A question for theists

[Jumalariik]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

I converted.

[Rannoria]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

Well, it's still my answer.
Why would you believe a religion if you don't think it's true.
That's like saying burgers is your favorite food, but it isn't.

[The Nexus of Man]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

I have this question for theists, it's kind of the reason I'm an agnostic.

There are five main religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism) and 4,195 smaller religions. That means that, statistically, you have a 1 in 4,200 chance, or 0.0002% chance of being a member of the correct religion, assuming that the correct religion is existing.

You must also take into account the death of said religions, either due to the natural or deliberate deaths of the believing population base. I'm sure that the adherents of such religions would have believed for their religion to save them, and so they put forth their faith into it even amongst the perils of their population dying. For them, it was the truth, but for those that now live on Earth, it is not, because said religion (if it was ethnocentric, for example) would have saved them.

Look at the Abrahamic and Indo-European religions that currently exist. They have existed for (quite literally) thousands of years -- the age of their existence is not a testament to their validity, but rather that they still have a believing base. Having a surviving believing base is, in my opinion, a large factor in giving said religion a large amount of believably.

From there, we can see that the two main Abrahamic religions -- Christianity and Islam -- whom both stem from Judaism, have dominated much of the world in direct and indirect influence. The power of Abrahamism has conquered a plethora of different cultures, and vanquished an array of different religions. Would you agree to the fact that these (possible) ethnoreligious would have had their gods intervene in the destruction of their sole believing base against these two powerful universalizing religions?

In short, you should not use that percentage to estimate if someone believes in the correct religion. Instead, crop out the religions that have become extinct, and make the proportion of theological actuality in relation to the current population and power projection of the religion, in testament to the power of their specific version of theism.

[Herargon]

Mph. This is why I'm an agnostic deist even though I identify as a Christian and still go to Church...

In other words, you think that God might exist or not exist, but that for now you think it's more likely He exists?

[Nariterrr]

This argument is useless. I am basing my opinions on what is tangible and what I can prove, not what has already been disproven. I am looking at it and comparing them through a religious lens. I have no proof of Cargo Cults being the true religion, I have no proof of Christianity, therefore, even if Cargo Cults can be disproven, they are still on the same level, no proof is no proof.

You're not actually saying anything here. You are saying "I look at this from a religious view and tangible elements." There are tangible elements saying that Cargo Cults are false. There are tangible reasons that Christianity is not untrue. (wether it is true is debatable though) Cargo Cults work under suppositions like that the island that it appeared on is the entire world, that John Frum was not just an American pilot, etc. We know they are false claims. Christianity's claims are all either proven or are not disproven. God's existence is not disproven. Jesus' existence is proven.

I cannot disprove to you God, you cannot disprove a negative. Your religion is equal to all the others out there, it is a belief system, a belief system which we have no proof of. Again, my argument is notwithstanding evidence that could prove a religion false, while it is true that I cannot 'disprove' Christianity, it is not my job too. My job is to believe what can be proven and what IS PROVEN. Christianity and every other religion fails to do either.

[Uxupox]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

There are many converts around man. Those aren't born into their religion.

[Shonburg]

Yes they are, more specifically, amino acids are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

Amino acids are definitely the foundation of life but peptides are not. Now if you have said polypeptides on the other hand.

Peptides and Polypeptides are both made up of Amino acids, the split is simply arbitrary, with Peptides having 50 or less Amino acids. And the Miller-Urey experiment produced amino acids, which make peptides and polypeptides.

[New haven america]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

You claim to not understand a lot about science (Specifically Astrogeology and Biology), claiming that it would go against your religion (Correct me if I'm wrong).

But the funny thing is, the people who did work on these subjects when they first started were heavily involved with the church. Did you know Charles Darwin (The man who discovered Evolution) was actually also studying to be a clergyman?

[Rannoria]

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

There are many converts around man. Those aren't born into their religion.

Does this mean I am correct in a theological question?

[Nariterrr]

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

There are many converts around man. Those aren't born into their religion.

And? I can be born in the belief that Mars is the center of the universe and then convert to the idea that the Earth is, either way, I'm wrong.

[United Marxist Nations]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

It doesn't have to be the one you were born into.

And, like I said, you're making the mistake of rationalism.

[Razgriskm]

4. We didn't, we evolved from a common ancestor ape of humans and chimps, which evolved from another ancestor animal, and so on. Humans didn't automatically evolve from fish to humans, it took billion of years of adaptations for humans to come into existence.

This is a very important point, since big bang and similar kickstarter theories are ultimately irrelevant to the debate of religion. No evidence of evolution from one animal kind to another exists. We have obvious and easy to see examples of adaptation and micro-evolutions. EI: Wolf to Dog, Fish to fish with bigger tails.

But we haven't observed a change in kind. If a fish can become a lizard and the lizard can become an ape, then were are the lizard-ape hybrid animals and their fossil records? Or the Bird-Fish. Or even something simple like the change from a fish to a sea mammal like the whale?

[Rannoria]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

You claim to not understand a lot about science (Specifically Astrogeology and Biology), claiming that it would go against your religion (Correct me if I'm wrong).

But the funny thing is, the people who did work on these subjects when they first started were heavily involved with the church. Did you know Charles Darwin (The man who discovered Evolution) was actually studying to be a clergyman?

I never said it would go against my religion. To be honest I like science very much, and I believe God wanted us to learn these things. But if you work out the little kinks... it's all amazing isn't it. How things come to be, and how things are...
Still, I stand by the statement you quoted. And I am firm.

[The Nexus of Man]

There are many converts around man. Those aren't born into their religion.

And? I can be born in the belief that Mars is the center of the universe and then convert to the idea that the Earth is, either way, I'm wrong.

Alas, no prior belief with a large following ever preached such motive -- and if it did, its belief base is dead, thus giving way the fact that it was the wrong belief.

That is not the same as normal religious conversion, you know.

[Uxupox]

Amino acids are definitely the foundation of life but peptides are not. Now if you have said polypeptides on the other hand.

Peptides and Polypeptides are both made up of Amino acids, the split is simply arbitrary, with Peptides having 50 or less Amino acids. And the Miller-Urey experiment produced amino acids, which make peptides and polypeptides.

Then how do you conclude as to these polypeptides bonded together to form the first uni-cellular organisms?

[Shonburg]

This is a very important point, since big bang and similar kickstarter theories are ultimately irrelevant to the debate of religion. No evidence of evolution from one animal kind to another exists. We have obvious and easy to see examples of adaptation and micro-evolutions. EI: Wolf to Dog, Fish to fish with bigger tails.

But we haven't observed a change in kind. If a fish can become a lizard and the lizard can become an ape, then were are the lizard-ape hybrid animals and their fossil records? Or the Bird-Fish. Or even something simple like the change from a fish to a sea mammal like the whale?

"Kind" is not a scientific classification. And we have found thousands of transitional fossils, such as Tiktaalik, Lucy, etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_t ... al_fossils

[Nariterrr]

And? I can be born in the belief that Mars is the center of the universe and then convert to the idea that the Earth is, either way, I'm wrong.

Alas, no prior belief with a large following ever preached such motive -- and if it did, its belief base is dead, thus giving way the fact that it was the wrong belief.

That is not the same as normal religious conversion, you know.

Just because something has a large following, doesn't mean it's true.

[The 502nd Ghost Division]

Norse Paganism of all things though. Personally if I could /choose/ what reality was after death I'd be inclined toward self godhood after death. ;D

Honestly, kinda weirdly, an atheistic afterlife would be fine for me. Death would just be nonexistence, and I am happy with that. I was not unhappy before I was born.

That's the good thing about my belief, you have no one to blame , but yourself.

I was born Christian, but I recently converted to Norse Paganism. I did so not because I believe in Odin, but because it felt right. I believe we create our own heaven and hell. What we believe/follow is what we end up with. You would be gone when you die and I would go to Valhalla or Niflheim when I die.

Norse Paganism of all things though. Personally if I could /choose/ what reality was after death I'd be inclined toward self godhood after death. ;D

What's wrong with Norse Paganism?

[Jumalariik]

You're not actually saying anything here. You are saying "I look at this from a religious view and tangible elements." There are tangible elements saying that Cargo Cults are false. There are tangible reasons that Christianity is not untrue. (wether it is true is debatable though) Cargo Cults work under suppositions like that the island that it appeared on is the entire world, that John Frum was not just an American pilot, etc. We know they are false claims. Christianity's claims are all either proven or are not disproven. God's existence is not disproven. Jesus' existence is proven.

I cannot disprove to you God, you cannot disprove a negative. Your religion is equal to all the others out there, it is a belief system, a belief system which we have no proof of. Again, my argument is notwithstanding evidence that could prove a religion false, while it is true that I cannot 'disprove' Christianity, it is not my job too. My job is to believe what can be proven and what IS PROVEN. Christianity and every other religion fails to do either.

Did you not read what I said? Is there no proof to you that could prove Christianity or disprove Cargo Cults? We know by experience that Cargo Cults are automatically false. Christianity is not. We therefore checked off a big amount of religions as false. I gave you clear evidence against Cargo Cults, others have given you evidence for Christianity. Not to prove it 100% but that its not wrong. How is that not enough for you to concede that Christianity is above Cargo Cults in likelyhood?

[The Nexus of Man]

Alas, no prior belief with a large following ever preached such motive -- and if it did, its belief base is dead, thus giving way the fact that it was the wrong belief.

That is not the same as normal religious conversion, you know.

Just because something has a large following, doesn't mean it's true.

If it is a religion, and its entire belief base is dead despite the fact that the belief (if ethnocentric) would have intervened, it would be definitively wrong.

This is not the case for the world's most powerful religions -- the largest of which are Abrahamic.

[Rannoria]

There are many converts around man. Those aren't born into their religion.

And? I can be born in the belief that Mars is the center of the universe and then convert to the idea that the Earth is, either way, I'm wrong.

Well, I'm going to bring in something.
Let's take the Greek gods, and the mainstream religions.
For one thing, I doubt anyone believes in the Greek Gods anymore.
Christianity never became an official religion until the, what, early church?
But the following of YHWH always prolonged before Greece was even founded (based on the Bible)
You know I think I'm making a useless point.
And I don't get how your answer counters my question. My question states there is no answer, you have to have faith in your religion.

[Shonburg]

Peptides and Polypeptides are both made up of Amino acids, the split is simply arbitrary, with Peptides having 50 or less Amino acids. And the Miller-Urey experiment produced amino acids, which make peptides and polypeptides.

Then how do you conclude as to these polypeptides bonded together to form the first uni-cellular organisms?

Millions of years for trillions of combinations of various Polypeptides which we can observe happening today, so on a scale of millions of millions of years, you get combinations that form the most basic of cells.

[Hatheg Kla]

There is no correct religion (not the point of religion) as the universe is predeterministic.

The universe is probabilistic, not deterministic.

[Nariterrr]

I cannot disprove to you God, you cannot disprove a negative. Your religion is equal to all the others out there, it is a belief system, a belief system which we have no proof of. Again, my argument is notwithstanding evidence that could prove a religion false, while it is true that I cannot 'disprove' Christianity, it is not my job too. My job is to believe what can be proven and what IS PROVEN. Christianity and every other religion fails to do either.

Did you not read what I said? Is there no proof to you that could prove Christianity or disprove Cargo Cults? We know by experience that Cargo Cults are automatically false. Christianity is not. We therefore checked off a big amount of religions as false. I gave you clear evidence against Cargo Cults, others have given you evidence for Christianity. Not to prove it 100% but that its not wrong. How is that not enough for you to concede that Christianity is above Cargo Cults in likelyhood?

Again, notwithstanding evidence that such religion is false. I cannot prove to you that either the Cargo Cults or Christianity are true.

[Uxupox]

Then how do you conclude as to these polypeptides bonded together to form the first uni-cellular organisms?

Millions of years for trillions of combinations of various Polypeptides which we can observe happening today, so on a scale of millions of millions of years, you get combinations that form the most basic of cells.

You got a source?