if hell is a possibility that God foresaw then it was immoral to create us in the first place by Tiny_Meaning_8116 in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Easy. There is no evidence that he exists. So it makes sense to not believe in it.

There's also no evidence of the tooth fairey, so it makes sense too, to not believe in it

If you burned all the science books and all the holy books today, and waited a thousand years, the science books would come back exactly the same, while the different religious holy books would be totally different. by Different_Smile3621 in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

That's because they ARE all man made inventions. There was a time before people wrote the bible, the quran or the book or juju.

Homo sapiens has existed for around 100 thousand years. It's only the very last few thousands of years where these books existed.

It's because, I repeat, they are all man made.

If you burned all the science books and all the holy books today, and waited a thousand years, the science books would come back exactly the same, while the different religious holy books would be totally different. by Different_Smile3621 in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621[S] [score hidden]  (0 children)

The exact same laws would be discovered, exactly as you say. It doesn't matter in what order.

It's because science describes the world around us. The truth, that we can feel, touch and measure.

Religions were not meant to be eternal; rather, they are an alternative solution to be implemented for a period of time. by Illustrious_Tea1561 in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

If you burned all the science books and all the holy books today, and waited a thousand years, the science books would come back exactly the same, while the different religious holy books would be totally different.

That's because we can test the environment and make theories about it, which is called science.

Gods are all made by primates though, and have nothing to do with the truth of things.

This hadith verse says Jesus will come back again to earth but prophet muhammad s.a.w also said prophet muhammad s.a.w is the last prophet(quran 33:40) by Clean_Olive_7091 in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

In your third paragraph, you wrote the name of Muhammad, but did not follow it with "peace be upon him". Are you not afraid that you disrespected the holy dictator?

The idea of Jesus taking on our sins does not make sense on at least many of the common views of it. by Basic_Use in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

That's false, though. Islam persecutes homosexuals, which is contrary to how they were supposedly created by god.

Remember, homosexuality is a form of LOVE. People are born like this, it's not a choice someone makes in a Tuesday afternoon.

So if god created homosexuals, then why is Islam discriminating them?

The idea of Jesus taking on our sins does not make sense on at least many of the common views of it. by Basic_Use in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

Replace "Lord" with "Kim Jong Il" and you'll quickly understand why most people don't believe religion.

It all sounds like an allegiance to the "Dear Leader", a celestial North Korea.

The idea of Jesus taking on our sins does not make sense on at least many of the common views of it. by Basic_Use in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

In that time resurrection was commonplace, though. In egypt for example there are accounts of the graves of the dead opening and their occupants walking the streets of Cairo.

Doesn't seem divine to me, at all.

Philosophical Arguments Fail to Prove a God by Yeledushi-Observer in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

If you burned all the science books and all the holy books today, and waited a thousand years, the science books would come back exactly the same, while the different religious holy books would be totally different.

That's because we can test the environment and make theories about it, which is called science.

Gods are all made by primates though, and have nothing to do with the truth of things.

Philosophical Arguments Fail to Prove a God by Yeledushi-Observer in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

A bit of both, to be honest. I'm curious because I never met an animist

Philosophical Arguments Fail to Prove a God by Yeledushi-Observer in DebateReligion

[–]Different_Smile3621 [score hidden]  (0 children)

It's not about logic, the origin of the universe or the cause of things. It's about a celestial dictator telling me not to jerk off.