Hopefully you will also apologize and retract your lie that he has no facts. Cheers.

I didn't say he has no facts; I was inferring that he was going to provide interpretation of CURRENT FACTS instead of establishing his own

If it was read that way because of my shitty wording, I do retract it.

OK fair enough. But all his facts are 100% current. So enjoy the read and let me know if you have any questions or struggles. 😉

```What evidence is there for God, Max?```
The evidence is that people believe in the Gospel of the Leather Jacket or some fruit, if the void "left by god" is not filled.

Thus Atheism is the worst you can do, on a similar level of destruction than Naziism...
And there is also a Country where it was tried - and not with particularly good results as their god is MONEY. And all they do there is money.
WITH GOD, you do not do everything for money, you have other things to do as well.

So if you want to see a Godless Country, go to China!

And maybe think about how much different it would be if they would have some kind of god in their life.

And the South East Asians have awesome Religions, always had.

For example:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taoism

Buddhism and all the other good shit also comes from there. Cultural the South East Asians were IMO superior to the Europeans.

Of course I'm talking about something like 500 Years ago or so.

That's evidence in favor of religion, not evidence in favor of the existence of God/gods.

Or just go with the 90% of what all humans did

Just dont

Your mood goes from 0 to 100

For some that is the existance of GOD:
https://o.aolcdn.com/images/dims?quality=100&image_uri=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blogcdn.com%2Fwww.engadget.com%2Fmedia%2F2010%2F09%2Fnvidia-tattoo-09242010.jpg&client=amp-blogside-v2&signature=85b77f35f00ee412ff93ab7493f355c6c3a0865f

But yeah, when Relition is important, and we agree on that, doesn't the Existance or Non Existance of God become irrelevant as it is an imaginary figure??

Because GOD is something different for every person.

The reason people agree that those rules of the religion are important to follow is because they believe they are the word of God. If there is no God then they are following the rules for no reason. If they did not need the idea of God to follow those rules then they didn't need the religion. So yes, when someone comes in and says "You must follow these rules because God wills it" the question of "Well is your God real or not?" is an important one.

One could also argue that the reason god wills it is because he wishes for the world to be a certain way and for people to be a certain way.

I would argue that the existence of such a god would need to take a backseat to the values of the society/lifestyle that is being advocated for

so a few things re: that book. 1. It's a philosophically based argument, not one based on tangible, testable evidence 2. It's got a direct rebuttal (actually several), so it's not accurate to say that nobody knows how to deal with it even beyond the fact that theyre not especially new arguments- in fact they're all quite old 3. Even early on in the book the author comes across as scientifically illiterate. I dont know if I have the patience to read 5 chapters of "where did the coldness come from tho" tier armchair philosophy

https://www.richardcarrier.info/archives/13752 was not expecting to link anything of Richard Carrier's ever, but here we are

```The reason people agree that those rules of the religion are important to follow is because they believe they are the word of God. If there is no God then they are following the rules for no reason. ```
WRONG

In Buddhism there is no god, yet there are people following it.

Your assumption is wrong, because you assume that god is the most important part, when its the least important one

Do I really need to add a disclaimer to every statement letting you know that I know this isn't the truth in every single case? It still shows why the question is worth asking because people who do make that claim exist.

Your assumption that because many people tend to need ideologies that religion is the only answer is also wrong as Buddhism proves with many people discarding all of the religious aspects for the philisophical.

That proves my point, that its not about god and that it's utterly unimportant if God Exist or not.

So then it's not about religion either. If you can have functioning communities and ideologies with all the religious aspects removed why does it need to be centered around a religion in the first place?

Because you need to get your morals from somewhere and that is Religion and I'd put Buddhism in the Religion category as well.

You are begging the question here. There are many places you can get your morals from aside from religion. Yes Buddism is a religion, but how many Buddhists have you met that fear the fires of Naraka?

Most western Buddhists discard that and focus on the philisophical teachings. Those teachings do not need a believe in Diyu to function

```There are many places you can get your morals from aside from religion.```
Name one

Philosophy.

You can call that a Religion.

for example that Ayan Rand Stuff

You can, but you'd be wrong.

No, because it is something you believe in.

If you're going to describe everything people believe in as being a religion, then sure, people need religion, but that isn't the sort of religion being discussed, nor is it anything close to the standard deinition of religion.

Religion must be part of our life, it gives us values, brings us together, tames the beast in man and builds communitys.

```close to the standard deinition of religion.```
But it should!

Because the Religion of the Letherjacket or the Fruit is just utter garbage.