cant stand religion bashers

If I could eradicate one thing from this planet, it would be irreligion. It is the root of all evil.

Do you not find this offensive? It has become acceptable to mock religious people, but if you offend atheists they get all annoyed.

Faith is not a good thing. As long as individual keeps it on themselves its neutral thing at best. When they start to try to convert others, raise their innocent children to faith and maybe even use it as reason or excuse to violence it turns into evil.

Faith is like voluntary blindness. Its not smart to believe in something there is no evidence of existing. I could believe in god immediately if there was reason to.
But god is logical paradox and we are yet to find the reason.

Faith is not a good thing. As long as individual keeps it on themselves its neutral thing at best. When they start to try to convert others, raise their innocent children to faith and maybe even use it as reason or excuse to violence it turns into evil.

Faith is like voluntary blindness. Its not smart to believe in something there is no evidence of existing. I could believe in god immediately if there was reason to.
But god is logical paradox and we are yet to find the reason.

Nonsense. The question is whether it is justifiable to do hold a belief. But all questions of whether an entirely speculative belief is justifiable arguably rest on utility, and this isn't dependent on your own perception of what it is -- it's not up to you whether it rests on utility. Utility, in this case, is determined subjectively: e.g., it brings X a lot of pleasure or comfort to believe in God. It doesn't matter if God doesn't exist; if X believing He does brings X a lot of utility (pleasure, comfort, happiness, etc.) then that's a reason for X to hold that belief, and it would arguably be irrational to withhold because some internet atheists said not to with little to no substantiation of why they shouldn't feel all the things listed above.

Also, that's not what faith is typically defined by both academics and themselves so you're just beating a strawmen for the rest of it.

Your problem is that you base everything off science. You're used to the old proof system: nothing exists unless you prove its existence. Unfortunately, science isn't always right: it constantly changes directions. Now, I'm not saying I think science is stupid; check my profile: I love science. It's just that it has been very misused, and needs to be put in its proper place.

So for example, in the early 20th century, all the leading scientists were convinced that the Universe had been around forever. They would have laughed at the idea of a "Big Bang". Indeed, even when the evidence started coming in, some atheist scientists said that they disliked the idea of the Big Bang - it seemed too much like something from Genesis. And yet now people try to say that the Big Bang disproves the existence of God!

I think the illustration of a kettle is very fitting here...
Supposing I turned on a kettle full of water, and after a bit, the water began to boil. Why did it boil? Well, you could quite rightly suggest that it was because of energy, etc. If I pressed you further, you might start to talk about the electricity, and how it came from the mains electricity, etc. But you would be missing out on another vital point: the water boiled because I wanted a cup of tea.
You see, science is one side to the explanation, but there is also another, completely true side. If I hadn't wanted a cup of tea, that water wouldn't have boiled because I wouldn't have turned the kettle on in the first place.

So when you say that God is illogical, I think it's because you're actually taking him right out of the equation

Yeah, I am gonna go and cry in a corner right now. Maybe even blow up some people/skyscrapers out of frustration.

You could send people to gulags or deliberately starve millions to death or rape some nuns with bayonets. That's more like what atheists do/have done in history.

Yeah, a 100 million dead is some irrevelance Some of them would have even been relatives of people you personally know.

There is no point continuing to save you. You clearly have brain damage and a lost soul.

Good.

Honestly I'm bemused at how many people think that 3 billion people actually believe that there's an invisible ' man' in the sky and that when they die they will live again and meet all their loved ones whereas a lot of other people won't and even worse will go to 'another place' where they will suffer for all eternity!


Using Occam's razor,which is the more likely, that so many believe in something so utterly fanciful in spite of there being not a shred of evidence to support it....

Or that for reasons that we have speculated on -and/ or other reasons - a lot of people feel the need or benefit in making such a claim?


Also ,the next time you see on the TV news a religious person dealing with sudden tragic loss take a good hard look.

The grief you see is nearly always the grief of someone who knows they won't be seeing their loved one ever again.


Religious people seem to take unforeseen death even harder than non religious people it seems to me.

Could it be that they are dealing with both the grief of the loss of their loved one and the acute knowledge that their 'belief' did not help them?


I hope no one takes this the wrong way. These people have my utmost sympathy.

Believing in a religion and living your life by the ideology from that religion limits your experiences in life. Life is all about experiences, and regardless of what you may believe there is no evidence to suggest there is an afterlife, therefore you are limiting everything you can do because of your belief. Also to believe in a religion is completely illogical, the only logical reason to believe is because you don't want to be punished for your decisions, and what is to say the religion you believe in is the right one?

If you are religious the place where you were born will most likely determine the religion you believe in, it has nothing to do with one religion being more possible than another. There are many contradictions and inconsistencies within religion yet people blindly follow. Also when people say things like 'It's part of Gods plan' is an incredibly damaging idea, passing the blame of what has been done and what we could change to an imaginary God is lazy and disgraceful. What happens in the world is down to us and us alone.

Saying life is all about experiences is SUBJECTIVE in all circumstances; that's a fact.

You saying people following religion limits their experience is you being CLOSE MINDED.

In fact, why are YOU judging them on how they live their life? You're actually doing the opposite of what you're speaking about; that's called HYPOCRISY.

Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and others have FREE WILL to live how they want to. Stop trying to impose your values on others. You lil b****.

Life IS all about experiences, some are hedonists, some are interested in studying, some are murderers, some are unsure about what they want, but at the end of the day when you're laying on your deathbed and you look back at all of these activities, it is all experience.

I can see why you're saying I'm close minded, however it's more of the opposite. It is a fact, Theists have no evidence to suggest what they believe in is the truth, yet they blindly follow their belief and often push it onto others. While it is more rational to be an Athiest, similar to thiests there is still no definitive evidence to suggest that there isn't a God. However the difference is that I'm coming from a point of skepticism and rationality, I'm saying you shouldn't live your life by a religious doctrine until you can prove it's true, and until that point Islam, Christianity, Judaism and ****ing Jediism could be the true religion, after all we can't disprove it, that isn't being close minded, it's trying to possibly save a Christian that maybe should be believing in Islam if Islam turns out to be true. Theists will live their life by a moral code of their religion based on blind faith, you don't need a moral code to tell you how to be moral, morality isn't even an objective concept so living by a doctrine that tries to define it is being CLOSE MINDED.

Without getting in a philosophical discussion and for the sake of the argument let's say free will definitely exists. Yes Theists have free will, we all do, if we want to commit murder, or have sex we can, but a Theist having the ability to choose out of two options is biased. At least a small amount of hardcore Theists would rather be murdered than kill their murderer based purely on the religious indoctrination that murder is wrong thinking they have an afterlife when actually they're more likely to have missed out on the last 60 years they will ever be conscious. Their own biased free will has ironically prevented their future free will. A lot of believers would say no to masturbation or sex, sexual desire is 100% natural, for religion to punish or look down upon sexual experience before marriage is utterly disgraceful,

I'm not saying it's a bad thing, if you don't have any urges nor do you want to that's fine, but for a religious institution to indoctrinate you on how to think and feel about how your body naturally functions, that is anything but fine.

not only is it trying to force humans against their natural urges it would start to damage them psychologically, forcing a form of schizophrenic thought with their bodies demanding a sexual release and their minds telling them that they shouldn't be feeling that way. So yes, they have free will to make decisions, but their decisions are biased from a young age, and very damaging.

I don't see how I'm being a hypocrite, and I'm judging them because someone made a post about how they 'cant stand religion bashers', so I was explaining why I abhor religion 'You lil bitch'.

you cannot judge someone for believing in something you do not.

You could send people to gulags or deliberately starve millions to death or rape some nuns with bayonets. That's more like what atheists do/have done in history.

You are Hungarian right? Strange that your people lived under the brutal, atheistic system of communism yet you don't seem to be too against it. At least most young Hungarians have some sense which is why Jobbik are the most popular party among the youth of Hungary.

If we for discussion for a second assume that god is real (I DONT believe that!) and it created the universe, what does that solve? If we put aside that you can eat chips in heaven and watch me suffer eternal torment, what does that help? When trying to find out origins of the universe, if we would find out god created it we would still need to know where god came from to answer the very question. Explaining birth of universe with god when there most likely is no god is like paying MasterCard bill with Visa. We cant go ahead of what we know, there could or could not be god, but if there is not we would be highly mislead if we just assumed there is.