All religions are dangerous?

[_JAK]

dart stated:
"You haven't explained or demonstrated why there needs to be. Nobody has to "justify" himself to you as far as his personal beliefs go. But they do justify their beliefs with themselves. Certainly no theist believes his or her beliefs are not justified. They don't believe for no reason whatsoever.

Why do you avoid identifying who made the statement you list as merely “Quote”?

To your point, not that you really have one: People believe religious dogma because they have been indoctrinated likely from cradle up. That addresses your “because” question.

There is a cause for people holding beliefs which are contrary to fact and in spite of fact. That’s one reason.

Of course they don’t believe the beliefs are unjustified. That belief in fiction does not make the beliefs reliable, accurate, or valid.

We have more than 1,000 Christian groups which each believe somewhat or greatly different things. Each believes his/her beliefs are true. That in no way makes any of them true.

Since you attack any documentation, I’ll provide none.

JAK

[Guest]

What is the justification(reasoning) for religious claims which defy natural physical laws? Explain how this reasoning does not ignore reason and evidence.

Aside from the point that theists do not need to justify their beliefs to your satisfaction, and that all theists do "justify" their beliefs to their own satisfaction, you'll have to provide examples, as answers will vary on a case by case basis.

[Guest]

What is the justification(reasoning) for religious claims which defy natural physical laws? Explain how this reasoning does not ignore reason and evidence.

Aside from the point that theists do not need to justify their beliefs to your satisfaction, and that all theists do "justify" their beliefs to their own satisfaction, you'll have to provide examples, as answers will vary on a case by case basis.

Right. Religious pundits just make it up as they go. That is exactly why religious dogma is unreliable.

JAK

[_JAK]

What is the justification(reasoning) for religious claims which defy natural physical laws? Explain how this reasoning does not ignore reason and evidence.

Aside from the point that theists do not need to justify their beliefs to your satisfaction, and that all theists do "justify" their beliefs to their own satisfaction, you'll have to provide examples, as answers will vary on a case by case basis.

“Where reason and evidence are turned aside in favor of dogma and claim absent evidence, danger prevails.”

JAK

[Guest]

To your point, not that you really have one: People believe religious dogma because they have been indoctrinated likely from cradle up. That addresses your “because” question.

Ah, so all theists stay in the same religion from birth, and no atheists ever convert to theism? You can' possibly be this stupid!

And what the hell does any of this have to do with anything?

There is a cause for people holding beliefs which are contrary to fact and in spite of fact. That’s one reason.

You're just reiterating your same dogma in a different form, but you are still dodging questions. If you're such a great debater, why are you hiding from the questions I asked? Why are you conveniently ignoring every post that challenges your position, and responding to only a fraction of other posts?

Of course they don’t believe the beliefs are unjustified. That belief in fiction does not make the beliefs reliable, accurate, or valid.

You're making the illicit leap again, refusing to acknolwedge that you have not substantiated any given religious belief to be fiction. Attributing fiction to it is another truth by assertion.

We have more than 1,000 Christian groups which each believe somewhat or greatly different things.

Yes, and this means nothing and the hilarious thing is that you constantly reiterate this as if it means a hill of beans. Here is a clue for you. Not everything posting on infidels.org is to be taken as factual. I know you have your own belief system that rejects reason and facts, but that is one of the great ironies here. All theists believe a God exists.

All the quibbling over doctrine in Christianity is an issue with biblical interpretation for the most part. So what? We see the same thing with politicians interpreting and misinterpreting the constitution. Show me two politicians who agree on every single issue. Does that mean politics is unjustified?

Each believes his/her beliefs are true.

Including you!!

That in no way makes any of them true.

Including yours!!

Why are you attacking another straw man?

Who in the HELL ever argued that God must exist simply because many theists claim their beliefs are true?

WHO??????

Since you attack any documentation, I’ll provide none.

What's the matter, afraid I'll be able to track down the web article you'd be plagiarizing?

Now go find your backbone and start answering some questions. If you don't, then shut the hell up about how your thesis withstands all scrutiny. You can't even address simple points that challenge it and you absolutely refuse to clarify or qualify the ambiguity of your various statements.

[_JAK]

More dishonest misquoting and no refutation of what anyone actually stated, dart.

As marg observed, you are not worth any effort.

JAK

[_dartagnan]

I quoted you word for word. You're the one who keeps arguing via assertion and then pretending you're actually refuting something anyone here has said. Stop your squawking and answer the questions for once. You don't need anyone to misquote you in order to look foolish. You do all the work yourself.

[_JAK]

dart stated:
You're making the illicit leap again, refusing to acknolwedge that you have not substantiated any given religious belief to be fiction. Attributing fiction to it is another truth by assertion.

So you contend that all religious belief is correct. Unless one out of the thousand and more can be demonstrated reliable, transparent, clear, skeptically reviewed by analysis, none is reliable.

You want to make a religious claim. Go ahead and make it. Defend it. Present objective transparent evidence that it and it alone is THE singular correct religion.

Just do that for us, dart.

JAK

[_Jersey Girl]

Catching up with the thread from the point of where I left it last evening. A word of unsolicited advice: When people start using phrases such as "you're the one", calling eachother liars and interrupting the thread with inane "channeling" posts, the thread is pretty much one step shy of destruction. But what do I know, eh?

Just an observation...

Jersey Girl

(This type of discussion would have been far more effective on a threaded view option.)

[_dartagnan]

So you contend that all religious belief is correct.

No, I have "contended" no such thing. You can't be this stupid. You're ignoring everything I say and desperately trying to reinvent what's been said in order to score points by shooting down straw men.

Unless one out of the thousand and more can be demonstrated reliable, transparent, clear, skeptically reviewed by analysis, none is reliable.

All religions accept the premise that God exists. Their disagreements on rituals, biblical interpretations, theology, ecclesiastical authority, etc., do not make falsify their united premise that God exists. Again, you can't really be this stupid.

Can you be?

You want to make a religious claim. Go ahead and make it. Defend it. Present objective transparent evidence that it and it alone is THE singular correct religion.

This isn't about making religious claims, so nice try to divert and avoid. This thread is about your untenable thesis that you absolutely refuse to defend. You're trying to recreate the discussion by attributing to me claims I have never made, and now you're trying to pretend I have some burden to defend something I don't believe.

Again I have to ask, are you really this stupid?