What is the proper way to worship god? Should people be baptized? Must you be born again? Is there a heaven or a hell? Must you fast on Ramadan? What foods can you eat and what foods should you avoid? Must women wear head coverings? What is sin?
There is no doubt that questions like these are extremely important to believers of one religion or another, but ultimately they are irrelevant. Why? Because every single question like this assumes that a god exists, despite the fact that all religions have equally failed to provide anything more than just sheer determined faith as evidence. You can’t ignore this crucial bottle neck. If god doesn’t exist, then all the other arguments about his/her/its nature is irrelevant. No matter how you try and get around it, it boils down to this:

Also, notice how logically if you make a claim “I have a baseball” you have to be able to provide evidence to prove the statement if it is to be taken seriously. This is the same for “I have a [insert any noun, including god(s) here]” This is called burden of proof, and its how logic works, its how court systems work, its how reality works. Innocent until proven guilty. Something is assumed not true until there is evidence to support the contrary. So far no evidence has been provided. Meerly willing something to be, no matter how hard to clentch your fists and focus during prayers, does not make it true, nor does your effort count as evidence.
Tags: baptism, born again, burden of proof, christianity, god, god's nature, islam, logic, proof, proper way to worship, religion, worship





I keep running into people who put their foot down on that proving idea. “It’s all in my head/heart/soul so I don’t have to!” like they’re four years old and don’t want to go bed. You just can’t reason with people like that.
(and if we ever threatened to spank them…)
Religion is a philosophy not a science.
Most atheists seem to use the whole “can’t prove a negative” statement as a shield to hide behind. Not realizing that the mission statement of “there is no God” and “can’t prove a negative” is scientifically incompatible. It invalidates the entire atheist stance of using science to describe reality. Relagating Atheism to an exercise in philosophy not science.