I'm sorry, if one person came to me and told me that their cancer was cured by drinking arsenic, I wouldn't believe them. I don't buy the excuse that the vast majority of people are just not using arsenic right. Religion has an overwhelmingly negative impact on our society. Maybe your particular breed of Christianity isn't negative, but you still provide credence by using the same name and revering the same holy book.

The notion that the bible teaches love and acceptance is complete nonsense. This is a book that explicitly condones slavery, claims that god ordered genocide and human sacrifice and rape. This is a book that claims that god will send people for hell simply for not being willing to believe an absurd and unbelievable claim without any evidence whatsoever. Slaveholders in the US used the bible to justify slavery. People in Africa kill their children because they think they're witches. The fundamentalists, by definition, have a far stronger basis in scripture than you do. And if I believed in any sort of creator, I would not dare attach its name to the evils of the bible.

If you want to be loving and accepting, great, but don't claim that it's because of the bible. You have a secular morality, just like I do. You know it's not okay to own slaves. You know the actions of that band of murdering, raping, pillaging Jews described in the bible are not okay. You know it's not okay to stone people or for god to have ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, but you're clinging to this superstition, and trying your hardest to justify it in the face of the absence of any reason to believe it. I'm morally superior to the god described in the bible and so are you. You are better than that book, and it saddens me to see people buy into such a vile and hateful and nonsensical bronze age text.

Then why is it that across the board, in everything we can measure, there is a strong negative correlation between religiosity and societal health? Everything from rape, murder, poverty, income disparity, starvation, longevity, infant mortality, teen pregnancy, STD rates. Among industrialized nations, the more secular, the less serious all those problems are. Japan is one of the most secular countries in the world, lowest rape rate. The bible doesn't teach what you claim it teaches unless you look at a very restricted portion of it, but if its teachings really are so good, then why do highly religious countries like the US have these problems so much worse than more secular countries? Women are no longer the property of their fathers or husbands, we don't consider it okay to own slaves or stone people to death because they tried to lead someone to a different god. We didn't get over those things because of religion, we got over them in spite of religion.

Things are better than they ever have been because secularism has dragged religion kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Secular morality is superior because it tells us to really think about our actions and their consequences, instead of things being good or bad by edict. The problem with telling someone that you shouldn't kill people because there's this god you can't prove exists is that if they rightly begin to question what you've said, they will question everything connected to it, including the idea that we shouldn't kill one another. Besides, according to you, if someone goes out and kills someone and then repents to god after they die, nothing happens to them, and their victim would get to live on in an afterlife. If this is the one and only life we're going to get, then we have a reason to solve problems right here and now. Not only is it fallacious to appeal to the consequences of a belief to prove it, but your belief doesn't even win if we do that.

I'm sorry, if one person came to me and told me that their cancer was cured by drinking arsenic, I wouldn't believe them. I don't buy the excuse that the vast majority of people are just not using arsenic right. Religion has an overwhelmingly negative impact on our society. Maybe your particular breed of Christianity isn't negative, but you still provide credence by using the same name and revering the same holy book.

The notion that the bible teaches love and acceptance is complete nonsense. This is a book that explicitly condones slavery, claims that god ordered genocide and human sacrifice and rape. This is a book that claims that god will send people for hell simply for not being willing to believe an absurd and unbelievable claim without any evidence whatsoever. Slaveholders in the US used the bible to justify slavery. People in Africa kill their children because they think they're witches. The fundamentalists, by definition, have a far stronger basis in scripture than you do. And if I believed in any sort of creator, I would not dare attach its name to the evils of the bible.

If you want to be loving and accepting, great, but don't claim that it's because of the bible. You have a secular morality, just like I do. You know it's not okay to own slaves. You know the actions of that band of murdering, raping, pillaging Jews described in the bible are not okay. You know it's not okay to stone people or for god to have ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, but you're clinging to this superstition, and trying your hardest to justify it in the face of the absence of any reason to believe it. I'm morally superior to the god described in the bible and so are you. You are better than that book, and it saddens me to see people buy into such a vile and hateful and nonsensical bronze age text.

We don't have sufficient evidence to believe that Jesus even existed, and certainly not enough to believe the supernatural claims. But even supposing it's true, why do I have to accept Jesus or be tortured forever? Why are those the only two options? I'm not okay with this proposition that no matter how small a bad thing you do, you have to accept Jesus to be forgiven or you get tortured forever.

Besides, if you think that I have a chance to change my mind after I die, then why should I believe? According to what you've said, the best thing for me to do is go with the evidence and live my life as if this is the only opportunity to enjoy anything ever. If you're right, then I'll deal with that when it happens. But why should I spend any of the one and only life I know I'm going to get worrying or hoping for an afterlife that I have no reason to think exists?

You still haven't given a reason why you believe. You've just presented part of your proposition and said that's why. The consequences of a proposition don't have a bearing on its truth unless the consequences are a contradiction. What is your justification for believing what you believe?

Then why is it that across the board, in everything we can measure, there is a strong negative correlation between religiosity and societal health? Everything from rape, murder, poverty, income disparity, starvation, longevity, infant mortality, teen pregnancy, STD rates. Among industrialized nations, the more secular, the less serious all those problems are. Japan is one of the most secular countries in the world, lowest rape rate. The bible doesn't teach what you claim it teaches unless you look at a very restricted portion of it, but if its teachings really are so good, then why do highly religious countries like the US have these problems so much worse than more secular countries? Women are no longer the property of their fathers or husbands, we don't consider it okay to own slaves or stone people to death because they tried to lead someone to a different god. We didn't get over those things because of religion, we got over them in spite of religion.

Things are better than they ever have been because secularism has dragged religion kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Secular morality is superior because it tells us to really think about our actions and their consequences, instead of things being good or bad by edict. The problem with telling someone that you shouldn't kill people because there's this god you can't prove exists is that if they rightly begin to question what you've said, they will question everything connected to it, including the idea that we shouldn't kill one another. Besides, according to you, if someone goes out and kills someone and then repents to god after they die, nothing happens to them, and their victim would get to live on in an afterlife. If this is the one and only life we're going to get, then we have a reason to solve problems right here and now. Not only is it fallacious to appeal to the consequences of a belief to prove it, but your belief doesn't even win if we do that.

I'm sorry, if one person came to me and told me that their cancer was cured by drinking arsenic, I wouldn't believe them. I don't buy the excuse that the vast majority of people are just not using arsenic right. Religion has an overwhelmingly negative impact on our society. Maybe your particular breed of Christianity isn't negative, but you still provide credence by using the same name and revering the same holy book.

The notion that the bible teaches love and acceptance is complete nonsense. This is a book that explicitly condones slavery, claims that god ordered genocide and human sacrifice and rape. This is a book that claims that god will send people for hell simply for not being willing to believe an absurd and unbelievable claim without any evidence whatsoever. Slaveholders in the US used the bible to justify slavery. People in Africa kill their children because they think they're witches. The fundamentalists, by definition, have a far stronger basis in scripture than you do. And if I believed in any sort of creator, I would not dare attach its name to the evils of the bible.

If you want to be loving and accepting, great, but don't claim that it's because of the bible. You have a secular morality, just like I do. You know it's not okay to own slaves. You know the actions of that band of murdering, raping, pillaging Jews described in the bible are not okay. You know it's not okay to stone people or for god to have ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, but you're clinging to this superstition, and trying your hardest to justify it in the face of the absence of any reason to believe it. I'm morally superior to the god described in the bible and so are you. You are better than that book, and it saddens me to see people buy into such a vile and hateful and nonsensical bronze age text.

I find this notion that you're supposed to love everyone very odd. I don't love you, I don't even know you. I value love far more than that. I care about you because we're part of one big, if a bit dysfunctional, family. We all depend on one another, and I care about the well being of my fellow humans, even if I don't necessarily like all of them. But why would you devalue the concept of love by applying it to such absurd extremes?

We don't have sufficient evidence to believe that Jesus even existed, and certainly not enough to believe the supernatural claims. But even supposing it's true, why do I have to accept Jesus or be tortured forever? Why are those the only two options? I'm not okay with this proposition that no matter how small a bad thing you do, you have to accept Jesus to be forgiven or you get tortured forever.

Besides, if you think that I have a chance to change my mind after I die, then why should I believe? According to what you've said, the best thing for me to do is go with the evidence and live my life as if this is the only opportunity to enjoy anything ever. If you're right, then I'll deal with that when it happens. But why should I spend any of the one and only life I know I'm going to get worrying or hoping for an afterlife that I have no reason to think exists?

You still haven't given a reason why you believe. You've just presented part of your proposition and said that's why. The consequences of a proposition don't have a bearing on its truth unless the consequences are a contradiction. What is your justification for believing what you believe?

Then why is it that across the board, in everything we can measure, there is a strong negative correlation between religiosity and societal health? Everything from rape, murder, poverty, income disparity, starvation, longevity, infant mortality, teen pregnancy, STD rates. Among industrialized nations, the more secular, the less serious all those problems are. Japan is one of the most secular countries in the world, lowest rape rate. The bible doesn't teach what you claim it teaches unless you look at a very restricted portion of it, but if its teachings really are so good, then why do highly religious countries like the US have these problems so much worse than more secular countries? Women are no longer the property of their fathers or husbands, we don't consider it okay to own slaves or stone people to death because they tried to lead someone to a different god. We didn't get over those things because of religion, we got over them in spite of religion.

Things are better than they ever have been because secularism has dragged religion kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Secular morality is superior because it tells us to really think about our actions and their consequences, instead of things being good or bad by edict. The problem with telling someone that you shouldn't kill people because there's this god you can't prove exists is that if they rightly begin to question what you've said, they will question everything connected to it, including the idea that we shouldn't kill one another. Besides, according to you, if someone goes out and kills someone and then repents to god after they die, nothing happens to them, and their victim would get to live on in an afterlife. If this is the one and only life we're going to get, then we have a reason to solve problems right here and now. Not only is it fallacious to appeal to the consequences of a belief to prove it, but your belief doesn't even win if we do that.

I'm sorry, if one person came to me and told me that their cancer was cured by drinking arsenic, I wouldn't believe them. I don't buy the excuse that the vast majority of people are just not using arsenic right. Religion has an overwhelmingly negative impact on our society. Maybe your particular breed of Christianity isn't negative, but you still provide credence by using the same name and revering the same holy book.

The notion that the bible teaches love and acceptance is complete nonsense. This is a book that explicitly condones slavery, claims that god ordered genocide and human sacrifice and rape. This is a book that claims that god will send people for hell simply for not being willing to believe an absurd and unbelievable claim without any evidence whatsoever. Slaveholders in the US used the bible to justify slavery. People in Africa kill their children because they think they're witches. The fundamentalists, by definition, have a far stronger basis in scripture than you do. And if I believed in any sort of creator, I would not dare attach its name to the evils of the bible.

If you want to be loving and accepting, great, but don't claim that it's because of the bible. You have a secular morality, just like I do. You know it's not okay to own slaves. You know the actions of that band of murdering, raping, pillaging Jews described in the bible are not okay. You know it's not okay to stone people or for god to have ordered Abraham to sacrifice his son, but you're clinging to this superstition, and trying your hardest to justify it in the face of the absence of any reason to believe it. I'm morally superior to the god described in the bible and so are you. You are better than that book, and it saddens me to see people buy into such a vile and hateful and nonsensical bronze age text.

You seem to be implying that I'm judging you or attacking you, but I assure you that's not my intention. I'm just saying the problems I have with your proposition and I'm trying to better understand it.

The problem I have runs far deeper than god just sending people to hell for not believing. I find the ideas of vicarious redemption and infinite punishment for finite crimes immoral.

What right does the god you believe in have to insert himself into this? If I've wronged someone, then they're the ones I need to make amends to, not god. I don't accept that someone else dying for my sins is okay, nor do I accept the concept of sin as valid. I never asked for Jesus to be tortured and killed for my sake, and I don't think that accomplishes anything. I don't accept that it's okay to torture people forever for any crime, even if they don't repent. God, as described in the bible, and to the best I understand as described by you, created us imperfectly and then wants to punish us for his own problems, unless we take this arbitrary loophole that has nothing to do with what we actually did wrong.

What you're doing is analogous to telling me what the social structures of the bigfoots are. You haven't shown me there's a god but you're telling me how you think he acts. What's the reason for your belief?