139
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2025
139 points (97.3% liked)
World News
156 readers
300 users here now
founded 8 months ago
MODERATORS
Love me militant atheists pretending they're smarter than all religious people. I mean believe what you want but thinking that the universe is a coincidence doesn't make you smarter than Einstein.
Do you have a point?
You're not saying anything remotely close to a rebuttal
Religion is absurd, the very idea of an omnipotent god is a logical fallacy a la the omnipotence paradox, and it doesn't add anything to humanity
All it does is divide people
I did.
-You
My rebuttal is this: Most of the people who built modern civilization were religious one way or another, and the proposition that someone like, say, Isaac Newton was incapable of asking questions is frankly ridiculous. The very ideals of inquiry you're espousing now were thought up and developed by Christians.
I mean I obviously disagree, but either way that is a completely different point than the one you made previously and I responded to.
Blasphemy was a crime in England during Newton’s time. He was literally forbidden from asking questions.
If you think blasphemy laws prevented Renaissance and Enlightenment Europeans from questioning Christianity then... uh... yeah.
So if we banned religion and then bragged about how all the greatest people of our time are atheists, you’d be ok with that so long as a few people keep their faith anyway?
If I then tried to imply all atheists are dumb and only enlightened religious people are smart, yes "all the greatest people of our time are atheists" would be a great rebuttal in that situation. I never said that, though, so that's a moot point.
It's not a belief that it's a coincidence.
It's an understanding that it's a coincidence.
For values of "coincidence". It's not at all a coincidence that we live in a universe that's capable of having us live in it.
it’s not pretending
Hi, im an atheist who got over his militant phase and accepts people for believing what they want as long as it doesn't harm others.
You're a dumbass.
I'm still pretty militant about forcing others to live according to your religious beliefs though. But you can HAVE them just fine.
Far as im concerned that counts under "harming others"
Should that be "not forcing others"?
I disagree y'all do not talk to enough actually religious people