What arguments?

There's nothing that really supports your view. Don't get me wrong I'm not out to ridicule your own personal religion, just religion in general. Religions are based upon 'faith', you can hardly call that evidence. Hence, why I tend to ridicule it.

It doesn't make sense to follow an idea, just because you like what it promises or how it's described in some modern book. A total lack of evidence is what makes it impossible for me to really take these religious theories seriously. Sure, theoretically there's still a possibility that God does exist and that he's laughing his ass off or disappointed, but until there's some real proof I can believe in because it's right in front of my nose so to speak... I can't believe in a theoretical being that allegedly has the ability of divine intervention and what not more.



No offense, but if you were less ignorant about science in general, you would have known better. Again and I can't say this often enough, science doesn't claim to have absolute truths, but is very aware of the limitations and dependence on research and knowledge. Contrary to science that actively searches for evidence for theories, religions simply state something is true, because it was written in some book. Apparently the ink on some paper proves God exists? What kind of proof is that? Where are the experiments that can prove without any doubt that God is not a myth? Even when it comes to thought-experiments, philosophy for example has proven over and over again that a God being is pretty unlikely to exist, in fact, determining our own existence is pretty complicated in the philosophical and theoretical sense, let alone the theoretical existence of a God. Obviously this has a lot to do with questions that can not be answered, for example when it comes to divine intervention. What sense does it make to believe in a allegedly powerful God, when it can not be determined whether or not some 'unknown' God-like being has some sort of control over how and when things happen? I simply can not believe in this without some reliable evidence. I would however definitely be among the first to convert if there ever would be such evidence, as it's also how science works. If facts contradict the theory, the theory is wrong and needs to be adapted.



It's simple, it's the difference between knowing because you've researched it enough to get reliable information and believing just for the sake of believing and feeling comfortable.

Apart from that, and life really shows this all the time (even in my very nice life), if something sounds too good to be true, it usually is. I also am convinced that religion is simply a social tool to control people on a psychological level. There are several religions that have gotten so damn much money for all kinds of promises they make to people in exchange for money. Really commercial religions can't ever be right...