I chose one side, but I think really both are quite flawed. The difference is, they're trying to explain it with magical thinking, and atheists are trying to explain it with logic. This may have added to me being biased in what atheists are like. =/ Indeed, not all atheists are gangsters who kill people for talking about their mothers. | |
True. Hm. I've been doubting Christianity for some time now. And I guess my way of thinking now would still keep my morals in check, I just wouldn't believe in God. Hm. I don't know. I'll look into it more.
| |
Absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense. I want to point out he hypocrisy in your argument. And I'm going to make it pointedly clear that I'm not trying to prove God's existence here. There is a absence of evidence for god, under your logic, there would still be no reason to doubt him. When you're trying to convert followers in a missionary like setting you should use logic that works. | |
...and I don't use the absense of evidence for god as an argument against his existence. I never have and I never will. I use arguments such as nescesary nonexistence, the omnipotence paradox, and Ockham's Razor as arguments against the existence of god.
| |
Occam's razor.
Do I win? | |
Atheism morals are more concrete than religious morals. Religion tells you to do something because God said so and if you don't you are going to burn in hell.
Atheistic morals are more humanistic. You don't act nice because you are trying to get somewhere or avoid going somewhere. You are moral because you want the human race to prosper. Or rather you focus on your current existence and you want to make the best of it and not make it a hell for others. | |
World, there's a difference between saying that the absence of evidence for God proves there is no God, and saying that the absence of evidence for God means that we should not accept the proposition that there is a God.
| |
Atheists are dirty.
| |
Asielen wrote:
Atheism morals are more concrete than religious morals. Religion tells you to do something because God said so and if you don't you are going to burn in hell. I understand your point, but I'd like to say something about this. In Christianity, the Ten Commandments are more of... a guide. God doesn't force anything. To get to heaven, you must only believe and choose to follow God. Those moreso please God. | |
Foomer wrote:
See, all crap like this does is spark religious arguments. Your brain must be broken if you're thinking that starting a guild like this could possibly be a good thing. It keeps the arguments from elsewhere. That seems like something good in itself. Rethink things more. =] | |
Yeah, I'd rather have this guild ignored, than have 299 blogs talking about one subject. Pretty cool idea, I'll have to stop by and look on occasion.
-DP | |
I was actually considering that, too - if religious arguments are confined to one blog, people like Foomer will be able to block it, when we have the ability. Problem solved.
| |
Absense of evidence isn't evidence of absense. Simple because we aren't currently away of where the energy from the big bang arose does not mean there isn't a cause. On the other hand, the idea of a magical man in the sky is eternally fucked for just being stupid.