What will win atheism or religion?

[QUOTE="duncancameron23"]

[QUOTE="nirvana563"]

As for the question if there will be more religious/spiritual/philosophical people in the furture verus Atheists and things of that sort is more likely morereligious/spiritual/philosophical as there always has been for 1000's of years now.

As for the idea that peole are more "rational" and this makes them somehow disproves God. This is kind of a dumb (for the lack of a better word) idea in that how does useing what you define "rational" thinking disprove God? Also just to point out not everyone believes in 1 God or God in the form you are refering to.

And one more thing science has no beef with Religion only fundmentalist. It's the idea that science has something against religion is what blows my mind away.

nirvana563

Way to miss read, science has nothing against religion, i said it was a challenge to it. look at old Darwin and the theory of evolution and you get the point. And what do you expect people to do when they are more rational believe in one all powerful being? Or seek a more educated answer.

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

Atheism. Religion constantly has to change in order to adapt to new scientific discoveries (i.e. spirit manifestations/animism becoming polytheistic anthropomorphic gods becoming a more abstract, non-physical omnipresent monotheistic God). If one remains sceptical of all religion, then there is no reason to adapt, you just go with the flow. People will still have faith in the unknown but religion will continue to change and adapt so much, there won't be much of the physical universe left for religion to "control." All it will be is supernatural.

Atheism. Religion constantly has to change in order to adapt to new scientific discoveries (i.e. spirit manifestations/animism becoming polytheistic anthropomorphic gods becoming a more abstract, non-physical omnipresent monotheistic God). If one remains sceptical of all religion, then there is no reason to adapt, you just go with the flow. People will still have faith in the unknown but religion will continue to change and adapt so much, there won't be much of the physical universe left for religion to "control." All it will be is supernatural.

foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="nirvana563"]

[QUOTE="duncancameron23"]

Way to miss read, science has nothing against religion, i said it was a challenge to it. look at old Darwin and the theory of evolution and you get the point. And what do you expect people to do when they are more rational believe in one all powerful being? Or seek a more educated answer.

duncancameron23

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

duncancameron23

That article is so wrong I can't even. . . wow.

Darwin was "sort of a Christian" until his daughter died, then he was agnostic and remained as such for the rest of his life. He was never an atheist and he flat-out denied being an atheist: "The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic."

Source

In the sense that the world will either wholly believe one way or another, religion will win. Read Warhammer 40K (specifically, the Horus Heresy) for details. If you prove that there is no God, by doing so you have given people faith that all things can be explained. They will look to you for those answers and then you will become the new "God". People, as a whole, must always have faith to deal with the truly grusome things in life.

AustXilo

Or they can just use Pantheism and say all is at it should be.Vandalvideo

something unimportant....:P

Theokhoth

I am just curious cause you didn't answer me. :|

[QUOTE="duncancameron23"]

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

That article is so wrong I can't even. . . wow.

Darwin was "sort of a Christian" until his daughter died, then he was agnostic and remained as such for the rest of his life. He was never an atheist and he flat-out denied being an atheist: "The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic."

Source

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]something unimportant....:P

Teenaged

I am just curious cause you didn't answer me. :|

I didn't see it. :|

I'll just say "you're wrong" and leave it there. :x

To be perfectly frank, every one that claims to be athiest is most likely closer to agnostic.. They don't disbelieve god so much, as being open to the possibility just havn't found any evidence yet beyond a reasonable doubt.sSubZerOo

Atheism

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]something unimportant....:P

Theokhoth

I am just curious cause you didn't answer me. :|

I didn't see it. :|

I'll just say "you're wrong" and leave it there. :x

Anyway I am too bored to debate now, I just want to know if you saw it, k? :)

One can not believe in a God and still be open to evidence. "Agnosticism" is optimistic fence-sitting. Agnostic atheism is a disbelief with the openness for new evidence. Gnostic atheism is just arrogance.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="duncancameron23"]

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

Theokhoth

That article is so wrong I can't even. . . wow.

Darwin was "sort of a Christian" until his daughter died, then he was agnostic and remained as such for the rest of his life. He was never an atheist and he flat-out denied being an atheist: "The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic."

Source

We could argue this ad Ad infinitum! But you probably guess that i'm not going to believe a welsh vicar! :P

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]To be perfectly frank, every one that claims to be athiest is most likely closer to agnostic.. They don't disbelieve god so much, as being open to the possibility just havn't found any evidence yet beyond a reasonable doubt.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]Hey Theo, did you get my answers and what I am saying? :|

I am just curious cause you didn't answer me. :|

Teenaged

I didn't see it. :|

I'll just say "you're wrong" and leave it there. :x

Anyway I am too bored to debate now, I just want to know if you saw it, k? :)

I saw it.

AND YOU'RE WRONG!!:evil:

:P

[QUOTE="duncancameron23"]

[QUOTE="nirvana563"]

FYI Dawson has a devote Christain dispute many cliaims of him not being one. The Church funed a lot of his studies. Besides evolution only challenges fundmentalist like I said before.

nirvana563

Mate it's Darwin not Dawson (Dawson may well be a devout believer!) I went to Darwin's house at the weekend, i don't live far from it. There doing his 200 anniversary exhibition there. And i can guarantee to you he was atheist even though has wife was not. Here's your proof:

http://seedmagazine.com/content/article/darwin_and_the_clergyman/

I think i have.

[QUOTE="Teenaged"]

[QUOTE="Theokhoth"]

I didn't see it. :|

I'll just say "you're wrong" and leave it there. :x

Theokhoth

Anyway I am too bored to debate now, I just want to know if you saw it, k? :)

I saw it.

AND YOU'RE WRONG!!:evil:

:P