Aestu wrote:
Mayonaise wrote:
If we were both in a room with the lights out and I said there was a dragon on the other side of the room, would you expect me to prove that the dragon exists or would you just take my word for it (in this hypothetical, assume that there's no way for either of us to turn the lights on)?
cleverly plagiarized from John Proctor
required reading in high school
bad form aestu. your condescending retorts won't help your case. try to keep it civil.
to caveat onto what mayo was saying, the burden of proof exists only to those who hold the belief because, let's face it, anyone can MAKE a religion. ahem l ron hubbard. anyway, the point i was getting at is that if you feel it's your duty to create a religion or spread some divine message you received then most people will require some kind of proof. the people that don't, who believe something blindly with no proof whatsoever are crazy. from an atheistic standpoint, all religions sound ridiculous and offer no proof whatsoever. from my perspective, christianity offers no more proof than scientology, or the church of satan, which most "wholesome" religions denounce. what makes your religion better? or right? all of them offer no proof, a vague moral compass (except in the latter), and require you to give up time and money to men.
