(April 19, 2016 at 9:07 pm)Faith No More Wrote:(April 19, 2016 at 8:53 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: Ok, but this is exactly what I'm saying. You don't like being told "you must believe in this and follow this path or follow this and that or do this and that and don't do this and that". The core of the issue is you hate the notion of dictating on what to do.
No, the core issue is people dictating how others live based upon their religious beliefs. Religious beliefs are to be kept personal, and just as I have no right to dictate that you should live your life as if there is no god, you have no right to dictate that I live mine as if there is.
But this exactly what I'm saying you have a problem with.
[quote pid='1253495' dateline='1461114421']
(April 19, 2016 at 8:53 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: But if there is no God, you have everyone doing that anyways, You have people making laws, you have society making morals, which differs society to society, and then you have your own confused self that just picks from here and there but mostly finds it's self agreeing to the people he feels identified with the most (atheists). But if there is a God, then who is more worthy to be listened and obeyed and followed and who more worthy of guiding to the truth then the wise knowing creator?
Well, we don't have a "wise knowing creator" guiding us to the truth, do we? All we have are believers with impotent arguments that insist god exists despite a complete inability to produce even the tiniest scrap of evidence of its existence.
And therein lies the rub and the crux of your confusion. The believer seems unable to distinguish between their beliefs and what can be proven.
[/quote]
So the crux of it is that believers make claims that cannot be proven to you. Is it right to say you would however have no problem with religion if there was proof from God of it being true as well as that being the proper God?
