Explain Your Religious Views or Lack Thereof

[The Steel Magnolia]

I reiterate:

Go cry about it.

Can I take that as a formal surrender?

If you want to.

[Blasveck]

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.

So because this God doesn't follow the rules of the universe (IE existence) you cannot apply those same rules to God?

If so, I get ya.

[Asshatland]

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.

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

[The Steel Magnolia]

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.

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

Therefore, you support Stalin.

[Frisivisia]

Can I take that as a formal surrender?

If you want to.

Yay!

My beliefs and debating skills are superior to yours! Atheists win, atheists win!

[Neo Rome Republic]

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.

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

Yep.

[With Teeth]

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.

So because this God doesn't follow the rules of the universe (IE existence) you cannot apply those same rules to God?

If so, I get ya.

Not exactly, but close enough.

I don't agree with the cosmological arguments, but I think atheists are making atheism look worse, intellectually, when they respond in such a way.

[Tabret]

I personally believe that one should not explicitly believe/not believe in something based on evidence and such. Humans are limited in their knowledge, everyday we learn something new and debunk another, there are things that we simply cannot empirically prove and that are just way out of our reach now.

[The Orson Empire]

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.

Whatever you say, pal.

[Miyager]

I ask the question again mein allies: What does god do all day?

[Frisivisia]

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

Therefore, you support Stalin.

A cheap ad-hominem. You really ought to take a break and cool off.

[With Teeth]

If you want to.

Yay!

My beliefs and debating skills are superior to yours! Atheists win, atheists win!

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[The Steel Magnolia]

I ask the question again mein allies: What does god do all day?

Watches you masturbate.

[Occupied Deutschland]

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.

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

Yeah, sure.

And all atheists support Stalin obviously. I mean, you might not SUPPORT him, but you form the codependent base that allows people like him to exist.

[Frisivisia]

"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.

Whatever you say, pal.

Another religion thread won for the atheist side.

[With Teeth]

I think that's a cop-out. The "nice" religious people form the codependent base that allows the "extremists" to exist in the first place.

Therefore, you support Stalin.

You deserve an award for the biggest non-sequitur ever made.

[Neo Rome Republic]

I personally believe that one should not explicitly believe/not believe in something based on evidence and such. Humans are limited in their knowledge, everyday we learn something new and debunk another, there are things that we simply cannot empirically prove and that are just way out of our reach now.

What other way can we learn things but that based on evidence? If you know of this magical ''third way'', I'd love to hear it.

[Ljvonia]

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.

I'm sorry, I don't quite follow... yes what? What is it that you actually want to know?

[The Steel Magnolia]

Therefore, you support Stalin.

A cheap ad-hominem. You really ought to take a break and cool off.

Your inability to recognize sarcasm - or counterpoints, for that matter - is not on me.

[The Realm of God]

So because this God doesn't follow the rules of the universe (IE existence) you cannot apply those same rules to God?

If so, I get ya.

Not exactly, but close enough.

I don't agree with the cosmological arguments, but I think atheists are making atheism look worse, intellectually, when they respond in such a way.

So do you agree with me that theism can be just as intellectual as atheism?

[Frisivisia]

Yay!

My beliefs and debating skills are superior to yours! Atheists win, atheists win!

WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

*high-five*

[Blasveck]

So because this God doesn't follow the rules of the universe (IE existence) you cannot apply those same rules to God?

If so, I get ya.

Not exactly, but close enough.

I don't agree with the cosmological arguments, but I think atheists are making atheism look worse, intellectually, when they respond in such a way.

Well how would you respond then?

(I'm an agnostic, just to let you know)

[Occupied Deutschland]

I ask the question again mein allies: What does god do all day?

Watch the universe expand and wank off to it.

"Ohhh, It ISSS Goood! Sooo Good!

[The Steel Magnolia]

Yes.

I'm sorry, I don't quite follow... yes what? What is it that you actually want to know?

Exactly what I asked.

[The Steel Magnolia]

Therefore, you support Stalin.

You deserve an award for the biggest non-sequitur ever made.

Are you seriously...

Do you people seriously not get the point I was making?