Even though I fall into it at times, arguing religion is seemingly pointless… Why? Because religion is fundamentally founded on faith, faith which is a:
· Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
· Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
Pay attention to that second definition, “spiritual apprehension rather than proof.” Proof and factual evidence can be used in the support of faith but not to the detriment of it because faith isn’t bound by it. The principle of faith is not bound by the laws of nature or man. I can provide as much scientific or historical evidence that completely disproves the premise of certain religions but it’s irrelevant because faith will always win out.
I am not going to speculate on the virtue of this because that is not the point. The point of this is understanding and acceptance. I have been in numerous discussions and debates in my life with people of all different faiths which in my immaturity has left me frustrated because they couldn’t see the reason of my logic. Logic that was so plain and simple to my perspective and understanding. In these arguments, their conviction, their certainty of the truth and validity of what they have faith in couldn’t and can’t be dissuaded by my evidence. Our faith doesn’t know the limits of reality which is what makes it both so powerful and so dangerous.
Most of humanity has faith in some form or another. It is not an absence of logic or reason. It is not the result of the addled mind or the weak willed. It can be these things depending on our individual perspectives but I think at its core, it’s a; sometimes desperate or inspiring, hope for something. It is pointless to argue it because how can you disprove or prove something that is fundamentally supported by believing in the truth of it regardless the absence of proof?
· Complete trust or confidence in someone or something.
· Strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.
Pay attention to that second definition, “spiritual apprehension rather than proof.” Proof and factual evidence can be used in the support of faith but not to the detriment of it because faith isn’t bound by it. The principle of faith is not bound by the laws of nature or man. I can provide as much scientific or historical evidence that completely disproves the premise of certain religions but it’s irrelevant because faith will always win out.
I am not going to speculate on the virtue of this because that is not the point. The point of this is understanding and acceptance. I have been in numerous discussions and debates in my life with people of all different faiths which in my immaturity has left me frustrated because they couldn’t see the reason of my logic. Logic that was so plain and simple to my perspective and understanding. In these arguments, their conviction, their certainty of the truth and validity of what they have faith in couldn’t and can’t be dissuaded by my evidence. Our faith doesn’t know the limits of reality which is what makes it both so powerful and so dangerous.
Most of humanity has faith in some form or another. It is not an absence of logic or reason. It is not the result of the addled mind or the weak willed. It can be these things depending on our individual perspectives but I think at its core, it’s a; sometimes desperate or inspiring, hope for something. It is pointless to argue it because how can you disprove or prove something that is fundamentally supported by believing in the truth of it regardless the absence of proof?