Hmm, I find omnipotence less hard to swallow than some kind of super-powered alien. It's too... anthropomorphic.
Anthropomorphic super-powered alien makes more sense. You run into all sorts of logical problems and continuity problems otherwise.
Without omnipotence, God (as many see him) is fallible and therefore more realistically an alien race or non-existent.
The closest thing to God there is any evidence or solid reasoning to believe in is a fallible one. Sorry Siquo, but you should drop your standards of God a notch if you want to argue with people who want more tangible reasoning. In addition, I'd like to point out that the "fallible" God's existence is inevitable on that old argument that everything exists somewhere (the argument that implodes when you try it on omnipotence) if that would entice you. It's the closest solid ground you'll get on that subject.
Reasoning is empty rhetorics
That's theology, actually.
That's reasoning in general actually. Anything but the most basic of truths are stacked upon other conclusions which are all dependent on each other, and they do change which affects all the others connected to it. This is a huge problem in fields like mathematics.
You believe in whatever you want, you do not care what is true or false, real or unreal, right or wrong, you don't have or strive to have a coherent moral philosophy or world view, and you seem to be opposed to rational arguments on principle.
I think he's of the "there is no such thing as rational arguments" philosophy. Like I just said about with reasoning is always inherently flawed.
achieve the intellectual freedom of... what exactly is it anyway that you call your way of thinking?
I didn't catch yours.
If you're arguing about what the Qu'ran does and doesn't say, you already arguing about what people should believe! Whether the Qu'ran does or doesn't say it, some people believe that performing circumcision is the right thing to do. Again, how are you going to convince them otherwise without questioning their belief?
Again, how are you going to stop people from killing kids as witches if beliefs are not to be questioned and evidence is overrated?
Indeed. And I'll stop trying now, and recommend everyone else the same, because this is really quite pointless.
I think I just missed some argumentation over how religion makes people believe bad things are right? Just want to point out, the people you're talking about believed bad smells were pathogens. That excess puss (the symptom) was the cause of a disease. Doesn't necessarily have to do with religion. People want to know causation, but their chain for linking things isn't even a foot long. It's a psychology thing you see in any organism, causation by any association, even if false. So yes, there are a lot of incorrect beliefs about things coming from back when a meteor and a spaceship was the same as a flying flaming chariot.
no religion would have any member left.
You say that as if it would be a bad thing.... Then how about a reasoned debate? I'm trying, at least....
...With a lot of hostility.
...and on the same train of thought as before, I think that same association and causation fallacy happens a lot when discerning "good" and "bad" out of religions. Same with that other fallacy that one bad apple is enough to conclude that the whole barrel is bad or vice versa.
Author
Topic: Atheists (Read 393248 times)