Pray for the success of atheism

Originally posted by sonship

Atheism is growing faster than theism .......................................

Some important choices in life should not be governed only on what is the fasting growing thing.

Internet hype is always informing people of what is going "viral". A huge percentage of the stuff growing so fast that it is "going viral" is not of much importance.

Don't base your decisions of eternal destiny on what fad is growing the fastest.

Not likely to happen considering the depth of the scam but what would happen if atheism won out completely and there were no corporate religions going on?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not likely to happen considering the depth of the scam but what would happen if atheism won out completely and there were no corporate religions going on?

Every man would do what is right in their own eyes, and even with religion you can see
how nasty we can be when we think we can get away with it.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not likely to happen considering the depth of the scam but what would happen if atheism won out completely and there were no corporate religions going on?

Time is on the atheists side. Science will always win at the end.

Originally posted by FabianFnas
Time is on the atheists side. Science will always win at the end.

Science doesn't have an agenda, men do. Time isn't on anyone's side, it simply is, and
we can see throughout time that men will use whatever they can to do the things they
want to. The things they want to do are not always what is best for anyone, but their own
lusts at the moment, so other people, the environment, or anything else can suffer. The
heart of man is where the issues really are, everything else are just excuses to do what
they want when they want, or hate who they dislike.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Every man would do what is right in their own eyes, and even with religion you can see
how nasty we can be when we think we can get away with it.

How nasty can you be ~ considering you keep explaining that you already know you can get away with it? Can you in fact be nastier than non-believers without it endangering your "salvation"? You believe that all your nastiness, past, present, future, has all been "forgiven", right?

Originally posted by FMF
How nasty can you be ~ considering you keep explaining that you already [b]know you can get away with it? Can you in fact be nastier than non-believers without it endangering your "salvation"? You believe that all your nastiness, past, present, future, has all been "forgiven", right?[/b]

From your point of view people who aren't caught get away with stuff all the time by default, so what's the problem?

Originally posted by dj2becker
From your point of view people who aren't caught get away with stuff all the time by default, so what's the problem?

The issue for me is what KellyJay is claiming about himself being "forgiven" for what he refers to as "sins". I haven't introduced anything about people getting "caught" or being "forgiven" for being nasty.

Originally posted by FMF
The issue for me is what KellyJay is claiming about himself being "forgiven" for what he refers to as "sins". I haven't introduced anything about people getting "caught" or being "forgiven" for being nasty.

Do you think his claims are unbiblical or do you just disagree with them regardless? Because if they aren't unbiblical your disagreement really is with the Bible.

Originally posted by dj2becker
Do you think his claims are unbiblical or do you just disagree with them regardless? Because if they aren't unbiblical your disagreement really is with the Bible.

If KellyJay is unable to explain the morality of the notions and ideas that he propagates or does so ineptly or unconvincingly, then that becomes a topic of discussion. I'll leave the bandying about of the terms "biblical" and "unbiblical" to Christians.

Originally posted by FMF
If KellyJay is unable to explain the morality of the notions and ideas that he propagates or does so ineptly or unconvincingly, then that becomes a topic of discussion. I'll leave the bandying about of the terms "biblical" and "unbiblical" to Christians.

People disagree all the time on morality, so unless your view of what is moral and what is not is the only correct view, the discussion is pointless, because even if you disagree your view of morality is no more or less correct than someone else's.

Originally posted by sonship

Atheism is growing faster than theism .......................................

Some important choices in life should not be governed only on what is the fasting growing thing.

Internet hype is always informing people of what is going "viral". A huge percentage of the stuff growing so fast that it is "going viral" is not of much importance.

Don't base your decisions of eternal destiny on what fad is growing the fastest.

Typo:
I meant to write.

Some important choices in life should not be [decided] only on what is the fastest [edited] growing thing.

Originally posted by dj2becker
People disagree all the time on morality, so unless your view of what is moral and what is not is the only correct view, the discussion is pointless, because even if you disagree your view of morality is no more or less correct than someone else's.

The issue for me is that KellyJay's notion is incoherent. He says over and over again that nobody "gets away with sins" and yet his entire ideology explicitly has it that his "sins" cannot affect his "salvation" and that he will not be "punished". There is a disconnect. You are entitled to dismiss discussion of it as "pointless", and you resort to it quite often, but as debating points go, I am not persuaded. My question to KellyJay stands.

Originally posted by FMF
The issue for me is that KellyJay's notion is incoherent. He says over and over again that nobody "gets away with sins" and yet his entire ideology explicitly has it that his "sins" cannot affect his "salvation" and that he will not be "punished". There is a disconnect. You are entitled to dismiss discussion of it as "pointless", and you resort to it quite often, but as debating points go, I am not persuaded. My question to KellyJay stands.

According to your own subjective opinion of what is coherent or according to a universal standard of coherence?

Originally posted by dj2becker
According to your own subjective opinion of what is coherent or according to a universal standard of coherence?

I speak on my own behalf in these discussions and have never claimed otherwise. If you want to start a thread on something called "a universal standard of coherence", feel free to do so.

Originally posted by FMF
I speak on my own behalf in these discussions and have never claimed otherwise. If you want to start a thread on something called "a universal standard of coherence", feel free to do so.

There obviously has to be a universal standard, else everyones view is equally valid. You obviously believe that your view is more correct than Kelly's but that would require a universal standard. But you have a problem proving that standard because because you have no God figure to back up your proposed standard. So there's your problem.