8th March 2020, 9:40 PM
(This post was last modified: 8th March 2020, 9:44 PM by ForestDweller. Edited 1 time in total.
Edit Reason: Added the last sentence.
)
(19th January 2018, 1:28 PM)Robobot Wrote:
this pretty much sums up exactly how i feel
Here's my problem with this. First of all, Neil is a smart guy, I like him - and he's proven it several times through what he says and has done. So when he goes "that's why it's called a *faith*, because it's not based on any evidence" I was confused. This is exactly what I say when discussing the topic of God with people who question it. The whole point of religion is that we need to have faith in the creator through the inherent spirituality that is given to mankind, and if we fail to do so then we face the repercussions of it (in Islam, at least, these "repercussions" depend entirely on how Allah deals with you, which obviously will vary person to person - much has to do with deed and intention). If God gives us the evidence of his existence, then even the most evil of people will worship him out of necessity, knowing that he exists so they have no choice. This is a really important concept in Islam, called "iman" - faith in God which goes hand in hand with the "goodness" of people. People who chose to stray and live a life of sin will weaken or perhaps completely drop their iman in order to do so. You wouldn't do evil if you were keenly aware of His presence, and your iman was "strong". Since life is a test, it wouldn't make sense to give the "answers" (evidence of God) to the test, that would defeat the point of the test.