Religion for Retards

[deltro300111]

Please note:

.. oh never mind.

I hear many people saying things like "THERE'S PROOF AGAINST GOD" , "THERE'S NO PROOF FOR IT" ... I'm not here to provide such proof... I'm here to explain why you shouldn't need proof... Religion works deeply into faith... faith,.. meaning blind faith...

Pope: Just Believe it.

That's the point of religion... not only to make debates ... but to just believe... that's why you believe not.. subscribe to the theory of.. .you don't need proof, you just know...

-... my 2 pesos ..

[zildjian133]

I don't goto church or believe in christ, but I believe in god, and I ask my religous neighbors to put my near-death brother on the prayer list. Humanity clings on physical evidense and the power of prayer is proven. Days ago the doctor looked me in the face and exorcisismed, "I hate to be so blunt but in a few hours his body will give up and die." 6 days later my life is in a pit of overprocessing nubileness knowing I asked for his death while he was dying. For some reason god has kept him here and relays messages to me that he won't even have brain damage which the doctor told me would be nearly impossible. Who Knows?

[Nonexistent_One]

You are more inclined to say that because you have been brought up with it, thus you are more willing to put your faith into the familiarity of it all. Therefore, you are also inclined to fight for this belief. Change is harder than uniformity, and instilled beliefs are harder to give up. If the Pope told you that angels would come down and catch you if you throw yourself off a cliff, as long as you "just believe it," would you might feel inclined to do so? And it is extremely obvious that I don't believe because I don't "just believe." That point you made in your last paragraph was just redundant.

P.S.-Your excessive use of ellipses does not make you sound any more wise or mystical than you already are. It's much easier to read when you get straight to the point, and the reader admires this. I don't mean this in a hurtful way; just some constructive criticism.

~NEO

[DHS1]

Your right deltro. ^_^

-[DHS1]-

[Nonexistent_One]

I realize that I supposedly "prooved his point," but his point wasn't very sound to begin with, as explained in my previous post. Of course, this leads to a big loop of him saying:
"You need blind faith,"
and me saying:
"I want proof that I need blind faith,"
and him saying:
"You need blind faith to realize that you don't need proof,"
and me saying:
"I want proof that I need blind faith to realize that I don't need proof,"
and so on.
This argument is an argument of ignorance. I do not mean this in a negative way, but I am only using it for it's definition, not the assumed 'negative' meaning that our society has labeled it to have. Ignorance-lacking knowledge or comprehension of the thing specified. Obivously, you have no knowledge or comprehension of 'God,' for you assume that blind faith is required, hence knowledge/comprehension is not needed. Ignorance is on your side, my friend, and ignorance, they say, is bliss. I, however, find no comfort in ignorance, but rather the opposite. I am a seeker of knowledge and wisdom, and I will stop at no ends to attain it.

I don't understand how ignorance is bliss, but that is my nature. I suppose ignorance could be bliss if the subject had never been apparent to you at all, but the topic of religion has stared us in the face for the whole of our lives. Since the concept of 'God' provides every answer, whether illogical, evil, or otherwise, I suppose there can be a certain bliss attained from it. But, once you look past the institutional answers and seek your own personal ones, you begin to understand so much more about the universe and yourself than any mystical answer could ever explain. When things make sense, its a lot easier to believe in them.

Mis dos Pesos.

~NEO

[Omeganitros]

If you need to learn about how ignorance is bliss, just watch the movie "The Gods Must Crazy." It's a great movie with great insight on our modern society.

[IronMonk]

religion is a touchy subject. natureally people who are christians will not want to relinquish their hold onto life in heaven by doubting its existance.

[Bloodsik]

I dont personally have a particular religion. They all seem either too stupid or contradictory for my tastes. But for that, I have been told I have no morals. Mainly by the people who are under age, get drunk every weekend, smoke pot all the time, & have massive amounts of sex. Funny they should tell me that. I rarely drink or smoke weed, and it took 18 years to have sex for the first time. Wow, if I have no morals, their morals are in the negatives. Retards.

[bbcc]

i believe in GOd, and i also believe religion is here, or some religions are here to keep people in order, by telling them they will be rewarded if they follow the rules of their religion, no killing, no stealing, ect..... just my opinion.

[alainbryden]

NEO, I like your style. Good insight and I appreciate your nihilism. There's only one fault I found in your whole statement; don't sign your name ~NEO. ~ is mine. I had it first. Thankyou.

[Kilgamayan]

Neo is mostly correct but he falls short because he tries to bring logic back into the equation even after acknowledging it doesn't belong there.

I am a Methodist, but I realize that different people have different beliefs. I've tried looking at God from a logical standpoint and can't find a thing myself. That's why it's "faith". Believe what you will - I won't have a problem with it. Live and let live. Just don't try to tread on what I believe in.

[Nonexistent_One]

Thank you, alainbryden, but I can't discontinue my use of '~'--I've always used it! And until you provide proof of a copyright, I'll just have to assume that using the tilde is public domain.

Neo is mostly correct but he falls short because he tries to bring logic back into the equation even after acknowledging it doesn't belong there.

But, in order for us to have an equation to begin with, there must be logic involved. I did not bring logic "back in," but merely used it to form a different argument to attain the same end. It's kind of hard to argue without using logic, unless you want me to explain that "I don't need blind faith because I eat purple cheese." On the other side of things, his argument is incredibly hard to understand in the first place, and I am still wondering if I'm getting anywhere. Oh well.

~NEO

[Kilgamayan]

Bad choice of words, then.

The thing about faith is that you simply can't look at it logically, meaning you can't look down at it logically. There's no scientific reasoning behind it. It just "is".

[QreepyBORIS]

Summed up: Deltro got served?

[Nonexistent_One]

The thing about faith is that you simply can't look at it logically, meaning you can't look down at it logically. There's no scientific reasoning behind it. It just "is".

There is also no scientific reasoning in believing that an Invisible Pink Unicorn exists; does that mean that it just "is"?

OK, that was a logical argument for you. Now for the illogical one, which must be the correct one, since logic is supposedly 'invalid' when arguing about faith. Here it goes:

Since cheese is the air speed velocity of green eggs and ham, then I propose that Pi is equivilant to purple corn dogs--therefore, God doesn't exist. In illogically reasoning this, I may also assume that a hump-back whale is in my teapot, flying around with a brightwhitish-black pencil.

Even though all of this is illogical, I have faith in it, so, therefore, it must all be true.

~NEO