The Big Big Thread of Religious Discussion

[ZAKtheGeek]

Originally Posted by Nique

You know, in a way, I agree with this. You would no doubt agree that faith in any claim should come after proof of some kind.

Sure. And what I'm saying is that nice morals are weak proof at best.

Originally Posted by Nique

I meant for this argument to be a little more encompassing than just morals. I guess I got sidetracked with that as my example. It would be more like "this religion's overall teachings about life, morality, exsistance, makes sense to me and appear to be pretty coherent".

It's probably best not to lump too many things together here. Morals, unlike some things, are subjective. Following certain morals leads to a certain society. If that sort of society is what you think society should be like, then you agree with the morals. Something like existence, on the other hand, is an objective matter. That means that there isn't much room for "makes sense to me;" just "makes sense" in general. As in, "is rational." So then what you're saying becomes equivalent to, "If the religion says rational things about the world (etc), then it must be right." Something of a tautology, really...

What's my point again? I'm not sure. I think it's that, if people believe in their religions due to such reasoning, it should be exceedingly easy to convince others as well. Seeing as there's hardly any world religion, it means either people just aren't trying to be convincing or their faith is not based on these things.