Is new Bioware agaisnt christianity?

I do get it. Its just not correct. I agree that we "can't detect everything", that we have a "limited perspective", that we don't have the ability to say with complete certainty that it "will never change". Its possible we're wrong, and gravity will change, or the sun won't rise tomorrow. But the point, which you're either ignoring or missing, is that faith is not defined as or distinguished by the mere possibility of error, but the absence of proof/evidence: so whether something is a matter of faith or not hinges on whether we have evidence for it, not whether its possible for it to be wrong. But we don't lack evidence for gravity, or the sun rising tomorrow- all we lack is complete logical certainty, despite all the evidence: it is not a matter of faith.

But even if "faith" did mean "possibly wrong" or "not completely certain" instead of "lacking evidence", and so these things were matters of faith after all, that wouldn't mean they are therefore on par with religious belief, and that belief is God is as justified as belief in gravity... it would just mean we had to come up with a new term to differentiate between things which are well-evidenced but not logically certain (i.e. the vast majority of science, our everyday beliefs, etc.) and things which not only are logically uncertain but lacking evidence as well (like most religious beliefs)... in other words, we'd need a term to do exactly what the term "faith" currently does, in normal English: differentiate between beliefs that are held on the basis of evidence and those that are not. 

I don't mean it's possible wrong in that sense. I only pointed out the flaws in the concept the fact that it can be flawed. that does not deter the fact we still unquestionably believe it away works. We just don't have proof it will always work. that still is the same a faith.

I have no proof gravity will always work but i believe that it with always works. that's faith.

lol

Considering Poe's Law was in effect with the original poster, I'm not sure that this thread ever had a point.

I'm not going through 14 pages, so I assume there was some kind of reveal that it was a Poe?

Suvi's religious views are ridiculous anyway. Itsism at best.

• Logs in.
• Sees title...
• Notes that the thread hasn't burnt down after 14 pages.

Congrats, BSN. 

I guess. But isn't that a philosophy and not a specific religion?

Technically, but it isn't an organized religion with specific dogmas or god(s). I guess I should have clarified that's what I meant. Deism is also pretty vague, and there are people in religions who identify as such.

Bioware can't tackle these themes anymore, too much bias here and there. Not that I mind, I'm not religious myself.

If I understand the OP correctly, your complaint is that the antagonists resemble the Christian church, while the protagonist can't be explicitly Christian.

Two things: kett's ideology ("We know what's the best for you") isn't limited to religion only and can be applied to almost any philosophy (e.g. the Roman Empire or "The White Man's Burden" by Rudyard Kipling). Same for their fondness of ceremonies (military rites or university graduation are pretty much the same; they represent that This Is Important and reaffirm one's identity as a part of the group).

The second point is that while the protagonist can't specify their belief in any particular religion (from Buddhism to Pastafarianism), neither they can ridicule followers of it. Also faith in some sort of afterlife is set by default and can't be altered by the player (the second dialogue with the sibling, the avatar says about their presumably dead parents "At least, Mom and Dad are together now").

Therefore, ME:A is neutral (if not positive) in terms of religion. Christianity isn't shown either as "the one and only right" or as ultimately immoral.

no
they are against good sidequests