The answer is more nuanced than simply good or bad.
It hinges on the particular tenets of the religion or sect / denomination and their implications.
One could argue even that atheism is in itself a religion in that it is a system of beliefs that preclude the Divine.
Morality is subjective but I believe it is possible for rational thinkers to arrive at some form of consensus on the matter.
This largely depends on common values for instance the value or sanctity of human life.
Another value that many hold dearly is that of freedom which most self-righteous a false religions stifle.
In my particular sect if you will, the moral requirements have been fulfilled by another person and thus people are able to live in freedom following the dictates of their conscience and love.
Unfortunately, this is fringe thinking as far as major religions go. The Bible itself does say WIDE is the way that leads to destruction and one can see the correspondence with the world today
Oppressive religions reign but their time will come. When He comes down from the clouds bringing not peace but a sword.
Until then, I proclaim the gospel of Grace and His immutable work on the Cross. Fancy that? An immutable work being preached on an immutable ledger.
What a day to be alive! 😃
No. To quote Hitchins, this is akin to saying a TV being off is a channel.
But today is always a good day to be alive :-)
Hitchens is dead. Checkmate atheists. Jfwy
You can be agnostic @nathen007 and be intellectually honest. You cannot positively assert God doesn't have exist unless you are omniscient thus having access to all conceivable evidence.
It's not a a two wag street in this instance due to the inexplicably reliable constructs for which we both rely. Logic, uniformity of natural laws, mathematics etc.
Can a universe existing solely of chance have such coherence? Do you have faith in an oscillating universe or do you place it in obscure quantum theory?
Does this account for the rationality or our existence or do you attribute it to something else?
We agree on the last point. Cheers!
Within this well put argument you are making points based upon current knowledge and understanding and making assertions that reinforce the argument that religion was created simply to answer questions that no one had the answer for.
Agnosticism works both ways, if you wish to suggest I am agnostic because I can't absolutely prove there is no God, then you are also agnostic because you can't prove there is . Quid pro quo!
The difference here is that I accept there are unknowns but religion insists on an answer for everything and that which can't be answered through logic or due to to constraints in current knowledge is simply attributed to God.
Both arguments end in stalemate but my final sentence was simply to point out that we both end up at the same place but arriving from opposite directions just in the same way that you're about to go to bed but I've just woken up!
Posted using Partiko Android
Here take my #angryupvote.jk
I'm glad we can have this discussion is a civil way. Good stuff. Yeah guess it's bed time for me.
Enjoy your day
Yeah. Being alive is a good start.
Yeah of course I love this. It I kind of don't have a very strong opinion about it right now at this stage of my life. But having conversations about it for sure in my opinion is one way to go.. no matter what they have to bring to our society. Eheh thank you forntaking the time to share that with us :)