Offensive statements concerning God.

"God is real" versus "God is make believe." Which of these two statements are the most offensive?

the assertion of God's existence or non-existence is a statement of one's belief without proof. We cannot test hypotheses about the supernatural (even whether it exists or not) using our current technology, and there's a pretty good chance we will never be able to do so.

Both statements are beliefs, and neither side can back up those beliefs. They're equally offensive or neither is offensive at all.

Therefore there can be no statement offensive about

Should I assume that an atheist would be offended if you told them that God is real, and that a religious person would be offended if you told them that god is make believe?

Holy shit. I think I just blew my own mind.

is that offensive. How about if we said atheists are idiots are are to blame for all of the worlds problems or muslims or dems.

Get with the program.

but true. Religion is THE single worst cause of human suffering on record, whether you think the earth is 6000 or 600000000000 years old.

If you believe that God is real why do you have the need to teach that to everyone else?

If you believe that God is make believe why do you have the need to teach that to everyone else?

...I find one of those statements WRONG, but neither is especially offensive. Suffering from the delusion of deities is not offensive in itself, no matter how offensive the actions that religiously insane folks use their delusions to justify.

It seems that a day without pissing on non-atheists here is a day without sunshine.

What is it with you bitter, proselytizing atheists?*..Are you so insecure in a world which largely rejects YOUR "belief" that they have to attack and insult all who don't "believe" as you do?

Sorry, but secure people just don't do that.

* You may deny that you're proselytizing, but you are -- through the backdoor of In the insult and derision of all those who don't share your world view -- Gee, isn't that called "oppression" and "intolerance"??

What part of "neither is particularly offensive" was so hard to understand?

Oh-- and I'm very happy to accept the label "proselytizing atheist." Look, if someone sits next to you muttering about voices in his head and CIA agents trying to steal his soul, would you respect his beliefs or recognize them as delusions, and hope he gets better some day? Call me "intolerant" if you like, but I don't feel the need to acknowledge anyone's delusions simply because they embrace them as their version of reality.

Show me your deity-- corporeal, thank you-- and we'll talk. Until then, please accept my best wishes that the invisible sky people stop tormenting you soon.

keep a lot of folks away from you.

Is everything corporeal, Mike?...Can you show me your thoughts -- WITHOUT the recent technology?...Even WITH it, you could only show the presence of thought, not the thoughts themselves...Could you show me GERMS before the invention of the microscope?...No.

Strict empiricists are very limited as they depend solely on their five senses and the latest technological invention which some "seeker" not content such limits sought out and created.

Have a nice, limited life.

an idiot or preaching at me because I don't believe what they think I should. x(

But I do think that popping someone's bubble of belief would offend them more than telling someone that something does exist when they believe that it doesn't.

Adding something vs. taking away.

Let's find a 5 year old we can test this on. Tell him that dragons exist and then that Santa Claus doesn't. Which one do you think will make him cry?

It depends on what you mean and who you say it to.

Posts here frequently sound a lot like posts in the gungeon.