Explain Your Religious Views or Lack Thereof

[Frisivisia]

Is it outside of existence?

It's outside of this universe, in another dimension, most likely.

Is it outside of existence?

[Conscentia]

Is it outside of existence?

It's outside of this universe, in another dimension, most likely.

That statement is based on what?

[The Steel Magnolia]

People in this thread have claimed otherwise.

And? Are those people you? Are those people me? No? Then what does that have to do with this conversation? Just as the beliefs of one theist are not the beliefs of another theist, why assume that the beliefs of one or several atheists are the beliefs of another atheist?

I'm not having a private conversation with you alone? Hence the reason that I sought to address your point, and then expand it to a broader whole.

[The Orson Empire]

It's outside of this universe, in another dimension, most likely.

Is it outside of existence?

What do you mean by existence?

[Neo Rome Republic]

You can stop right there. If God doesn't operate under the laws of physics as we understand them today, you are contradicting the current scientific understanding of the universe with a modification based on your bronze or iron age myths, depending on which god or pantheon you believe in. Whether or not said myths are ultimately true is irrelevant: they contradict the worldview of modernity in part, at the very least, if not in whole.

I don't care. I'm going to believe in my religion.

So, you don't care about what is true, I take it.

[Frisivisia]

Intellectual honesty, what is it?

Very good, you've quoted something someone else said.

I'm unsure as to how it relates to anything, it's hardly anything more than an unjust, unjustified accusation. It's very mean.

[Blasveck]

How is it a bad argument? The line of reason typically is that the universe was created, therefore, it needs a creator. Just because a God is supposedly outside of space and time does not exclude it from this line of reasoning. How exactly is this question flawed?

You do realize that something which exists timelessly does not begin to exist?

Couldn't there be a timeless being "higher" than the Christian God, for example?

[The Steel Magnolia]

There is no extensive evidence to the contrary. There is merely an absence of evidence to the affirmative, hence the null hypothesis. It's not about knowledge, get this in your head.

It is up to religion to support its claims in something that somehow defies all that we have found to be true through science. If religion is true, then all we know of physics, cosmology, astronomy, biology, mathematics, and essetentially every academic field must be abandoned.

Why?

Such world-shattering beliefs must as a principle be rejected until there is evidence for them. There is no evidence for them, whereas we have evidence for how a universe could exist without them, and basic probability to show why they almost certainly don't exist.

That is not evidence of absence. Hence belief.

So the only positive things religion offers can be found through alternative methods, once that do not require blind faith, rejection of science, submission to authority figures and strict standards, and horrendous moral theories. The secular alternatives are superior in every concievable manner. To not use them is foolish.

My religion requires none of those things.

E: Not why it's up to religion to prove its assertions, why it would require we abandon scientific thought

[Frisivisia]

Is it outside of existence?

What do you mean by existence?

I mean everything that exists.

Is Heaven outside of existence?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Very good, you've quoted something someone else said.

I'm unsure as to how it relates to anything, it's hardly anything more than an unjust, unjustified accusation. It's very mean.

Go cry about it then.

[Ljvonia]

Yes! Yes, indeed.



Plump provocation that. Bad form, old chap.

Answer the question.

Do you ask what I propose is to be done about irrational belief and those who hold it? Or do you perhaps ask what in the past was done with people deemed unfit to contribute in a useful manner to society? Or those who actively encourage the belief in a concept that cannot by corroborated by evidence, such as many political fanatics? What is it that you actually want to know?

[The Orson Empire]

I don't care. I'm going to believe in my religion.

So, you don't care about what is true, I take it.

Incorrect.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Answer the question.

Do you ask what I propose is to be done about irrational belief and those who hold it? Or do you perhaps ask what in the past was done with people deemed unfit to contribute in a useful manner to society? Or those who actively encourage the belief in a concept that cannot by corroborated by evidence, such as many political fanatics? What is it that you actually want to know?

Yes.

[Miyager]

What does god even do all day?

[Frisivisia]

Very good, you've quoted something someone else said.

I'm unsure as to how it relates to anything, it's hardly anything more than an unjust, unjustified accusation. It's very mean.

Go cry about it then.

I thought we weren't stooping. You sure you don't want to take a break? Your debating has degraded.

[With Teeth]

You do realize that something which exists timelessly does not begin to exist?

Couldn't there be a timeless being "higher" than the Christian God, for example?

You're missing the point.

No (academic) theist says that everything has a cause. They say that everything which begins to exist has a cause. Given their conception of god, the ''What caused god?'' argument is stupid.

[Neo Rome Republic]

So, you don't care about what is true, I take it.

Incorrect.

You ignore the evidence, because it hurts your world view. What should my make of that? If you cared about the truth, you'd consider the evidence.

[Athylon Prime]

No it's not. Not all religious people are dangerous.

Exactly.

I agree. Religious people as a whole are not dangerous. There are dangerous people with and without religion. Extremists on both sides. We shouldn't judge the bunch for a few bad eggs.

[Conserative Morality]

I don't care. I'm going to believe in my religion.

"I don't care", the last resort of a battered army, retreating to their keep once their walls are breached. Unable to face the foe that challenges them and the rock they build themselves upon, they refuse to engage their enemy that threatens their world and hide behind time and space, letting themselves rot away within its walls. A final sign of weakness that leads only to more weakness.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Go cry about it then.

I thought we weren't stooping. You sure you don't want to take a break? Your debating has degraded.

I reiterate:

Go cry about it.

[Frisivisia]

I don't care. I'm going to believe in my religion.

"I don't care", the last resort of a battered army, retreating to their keep once their walls are breached. Unable to face the foe that challenges them and the rock they build themselves upon, they refuse to engage their enemy that threatens their world and hide behind time and space, letting themselves rot away within its walls. A final sign of weakness that leads only to more weakness.

High five!

[The Steel Magnolia]

I don't care. I'm going to believe in my religion.

"I don't care", the last resort of a battered army, retreating to their keep once their walls are breached. Unable to face the foe that challenges them and the rock they build themselves upon, they refuse to engage their enemy that threatens their world and hide behind time and space, letting themselves rot away within its walls. A final sign of weakness that leads only to more weakness.

Let people have their weakness.

[The Kingdom of Nea Hellas]

There is no extensive evidence to the contrary. There is merely an absence of evidence to the affirmative, hence the null hypothesis. It's not about knowledge, get this in your head.

It is up to religion to support its claims in something that somehow defies all that we have found to be true through science. If religion is true, then all we know of physics, cosmology, astronomy, biology, mathematics, and essetentially every academic field must be abandoned. Such world-shattering beliefs must as a principle be rejected until there is evidence for them. There is no evidence for them, whereas we have evidence for how a universe could exist without them, and basic probability to show why they almost certainly don't exist.

So if Religion is true, 2 + 2 =5 ? Based on what you say we have to alter all of math since apparently arithmetic and geometry disproves the existence of God

EVERY ACADEMIC FIELD? Wow, I really don't want to offend you but you are overreacting intensely. Do we have to change Animal classifications? Change the Periodic Table? Come up with a new model of the Human Body? Is Saturn a planet?

For the Last Time. There is a difference between actual constructive criticism, and ridiculous propoganda.

[Frisivisia]

I thought we weren't stooping. You sure you don't want to take a break? Your debating has degraded.

I reiterate:

Go cry about it.

Can I take that as a formal surrender?

[Conscentia]

"I don't care", the last resort of a battered army, retreating to their keep once their walls are breached. Unable to face the foe that challenges them and the rock they build themselves upon, they refuse to engage their enemy that threatens their world and hide behind time and space, letting themselves rot away within its walls. A final sign of weakness that leads only to more weakness.

Let people have their weakness.

Why?