I've always been interested in having a debate over religion/existence of a god with people that are also interested in having one, but it's hard to find people who do not get offended when someone expresses and defends beliefs that oppose to their own. What I'm proposing is, let's start a debate on the topic where 3 basic rules are followed: -Do not attack each other but express your views without the need to adapt them to a more tolerant approach so no one gets offended. -Do not use the "I don't expect you to understand" argument. -Do not get offended, and if you do, do not express it. In my personal opinion: 1) There is no empirical evidence to support the belief on the existence of a god. 2) The argument that the universe must have been created by some sort of higher power is not necessarily valid, and even if it was, the chance that the higher power is a specific god with the rules that you read in the bible/quran/old testament or any other "holy" book is minimal, practically zero. 3) The bible does not prove the existence of god, to say that "god exists because the bible says so" is a fallacy of begging the question (petitio principi), it leads to a circular reasoning in which you argue that god exists because the bible says so and the bible is holy because god exists, it's not a logical argument. 4) The fact that many or most people believe in the existence of a god doesn't add anything to the argument for it's existence, most people believe weed is harmful, that doesn't make it true, it's an argumentum ad populum, which is also a fallacy.
I would like to debate you on this but, I agree with everything you said. Not much of a debate, huh? Seriously, I have quite an interest in this subject as it hits pretty close to home for me. I'll be interested to see what type of evidence is presented for any and all opinions that are voiced.
Pretty much the forum rules, no one's going to follow. Debating religion is debating someones entire life existence, of course they get offended.
I know what I experienced in my heart on May 22, 1986 and it isn't up for debate. I've also experienced poltergeists and that isn't up for debate either. Each person travels their own journey, some journeys are similar, but hardly ever exactly the same. I've enjoyed my journey (except for being homeless) even though others might find it tedious and unambitious.
Of course it's up for debate, everything is up for debate, I don't know why you think you've experienced poltergeists or what happened to you on that specific date but the fact that you are convinced that it's true doesn't make it true.
I got a debate for you; why not let people belive what they want to belive without having to debate about it
Because religion is one of the main reasons why there's been war and suffering throughout history and the influence of church on legislation makes it so that people can't get legal and safe abortions, in addition to many other unnecessary, arbitrary restrictions?
so what does needing to questioning someone elses beliefs have to do with any of that. If you are about to imply that religion is bad because of all of these things you listed I think im going to throw up
First of all "if you say this I'm going to throw up" is just attacking me without any reason to make my argument seem less valid, that does not lead to a rational debate, and second, I never said "religion is bad", but the reasons I stated make religion harmful in many ways.
This is a shit debate. Where are the butthurt Christians with their meaningless bible quotations? Where are the self-righteous Jews with their big-worded, legalese and twisted logic? Where are the aggressive Muslims with their stubborn claims of everyone being "infidels"? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6WPvSo8AYdM Come on, guys. Let's stir some shit lol.
People believing what they want to believe often leads to them trying to push those beliefs on other people, because they often think their Truth is the only truth. Past that, I don't really care. If a person can believe their own stuff (both atheists and theists) without worrying about what others do, so long as what they do doesn't harm anyone, then there shouldn't be a problem. I understand the temptation for atheists to try and educate certain types (like young earth creationists) but if a person is minding their own business there's no sense in bothering them.
Because no ideas should ever be given the special privilege of being exempted from scrutiny. If some ideas are debatable and some aren't, who decides which are which? You? Me? Does everyone decide for themselves? How does a legal system work when everyone can believe whatever they like and no one is permitted to question it? How would science exist? That way just leads to post modernist nonsense. Would you prefer a doctor who treats you with whatever he believes will cure you, but never examines the results to see if his belief is correct or not? Every dictator, cult leader, and con man in history has tried to claim that special exemption from scrutiny. The idea that certain beliefs are privileged and should be respected without ever justifying their worth only leads to ignorance.
From my half fast insight..... I would like to question your beliefs. In fact I don't even accept that you are a believer. I'm debating what you call yourself and your experiences a belief. But there is no underlying believer Sent from my XT1032 using Grasscity Forum mobile app
And Charles Manson absolutely believes that God sent him messages through the music of The Beatles, warning him of a coming race war and giving him the names of people he had to kill. If you think your personal experiences aren't up for debate, then you must support his right to his beliefs then? Do you think no one has the right to question what his faith led him to do then? I'd almost guarantee his faith is even stronger than yours, his has been put to the test - he killed for his beliefs. That's the problem with faith and personal beliefs: If you insist that we accept yours without question, then we must logically accept his too.
Exactly, that is a big problem with religion that relates to point 4 of my original post, people tend to think that their beliefs aren't up for debate just because many people believe the same, but if someone said "I believe I am god" they would be put in a mental institution, so why is a belief only acceptable when many people share it? Both are irrational, and therefore both are debatable.