Careful. Science is not the Truth, it’s a method for producing accurate predictions. We accumulate evidence until the predictions seem overwhelmingly likely, or not. At no point have we proven that things might not be completely different from what we imagine them to be, or that they won’t change. Science isn’t Truth, it’s just a method of finding the best answer up to that point.

Listen to the mainstream, not the mediastreams, don't listen to the jackasses spewing transdimensional micro-wormholes -- yet. There's mystery in science, but that's literally how we find the next-big-thing. When there's mystery in religion, you are supposed to ignore it.

So absolutely true. Until people realize this, memes like these sound stupid.

Science is descriptive where religion is prescriptive. Granted there are some origin storys in religion (Eve's sin or Noah's rainbow) but we've had people dismissing their own fables back in the classical age, instead trying to hypothesize how things are really.

This is how Adonai can be a total git and yet declared as just and righteous and benevolent by fiat, what raises challenges to the properties of justice, righteousness or benevolence. Apologists usually retreat to semantics.

Science has its own approach to morality, which is to frame it as a consequentialist formula. Exempli gratia, looking at the histories of civilization, we can see that whenever the bourgoisie neglects the needs of the proletariat, civil unrest, genocide and war follow. Therefore, we might infer that a) the bourgeoisie might be able to defer civic collapse by establishing and enforcing unconditional civil rights and accommodations for its population, and b) that no society has ever been able to do this in perpetuity. The thousand year reich is still a fiction.

The religious equivalent is scriptural passages to kings ( govern wisely ) and to bonded servants, ( obey ), without any elaboration on the mechanics or consequences.

Consensus among religious scholars is that scripture (whether Christian, Muslim, Hellenic, Nubian or whatever) are just early attempts at moral philosophy distilled down to divine command theory, which is very basic deontological ethics (creed-based ethics). With centuries (and centuries) of further thought on the matter, our religious ministries have focused more on profiteering than on keeping up with the times.

What if I told you that many people don't believe in any gods at all? Worship is a choice and not a necessity.

Rationalism can lead to a cult mentality. It's happened before. Of course, you could say that this isn't "true rationalism", but you have to ask yourself if you're actually practicing rational thinking or just fetishizing the trappings of rationalism. I think that this means that skepticism is just as important as rationalism.

anti-religious enlightened atheist garbage is some of the worst content out there

Really? Pedantry is as bad as fatwas and religiously motivated killings?

How quaint.

It's not the atheist part that sucks, just that a community for people who don't believe in something's (as opposed to a community for people who believe in something) lowest common denominator is basically hating something else, so you get a lot of condescending posts.

Doesn't help that a lot of posts are also very edgy, because atheism tends to skew towards the younger generation. I cringe every time, but at least it's not as bad as people taking the opportunity to be racist in the name of atheism.

are you sure you didn't catch religion off someone who was contagious at the time?

I think all communities can be annoying in this exact way if they resort to virtue signaling / dunking / repeating the classic lines, as opposed to working to form new arguments.

Many people find meaning in understanding how the world works.

If you reach it in an external, supernatural being who grants it to you, maybe you're searching in the wrong place.

That hurt to read, I feel I'm dumber now