Why is religion such a touchy subject?

[KdogPrime]

 

I didn't miss your point. I was just pointing out that irrational thinkers can invent things too.

 

You're argument is also one based on opinion' date=' rather than fact. Sire.

[/quote']

 

Oh I see what you did there. You said what I just said to you in an attempt to make my previous assertion look foolish.

 

Why don't you prove that statement by citing an example of an irrational, insane person who invented something that enhanced mankind's quality of life an affected history the way my examples did? Better yet, find an ATHEIST who fits that description.

Any Christian who's ever invented anything... ever.

That's a pretty feeble attempt to insult me.

 

 

I hardly see how the second request even relates to this thread at all.

 

And I wasn't trying to "make your previous assertion look foolish." You did a pretty good job of that yourself if you consider believing in a deity to be rational thinking.

 

Also' date=' if it's you, stop reporting EVERY single post I make.

[/quote']

 

The reason I'm reporting your posts is for your signature, which is possibly breaking Rule 19. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

 

You keep stalling because you can't prove your own point. If irrational God-believers can make the world a better place and enhance our understanding of the world, surely there has to be at least one irrational atheist who's done the same? Or maybe you are wrong, and the religious people can be just as rational and forward thinking.

 

My signature isn't breaking any rules that I know of. And, even if it is/was, why don't you send a message to a moderator instead of reporting my posts? >_>

 

You keep repeating your dumb s***. I never said that a Christian person is unable to make a difference or to enhance the understanding of our world. I'm just saying that it's irrational to believe in god, thus making every Christian is to some degree irrational.

 

I did send a message to a moderator.

 

I think it's irrational NOT to believe in God.

 

Well, I think this has gone on long enough. Why don't we just both rationalize our way to a locked thread?

[HORUS]

What about believing in God is rational?

[Guest JoshIcy]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement, rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[HORUS]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

[Guest JoshIcy]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Thus, it becomes a question of faith and believing. Which rounds back to your original subject. You end up questioning someones beliefs, which in most scenarios is their religion. Which is why it is a touchy subject...

 

Uugh... Too early for me to be doing this stuff.

[Womi]

 

Yes.

 

Atheist perspectives are usually developed through some sort of logical thought process.

 

Theist perspectives are usually established through some sort of blind acceptance and/or faith.

 

Neither of those two things are logical in their natures' date=' and thus, by default, are complete bullshit.

[/quote']

 

Ok, so, apparently all people who believe in religion are illogical. They can't possibly be reasonable, rational human beings.

 

So I guess the man who invented the mechanical printing press, Johannes Gutenberg, was a raving lunatic. So was the man who built the first mechanical clock, Henry de Vick. So was the father of genetics, Gregor Mendel. Mozart was a nutcase beyond compare. Even Isaac Newton was a violent psychotic! Oh the list goes on and on and on! So many of these great men of science, industry and music were mad as hatters because they believed in God!

 

In case I laid it on too thick, let me spell it out. Every one of those men, plus scores more like them, were believers in God, and most were devotely religious Christians. We owe many of our modern conveniences to groundwork laid by these people. Just the printing press itself is considered by many historians to be the single most influencial invention to date. The first book printed on a mechanical printing press? The Bible.

 

So if all these men were irrational for their belief in God, how could they possibly have made these very important contributions to the world?

 

Unless maybe you are wrong.

 

Who's spouting bullshit, I wonder?

 

Lunatics can invent things. =\

 

Let meh put it this way for yah! If religion had NEVER ever ever ever been thought of before, and today I made a thread saying, "I believe that a guy sits in the sky and makes everything out of nothing", you people would think I'm as crazy as that one kid who came on here and said that he had an insect queen living under his bed, commanding him to do things.

 

Willieh is right.

 

And I don't think that religion is a taboo subject.

The problem is, that every conversation about it ends in a hot argumentation. Afterwards, at least one member *coughwilliehcough* is banned, although he/she just raised his/her point. Talking about religion is like throwing Bowser and Mario into a small room. One dies, one survives. But eats mushrooms.

[HORUS]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Thus, it becomes a question of faith and believing. Which rounds back to your original subject. You end up questioning someones beliefs, which in most scenarios is their religion. Which is why it is a touchy subject...

 

Uugh... Too early for me to be doing this stuff.

 

wat

[~LunaticTouhou~]

Awnser: Some people just belive strongly and don't like it when somebody dosen't belive in the religion. I makes them upset. If you don't talk about it, everything would be OK.

[Willieh]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

[OMGAKITTY]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Proofs?

[Willieh]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Proofs?

 

PROVE THAT THE CENTER OF THE EARTH IS HOT!

[OMGAKITTY]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Proofs?

 

PROVE THAT THE CENTER OF THE EARTH IS HOT!

 

THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO

[Willieh]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Proofs?

 

PROVE THAT THE CENTER OF THE EARTH IS HOT!

 

THE BIBLE TELLS ME SO

 

Touché. Touché indeed.

[Guest JoshIcy]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Common Sense should also prove that the existence of an all powerful deity is plausible; by design. You may know, but do you understand that he can be?

 

EDIT: Since when did heaven/hell get into this?

[Huntar!]

Must a new thread about religion be made by Horus every single day? Seriously, is debating the same thing day after day fufilling? You can try to force opinions on people on the internet by giving facts and quite opinionated points but ultimately people will believe what they want to believe.

 

I'm the kind of guy who goes to church to please his grandparents when they're around. I am skeptic and sometimes I'm a religious christian and other times I barely believe in it. But when it comes down to it, I believe some 'great designer' made everything, because having everything be one giant coincidence is far too hard to believe.

 

But onto topic, that invisible pink unicorn totally exists.

[Willieh]

What about believing in God is rational?

 

Considering that logic defeats itself. This becomes a statement' date=' rather than a question.

But that logic, is emotional and based purely on choice.

 

So go figure.

[/quote']

 

wat

 

"Believing in God is rational."

You didn't ask a question. You made a statement.

 

But that statement, is logical. And it being logical, means that it defeats itself. Making it illogical. Believing in god is logical, but it isn't. As there is no proof to say he does or doesn't exist.

 

Icy, I promise you that when you die you won't go to heaven/hell. I KNOW that God isn't real. And regardless of whether or not you want to believe in a God, you can't say that believing he is real is logical or rational. Saying that you are "open to belief in God" is basically just being a closet atheist. Common sense should be proof enough that there is not an all powerful Deity.

 

Common Sense should also prove that the existence of an all powerful deity is plausible; by design. You may know, but do you understand that he can be?

 

EDIT: Since when did heaven/hell get into this?

 

On what grounds? How, in any imaginable way, is an all powerful deity existing plausible?

 

You can't say that something is plausible just because it's impossible to disprove it. Sure, gravity is only plausible, but there's at least some evidence of gravity existing

 

Things that are imaginary, such as "imaginary pink unicorns", don't exist. To suggest otherwise is stupid. And you know it.

[Guest JoshIcy]

On what grounds? How' date=' in any imaginable way, is an all powerful deity existing plausible?

 

You can't say that something is plausible just because it's impossible to disprove it. Sure, gravity is only plausible, but there's at least [i']some[/i] evidence of gravity existing

 

Things that are imaginary, such as "imaginary pink unicorns", don't exist. To suggest otherwise is stupid. And you know it.

 

Dude. You're grasping at straws.

Gravity is the name given to the "force" that keeps objects in orbit and to the ground. Nothing more. It exists, you just blew it out of proportion.

 

You also blew the IPU thing way out of proportion as well. I explicitly stated that it exists as a tool, or catalyst; akin to how people may use glasses to view the world. The IPU is used as a friendly medium so people may understand. Whether or not it exists or not, is irrelevant, but how it is used, is. And any closed minded moron can use it properly.

 

To deny such a thing: like gods and deities; don't exist is tomfoolery. But to expect it to exist, is subject to the person. And any good debater or understanding person, understands that and will not act like theirs is better. As it is not. So you keep an open mind, regardless.

 

And no, I will not stand back and just teach you the BASIC FUNDAMENTALS of understanding something like this; considering that you think that opening a challenge to me, you're on the same level. I promise you this Kevin, you are far beneath me. You're understanding is in the same place as your ego; 6ft under.

[「tea.leaf」]

 

Yes.

 

Atheist perspectives are usually developed through some sort of logical thought process.

 

Theist perspectives are usually established through some sort of blind acceptance and/or faith.

 

Neither of those two things are logical in their natures' date=' and thus, by default, are complete bullshit.

[/quote']

 

Ok, so, apparently all people who believe in religion are illogical. They can't possibly be reasonable, rational human beings.

 

So I guess the man who invented the mechanical printing press, Johannes Gutenberg, was a raving lunatic. So was the man who built the first mechanical clock, Henry de Vick. So was the father of genetics, Gregor Mendel. Mozart was a nutcase beyond compare. Even Isaac Newton was a violent psychotic! Oh the list goes on and on and on! So many of these great men of science, industry and music were mad as hatters because they believed in God!

 

In case I laid it on too thick, let me spell it out. Every one of those men, plus scores more like them, were believers in God, and most were devotely religious Christians. We owe many of our modern conveniences to groundwork laid by these people. Just the printing press itself is considered by many historians to be the single most influencial invention to date. The first book printed on a mechanical printing press? The Bible.

 

So if all these men were irrational for their belief in God, how could they possibly have made these very important contributions to the world?

 

Unless maybe you are wrong.

 

Who's spouting bullshit, I wonder?

 

I wonder who's the fellow that can't read.

 

Reread my last sentence.

 

Nowhere in that sentence, or anywhere at all, for that matter, did I ever say religious people are deluded or unreasonable.

 

I only established, in a logical fashion, that faith is illogical and irrational.

 

Way to make yourself look like an overzealous retard.

 

EDIT: The "yes" was in response to defending religion and faith, which basically follows this notion.

[DesCrow]

Because people are scared of dying.

 

It is as simple as that.

[「tea.leaf」]

Because people are scared of dying.

 

It is as simple as that.

 

Reminds me of Brave New World.

 

Children need to be taught death is a natural part of life.

[OMGAKITTY]

Because people are scared of dying.

 

It is as simple as that.

 

Reminds me of Brave New World.

 

Children need to be taught death is a natural part of lifewatch moar Lion King.

[Kitty]

Because people are scared of dying.

 

It is as simple as that.

 

 

Yes i agree with this, even i fear death but i know i can't elude it....

I think about it a literally start crying -.-

[Willieh]

On what grounds? How' date=' in any imaginable way, is an all powerful deity existing plausible?

 

You can't say that something is plausible just because it's impossible to disprove it. Sure, gravity is only plausible, but there's at least [i']some[/i] evidence of gravity existing

 

Things that are imaginary, such as "imaginary pink unicorns", don't exist. To suggest otherwise is stupid. And you know it.

 

Dude. You're grasping at straws.

Gravity is the name given to the "force" that keeps objects in orbit and to the ground. Nothing more. It exists, you just blew it out of proportion.

 

You also blew the IPU thing way out of proportion as well. I explicitly stated that it exists as a tool, or catalyst; akin to how people may use glasses to view the world. The IPU is used as a friendly medium so people may understand. Whether or not it exists or not, is irrelevant, but how it is used, is. And any closed minded moron can use it properly.

 

To deny such a thing: like gods and deities; don't exist is tomfoolery. But to expect it to exist, is subject to the person. And any good debater or understanding person, understands that and will not act like theirs is better. As it is not. So you keep an open mind, regardless.

 

And no, I will not stand back and just teach you the BASIC FUNDAMENTALS of understanding something like this; considering that you think that opening a challenge to me, you're on the same level. I promise you this Kevin, you are far beneath me. You're understanding is in the same place as your ego; 6ft under.

 

Icy, stop acting like you're a genius. Any ego-ridden hypocritical asshat with a keyboard can pretend to be a philosopher. You honestly think that you're above anyone? Please. I find it hard to take someone who believes that their soul is tied to that of a dog seriously. Then, of course, I guess that would explain your inability to understand what's real and what isn't.

 

Any good debater can discern reality from imaginationland. Imaginary Pink Unicorns are just like God. Imaginary. Nobody's acting better, I'm just pointing out that believing in something that doesn't exist doesn't exactly boast intelligence.

 

Try to be a genius all you want. That doesn't make you anymore right.

[Sunshine Jesse]

Any GOOD debater doesn't use the cop-out argument of comparing god(s) to the invisible pink unicorn

[Guest JoshIcy]

On what grounds? How' date=' in any imaginable way, is an all powerful deity existing plausible?

 

You can't say that something is plausible just because it's impossible to disprove it. Sure, gravity is only plausible, but there's at least [i']some[/i] evidence of gravity existing

 

Things that are imaginary, such as "imaginary pink unicorns", don't exist. To suggest otherwise is stupid. And you know it.

 

Dude. You're grasping at straws.

Gravity is the name given to the "force" that keeps objects in orbit and to the ground. Nothing more. It exists, you just blew it out of proportion.

 

You also blew the IPU thing way out of proportion as well. I explicitly stated that it exists as a tool, or catalyst; akin to how people may use glasses to view the world. The IPU is used as a friendly medium so people may understand. Whether or not it exists or not, is irrelevant, but how it is used, is. And any closed minded moron can use it properly.

 

To deny such a thing: like gods and deities; don't exist is tomfoolery. But to expect it to exist, is subject to the person. And any good debater or understanding person, understands that and will not act like theirs is better. As it is not. So you keep an open mind, regardless.

 

And no, I will not stand back and just teach you the BASIC FUNDAMENTALS of understanding something like this; considering that you think that opening a challenge to me, you're on the same level. I promise you this Kevin, you are far beneath me. You're understanding is in the same place as your ego; 6ft under.

 

Icy, stop acting like you're a genius. Any ego-ridden hypocritical asshat with a keyboard can pretend to be a philosopher. You honestly think that you're above anyone? Please. I find it hard to take someone who believes that their soul is tied to that of a dog seriously. Then, of course, I guess that would explain your inability to understand what's real and what isn't.

 

Any good debater can discern reality from imaginationland. Imaginary Pink Unicorns are just like God. Imaginary. Nobody's acting better, I'm just pointing out that believing in something that doesn't exist doesn't exactly boast intelligence.

 

Try to be a genius all you want. That doesn't make you anymore right.

 

And whos to say that we aren't all living in a matrix right now?

You accept the possibility, ignore the expectation.

 

One can say the same of you;

Try to be a correct all you want. That doesn't make you anymore right.

 

And I never said I was correct, but I did state that you DO NOT ignore the possibilities; immediately observational or not. The moment one thing comes in to disprove it, is the moment it goes to hell. And if it never does, doesn't make it any less possible.

 

God... You're baiting me. But whatever... This thread is done, and so are you.

 

@Nightmare Zarkus: It's a bloody fawking TOOL. I use it instead of God to be respectful, or were you ignoring that the whole time?