Official Religion Debate Thread

most atheists aren't willing to change their views since most of them have probably already been religious.

"Christians" (or whatever sect you want to use to fill in that blank) need structure in their lives. That is why I believe that these people cling to religion, religion provides that structure with its rules and standards. Religion also gives most of its followers a sense that someone or something else is in control of their lives and it makes decision making for them easier because they can always fall back on sentiments like "it was Gods will" or "it was never meant to be".

Atheists, Agnostics whatever, on the other hand, I feel are more independent and do not need much structure in their lives and so reject organized religion. They do not like the thought that someone else is in control because of their independence and so often they seem to go against the crowd.

I am oversimplifying and do not mean to lump all of humanity into 2 groups.

I like to use the term "Fanatic" which means "marked by excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion" to describe the people that need structure in their lives. Stay with me you will soon see why. The word "fan" is an abbreviation of "Fanatic" so "Sports Fan" should really be understood as "Sports Fanatic".

Fanatics are not exclusively religious. There are military fanatics, law fanatics, Video game fanatics, some fanatics like Physical exercise such as running or cycling etc. These people may or may not have religious beliefs but they do need some structure in their lives and they find it by focusing on one thing.

There is nothing wrong with being this way in fact, we need fanatics because they are specialists of sorts and can provide lots of information to their specialty. Many so called advisors are fanatics (if not they should be) and there are different types such as financial advisor, educational advisor so on so forth.

When fanatics force their will on those that do not need to live their lives by their rules or standards (or vice versa) conflict arises and since those engaged are unwilling to change, the conflict continues.

Long post I will stop for now.

i never got mad, i was saying you were right lol

que.... do u mean to say that because some ppl prefer stability in their lives they are less independent? Also are u saying that tere are no atheist fanatics becausse a kid at my school threw a chair at my world history teacher just because he had a bible in the classroom, even though he was using it for his lecture.

que.... do u mean to say that because some ppl prefer stability in their lives they are less independent? Also are u saying that tere are no atheist fanatics becausse a kid at my school threw a chair at my world history teacher just because he had a bible in the classroom, even though he was using it for his lecture.

1st: Que said that religious and non religious people structure themselves in different ways (To sum things up)
2nd: Que also said that the word "Fan" and "Fanatic" are the same word.

que.... do u mean to say that because some ppl prefer stability in their lives they are less independent? Also are u saying that tere are no atheist fanatics becausse a kid at my school threw a chair at my world history teacher just because he had a bible in the classroom, even though he was using it for his lecture.

I can tell you quickly skimmed over my post. Please read it more carefully to get a better understanding.

que.... do u mean to say that because some ppl prefer stability in their lives they are less independent?

I think you meant to ask "because some ppl prefer RELIGION (not stability)in their lives they are less independent? I must say yes if there is a belief that there is a higher power steering lives. I also stated that religion was not the only way to attain stability.

Also are u saying that tere are no atheist fanatics

I stated "Fanatics are not exclusively religious." and gave brief examples.

I do not know why the guy in your example threw the chair. Perhaps he was possessed by the devil.

[DarkPacMan77]

I noticed that everything that I'd read and heard about religion being a tool of control and corruption could ALSO not be proven.

Here is a start:

http://www.caesarsmessiah.com

I hadn't even begun to discuss the Roman side of this issue yet. I was saving it. Anyways, everyone should read that. It's a good explanation of how the probability of the Christian faith is 99.999997% false, and that it only has a 0.000003% chance of sustaining itself and proving true.

But as I said earlier, it's not "proven", it's only "effectively proven", because 99.999997% is still not 100%. So yea, I guess I kinda defend religion in that respect, but those numbers are just too powerful to leave out of the picture.

-DarkPacMan77-

The calculation shows that it is over 99.9999% certain that one account was written based upon the other.

What calculations?

The calculation shows that it is over 99.9999% certain that one account was written based upon the other.

What calculations?

common sense

[DarkPacMan77]

That article is about a book, or a part out of it. I recommend you kindly ask que13x for a torrent link to arrive to you in your PM box for a download to the book.

-DarkPacMan77-

sher no prob, gess I misunder tood, ma bad

[DarkPacMan77]

Yea. The Roman Religion facts are really some of the best anti-Christian arguments that Atheists and Agnostics use to determine their beliefs. If you wanted to better understand them, it would be best to read up on this really intriguing stuff. But que13x was able to send me a good torrent link. I have it now, but you can ask que13x also and I'm sure he won't mind. If he does... eh... lol

-DarkPacMan77-

you talking about "the god who wasnt there"?

you talking about "the god who wasnt there"?

No, We are talking about books, you would not be interested.

[DarkPacMan77]

you talking about "the god who wasnt there"?

No, We are talking about books, you would not be interested.

Far from youtube... lol j/k farq

-DarkPacMan77-

haha, i dont know, i might sound retarded, but i just cant stand reading books... I dont know why, but when i can read small articles on internet i just cant read books.

what book was it, i might be interested