This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
Iwantyourhotwife · 22-25
I'm quite curious. Do you really seek truth and want an answer for your purpose if this is a part of it?
Or are you steadfast and rather aim to make religious people doubt their religion to make them agnostic or atheist? Just a curiosity of mine?
I'll also engage the post if you'd prefer. I just wanna know your aim
Or are you steadfast and rather aim to make religious people doubt their religion to make them agnostic or atheist? Just a curiosity of mine?
I'll also engage the post if you'd prefer. I just wanna know your aim
@Iwantyourhotwife
My aim is the same as it is in the vast majority of my posts: To expose myself to different opinions and debate them where i find them worthy of debate .
My aim is the same as it is in the vast majority of my posts: To expose myself to different opinions and debate them where i find them worthy of debate .
ElRengo · 70-79, M
@Iwantyourhotwife
"Or are you steadfast and rather aim to make religious people doubt their religion to make them agnostic or atheist? Just a curiosity of mine?"
I´m not atheist.
That said, I seriously doubt that to be exposed to open debates is or should be a problem for the ones that hold a faith.
Exception made, of course, for those that think that their own interpretations of whatever revelation / religious canon is also enough explanation for all, includding the natural world.
And said ones are also refractory to facts, so it´s probably a waste of time to debate with them.
But instead of being worried with an agnostic agenda (by the way, not the purpose of most of scientists) I think that are the above said religious ones (not at all most of religious people but of the narrow minded variety) the most effective atheist makers.
IF they were the very examples of faith (IMO they are not) THEN I would also doubt on the goodness being in such count.
"Or are you steadfast and rather aim to make religious people doubt their religion to make them agnostic or atheist? Just a curiosity of mine?"
I´m not atheist.
That said, I seriously doubt that to be exposed to open debates is or should be a problem for the ones that hold a faith.
Exception made, of course, for those that think that their own interpretations of whatever revelation / religious canon is also enough explanation for all, includding the natural world.
And said ones are also refractory to facts, so it´s probably a waste of time to debate with them.
But instead of being worried with an agnostic agenda (by the way, not the purpose of most of scientists) I think that are the above said religious ones (not at all most of religious people but of the narrow minded variety) the most effective atheist makers.
IF they were the very examples of faith (IMO they are not) THEN I would also doubt on the goodness being in such count.