day and you are actually safer at night, contrary to popular belief. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that many crimes are committed at night either. People feel safer when other people are around ... and when there is daylight.

I don't view communism, socialism, mixed economies, capitalist, or laissez-faire economics as any less inferior or more superior than any other. It's a social science. The best you have is statistical data. It's not necessary how the government, economy, religion, whatever is set up, it's the people in it that count. I've never heard of a religion that taught you that stealing is good, and I've never seen a government which stealing was legal. Some people do it anyway.

According to the Bible though, that purpose is God, not our own. We are increasingly living in a society where our wants and desires are being fulfilled in a materialistic, human-centered way. "God" might have given you Earth, but "humans" made your iPhone. There's no denying that.

Religion is not necessarily an ''opinion''. An opinion, renders the subject matter, to be largely, personally arbitrary. Whereas, many things related to religious belief can be personally objective, yet subjective as per the individual. This is why these words like opinion, etc, can be tricky when trying to describe religious adherence.

I have BIG problems regarding people who think they have personal facts on God. Gnosticism is a disease. Most religious people are not gnostic in nature. They do not know for an absolute certainty if God exists or not.

Faith, according to the skeptic, is, "something you believe that cannot be proven." Does that sound like fact? "something you believe that cannot be proven" would be like, "I think the prequel trilogy of Star Wars is as good as the original." The subjective belief itself is the fact "I think" but "the prequel trilogy of Star Wars is as good as the original" is entirely based on subjective experiences, which makes it a judgment, or view point. It is not a fact, it's an opinion. I cannot prove to you that the prequels are better, I can just say things like, "Jar Jar doesn't bother me." "The exposition clarifies a lot that was unsaid in the originals." "The CGI is as good as real models, to varying degrees." "It was Lucas's vision." Things that other people can disagree with me about, but it doesn't make anyone right or wrong. It's a matter of opinion.

 

[Lyndon]

Really all you are doing is expressing personal opinions, and rather inane ones at that!!

 

[Skwim]

Technically speaking, airplanes can fly. Humans cannot.

Gee, I hear people talking about flying here and there all the time. Hmmmmmm . . . . . . . .

 

[Mackerni]

Really all you are doing is expressing personal opinions, and rather inane ones at that!!

My, my, my. Calling people names gives you five minutes in the corner. Go think about what you've done.

 

[Intojoy]

Bigfoot was located this week.

They found him at Compton high school teaching evolution

 

[Lyndon]

Mackerni, That's just your opinion. I never actually called you any names.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I have BIG problems regarding people who think they have personal facts on God. Gnosticism is a disease. Most religious people are not gnostic in nature. They do not know for an absolute certainty if God exists or not.

While I wouldn't go so far as to call it a disease, I think I agree with you for the most part.

Faith, according to the skeptic, is, "something you believe that cannot be proven."

That's not the definition I, and many others, use. The definition I use is "The justification for believing a position despite a lack of evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary". A faith-based position can still be a provable position.

Does that sound like fact? "something you believe that cannot be proven" would be like, "I think the prequel trilogy of Star Wars is as good as the original." The subjective belief itself is the fact "I think" but "the prequel trilogy of Star Wars is as good as the original" is entirely based on subjective experiences, which makes it a judgment, or view point. It is not a fact, it's an opinion. I cannot prove to you that the prequels are better, I can just say things like, "Jar Jar doesn't bother me." "The exposition clarifies a lot that was unsaid in the originals." "The CGI is as good as real models, to varying degrees." "It was Lucas's vision." Things that other people can disagree with me about, but it doesn't make anyone right or wrong. It's a matter of opinion.

But there's a difference between an opinion and a claim of objective fact. "The prequel trilogy is as good as the original" is not an objective claim of fact, it is a subjective expression of preference. Whereas "The prequel trilogy is the most critically acclaimed trilogy of films ever made" is an objective claim of fact. One is capable of being examined and demonstrated to be true or false, the other is entirely determined by individual experience and cannot be demonstrated (arguably) either way.

 

[Scott C.]

While I wouldn't go so far as to call it a disease, I think I agree with you for the most part.


That's not the definition I, and many others, use. The definition I use is "The justification for believing a position despite a lack of evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary". A faith-based position can still be a provable position.


But there's a difference between an opinion and a claim of objective fact. "The prequel trilogy is as good as the original" is not an objective claim of fact, it is a subjective expression of preference. Whereas "The prequel trilogy is the most critically acclaimed trilogy of films ever made" is an objective claim of fact. One is capable of being examined and demonstrated to be true or false, the other is entirely determined by individual experience and cannot be demonstrated (arguably) either way.

I think you messed up the quotes. You quoted me above for things that I didn't say.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I think you messed up the quotes. You quoted me above for things that I didn't say.

My mistake - accidentally left your quote html in my clipboard. Now corrected!

 

[prometheus11]

The "true religion" is the one in which you can locate no fault.

I have found no such religion except the one of my own philosophy which changes almost every day.

 

[Mackerni]

While I wouldn't go so far as to call it a disease, I think I agree with you for the most part..

Maybe I have gone too far ... when I "feel gnostic" of my beliefs, when I really think they are true, I try to convert everybody to think like me. Most people do not and probably cannot understand where I'm coming from though, causing a distance between us. It's really, really sad, and I'd rather not talk about it. I would do just about anything to meet someone who has the same theology as me (pan-apotheosis).

That's not the definition I, and many others, use. The definition I use is "The justification for believing a position despite a lack of evidence or in spite of evidence to the contrary". A faith-based position can still be a provable position.

Meh, I've heard of both before.

But there's a difference between an opinion and a claim of objective fact. "The prequel trilogy is as good as the original" is not an objective claim of fact, it is a subjective expression of preference. Whereas "The prequel trilogy is the most critically acclaimed trilogy of films ever made" is an objective claim of fact. One is capable of being examined and demonstrated to be true or false, the other is entirely determined by individual experience and cannot be demonstrated (arguably) either way.

And the later is exactly what I'm saying about religion in general.

 

[Estro Felino]

My faith is that all realities will be true, and under these realities people will get what they wish for, no matter the cost. Hence, it is a matter of what reality you want, not the reality we currently live in. Religion is Futurism. What you want is your opinion, not anybody else's.

Therefore: Religion is an Opinion

That's a concept I totally agree on, because reality and truth are the same thing. And there can be no truth, if all realities are not respected and understood. But we can obtain this only if we identify with ourselves.
Socrates said: Know yourself. Nietzsche said: Become what you are.

 

[Mackerni]

That's a concept I totally agree on, because reality and truth are the same thing. And there can be no truth, if all realities are not respected and understood. But we can obtain this only if we identify with ourselves.
Socrates said: Know yourself. Nietzsche said: Become what you are.

When your reality becomes true, truth shall be told by you.

Look at this. Look at all the possible realities people construct in their minds, delve deep into their conscious thoughts, steaming, brainstorming ....

http://nrm.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_religions