Your Faith Is a Joke

[arista]

P4dSiHqpULk


Yes Pat.
You have it well put out.


Bang On Right.

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

*cry*

[arista]

*cry*


No you need to hear the real facts
it will not hurt you.

[InOne]

I love Pat, his vids always cheer me up and make me laugh :D

[Ninastar]

Is he you arista?

[BB_Eye]

This guy just wants to be an atheist Melanie Phillips. He even has the hair and glasses.

[Tom4784]

No one can claim to know what happens after death, even if the religions are wrong who can say there's not something beyond death? I don't believe in religion but I find the thought of an afterlife comforting.

[arista]

Is he you arista?



No
but he is a Top Man
talks Utter Pure Sense.



Feel The Force .

[Tom4784]

He's a reason why Atheists get a bad rep, I found him to be arrogant and full of himself really. It's all opinions at the end of the day so it's hypocritical for him to do what he's slamming religion for doing.

[arista]

He's a reason why Atheists get a bad rep, I found him to be arrogant and full of himself really. It's all opinions at the end of the day so it's hypocritical for him to do what he's slamming religion for doing.


Sure
But he is Fighting Loads of God freaks

[Tom4784]

He's a hypocrite. I can't take anything he says seriously, he's just looking for a reaction.

[arista]

He's a hypocrite. I can't take anything he says seriously, he's just looking for a reaction.


Yes So am I.


There is no one like him.



Life In The City.

[Tom4784]

Atheists like that and the people they hate are just two sides of the same coin, both are basically screaming 'MY OPINION IS BETTER THEN YOURS' at each other. It's just utterly pointless.

[arista]

Atheists like that and the people they hate are just two sides of the same coin, both are basically screaming 'MY OPINION IS BETTER THEN YOURS' at each other. It's just utterly pointless.


No
You do not like the way he puts it.


I and millions of others do.



This needs to be said that way.

[Shaun]

Difference being atheists have facts to back them up, Dean.

[Tom4784]

No
You do not like the way he puts it.


I and millions of others do.



This needs to be said that way.

He's just as bad as the people he slams, like I said Religion and Atheism are two sides of the same coin, especially the vocal ones.

[Tom4784]

Difference being atheists have facts to back them up, Dean.

I don't think you can really disprove either side, the only people who can really vouch for either are dead.

I don't care for either, it's a difference of opinion dressed up as facts on both sides.

[Shaun]

I don't think you can really disprove either side, the only people who can really vouch for either are dead.

I don't care for either, it's a difference of opinion dressed up as facts on both sides.

I wouldn't call the big bang theory a difference of opinion :tongue:

[Shasown]

I wouldn't call the big bang theory a difference of opinion :tongue:

Very true, but it hasnt been proven yet has it?

Incidentally seeing as matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. Where did the energy and material come from to make the big bang? What started it?

[Tom4784]

I wouldn't call the big bang theory a difference of opinion :tongue:

I've always struggled to understand how it disproves anything other then some religions got that part wrong. I can't see why some Celestic being couldn't have triggered the Big Bang really. I think it's bonkers to think that the Big Bang didn't happen but I don't think it means there's nothing beyond this life because of it.

It's all about opinion really and it still comes down to two sides screaming 'YOU'RE WRONG' at each other.

[Ithinkiloveyoutoo]

I didn't really listen. There are plenty like him out there.

But..

the problem is not religion itself. The problem is people that read the scripts twist it into their own idea of what they think it means during their time, and the ones that use religion to justify their act of violence/injustice; catholic paedos, christian extremists, muslims extremists etc...

Why is it easier for people to worship satan, believe he exists yet they deny god's existence? surely one can't exist without the other?

Why did "atheists" begin to become atheists in the first place. Why does the idea that a person believes in something higher than man infuriate them so much? Is it fear? ego? can't they stomach the idea that something out there is bigger than them?



I understand why atheists feel they can be arrogant: advancing technology has many believing that with time and knowledge technology will explain everything, and for sure it is easier to prove that god doesn't exist than that he does because if he did then why all the pain and suffering in the world and everything else that the bible claims god is supposed to do but isn't, but i don't think the bible is as straight forward as that.

[Mystic Mock]

Difference being atheists have facts to back them up, Dean.

how do they? and prezzie is right that his being a hypocrite by acting all smug.

and how the heck did the universe get made if there isnt a god or some sort of life form out there?

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

misfits > god

[Stu]

It really bothers me when atheists at their most smug get described as being simply on the other side of the same coin. It's not even the same currency. Are my also just like religious fundamentalists because I scream at people 'YOUR WRONG! BATMAN IS NOT REAL!'.

What makes the existence of Batman less likely than the existence of god? But should I respect peoples opinion to believe in Batman anyway? Not really. Because I would be facilitating stupidity and ignorance. That's not being ignorant. Being like Pat Condell is not being ignorant. It's cutting straight to the point - no B.S. Why should we allow for something we on our own have entirely synthesized in our brains to dictate the rights of other human beings?

To have a poorly fabricated story only some believe in direct politics? Culture? To say in 2010 what people can and cannot do? Pat Condell is atheists very own rotweiler and by christ do atheists need a few rotweilers. Why roll over in the dirt and wait to see what happens with these cracker barrel idiots?

how do they? and prezzie is right that his being a hypocrite by acting all smug.

and how the heck did the universe get made if there isnt a god or some sort of life form out there?
Why are you assuming the Universe was made? Is it really that absurd to suggest it has always existed in some form? Does there need, then, to be a reason?

A lot of scientists are now convinced the Big Bang was not the start but merely a bridging point. What about the multiverse? Or an endless cycle of 'breath in, breath out' Big Bang, expansion, contraction and Big Bang? Again and again and again? Why did the Universe have to 'start'? And why for a reason?


I understand why atheists feel they can be arrogant
Please. Atheists do believe there is something greater than them ... the Universe. We also see ourselves as just another animal. We are not the ones claiming to be the superior species who had divine intervention intercept their lives in order to give them a straight hotline to the man upstairs.

Knowing the facts about the scientific world does not make you smug. Maybe in the eyes of those who can't be arsed reading the research and would prefer to just continually allow for the existence of a higher cosmic order through endless roundabout questions like 'well how did this then become this?' because they just like the idea of it, sure. Even easily readable pop science books like Stephen Hawkings new tome 'The Grand Design' would be appealing to such god bothering, 'better connected' nitwits. A whopping large print, colour illustrated 200 page behemot of a book that is endlessly more fascinating than any 'holy book' and one that tackles the exact same questions only within the realms of a very, very reliable medium. The medium of science.

It's what religious people first turn to when they get sick. Saying prayers in a hospital.

[Sticks]

His rant seemed more aimed at certain organised religions and their command and control structures.

There are religious groupings that do not have hierarchical structures that he seems to be against.

[InOne]

You need to take Pat with a pinch of salt at times. He always makes good points, but his sarcastic manner is why he's so popular.

[arista]

You need to take Pat with a pinch of salt at times. He always makes good points, but his sarcastic manner is why he's so popular.


Yes its all in the Points.


He is a Great Man.

[keithafc]

Im a believer in the universe, why is it if you die and there is an after life, does that mean its god? No it doesn't. It could be a perfectly natural thing which has just taken place. Perhaps we just live in a place in the universe which has it?

I don't care if there is an after life or if there isn't. Either way, it won't bother me.

[Niamh.]

Very true, but it hasnt been proven yet has it?

Incidentally seeing as matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. Where did the energy and material come from to make the big bang? What started it?

exactly. No one can say for sure that they know the truth because they don't.

[InOne]

Whatever the truth may be. Religion is far from it.

[Niamh.]

Whatever the truth may be. Religion is far from it.

yeah, that I do agree with. Religion, imo is a nice way to gain a bit of power and control over people

[InOne]

yeah, that I do agree with. Religion, imo is a nice way to gain a bit of power and control over people

Definitely, can't believe it still does so much in this day and age tbh!

[Niamh.]

Definitely, can't believe it still does so much in this day and age tbh!

yeah I know:shocked:

[arista]

Whatever the truth may be. Religion is far from it.



There Is No God

[KG.]

Pat :worship:

[Livia]

People's faith is personal. Who is anyone else to say what's right and what's wrong if someone feels it in their heart? If only people would accept other people's faith and convictions and not get all self-righteous because they don't believe what you believe.

[MTVN]

People's faith is personal. Who is anyone else to say what's right and what's wrong if someone feels it in their heart? If only people would accept other people's faith and convictions and not get all self-righteous because they don't believe what you believe.

This.

[arista]

People's faith is personal. Who is anyone else to say what's right and what's wrong if someone feels it in their heart? If only people would accept other people's faith and convictions and not get all self-righteous because they don't believe what you believe.


Yes it should be
all these God Freaks Preach Rubbish.

[Angus]

There Is No God

Prove it.

[InOne]

Prove it.

I will prove it on boxing day :)

[iRyan]

I believe that god is the earth, the universe, and is just a massive massive massive amount of energy. And when people pray it's like like they are sending out that positive energy. Like someone said on Oprah, the power of the human mind and the energy it gives out is almost undiscovered and is alot more powerful than we think.

I think our bodies are just vessels for our spirits. They mean nothing, it's our spirits and our soul and our mind that controls everything. Religion makes God out to be a person and refer to him as a 'he' which is just not correct IMO. God is not a he, or a she, or an it. God doesn't live in the sky. God is what's all around us, it's what we're made of.

I used to be Catholic but now as I grow up, I have my own mind. And as much as I want to believe in the tradional Catholic beliefs and views, I'm finding it hard to believe that it's all real. Because alot of it to be just sounds like folklore.

I do believe that when you die, your soul lives on. And I believe in reincarnation as well. But I don't believe in the whole 'if you sin you go to hell' thing. I think it's all made up to scare people. What constitutes a sin? And I hate how Christians pick and choose bits out of the bible to go along with. In the bible it says divorcing, maturbation, and premarital sex are mortal sins. Yet the majority of Christians and Catholics have all done that. Yet if someone is a homosexual, they all point the finger and call them a sinner and say they will go to hell. Talk about hypocritical.

[LidlSistA]

I agree with the person who said faith is a personal thing and far more complex than whether a being exists in the sky. Live and let live. However people get through life is their business! Peace out

[Marsh.]

Im a believer in the universe, why is it if you die and there is an after life, does that mean its god? No it doesn't. It could be a perfectly natural thing which has just taken place. Perhaps we just live in a place in the universe which has it?

I don't care if there is an after life or if there isn't. Either way, it won't bother me.

That's assuming you know what "God" (if there is one) actually is.
The term "God" doesn't always mean the bearded man sitting on a cloud.

Also, it's funny after reading that "Forum Trolls and Bullies" thing someone posted yesterday it seems to be describing Arista perfectly. Deliberately trying to wind people up with the thread. Arista knows ****.

And amusing how these very vocal and patronising atheists are the ones that seem to need assurance that they are right from other atheists and constantly searching for someone to tell them "You're right, faith is wrong". If they were 100% correct and right in what they say they wouldn't need that. If you don't believe, you don't believe. Whereas a lot of religious people seem to just have their beliefs and keep it private.

[InOne]

You all only have Religions idea of what a god should be as well. Any idea you think is "out of the box" came from someone else.

Love how people seem to think one god is any more logical that many gods.

[Marsh.]

Since when did religious people think the ideas in their religion is "out of the box"?

[InOne]

I meant these people who are deists and stuff like that. All that new age crap

[Marsh.]

Oh, right.

[arista]

"I think our bodies are just vessels for our spirits. "



Yank Twaddle

[Stu]

That's assuming you know what "God" (if there is one) actually is.
The term "God" doesn't always mean the bearded man sitting on a cloud.

Also, it's funny after reading that "Forum Trolls and Bullies" thing someone posted yesterday it seems to be describing Arista perfectly. Deliberately trying to wind people up with the thread. Arista knows ****.

And amusing how these very vocal and patronising atheists are the ones that seem to need assurance that they are right from other atheists and constantly searching for someone to tell them "You're right, faith is wrong". If they were 100% correct and right in what they say they wouldn't need that. If you don't believe, you don't believe. Whereas a lot of religious people seem to just have their beliefs and keep it private.
Oh give that tired old rhetoric a rest would you. Everything you said their could be applied to religious people too if I were into weak arse, wank assumptions. No matter how much I love or hate atheists that's just such a lazy argument from people of faith. Of course atheists are going to broadcast their stance on the issue, share information on the universe with other atheists and so on. Very few people are natural atheists considering most of us were reared with religion. Information had to convert them and they now share this information with others.

Are you saying because atheists don't believe that they should not be allowed debate with religious people? After all they know and have their own beliefs. Why don't they just shut up unlike the religious people. Yeah. Atheists should just shut the hell up. So should people in various other positions to give out knowledge or their interpretation and opinion on it. Yeah. Just shut up. You big loosers. We don't want to hear your side of the story because it might in some way threaten ours.

Prominent atheists are not trying to padlock local churches. They are trying to point out that maybe ... just maybe ... religious faith is fallacious in nature and maybe just maybe it has caused a lot of harm and we ought to rethink it a bit. They have every right in the world to do that.

That pissant generalization of 'oh you believe too and you need reassurance too nyah nyah nyah nyah nya nya' applies even more to religious people. I could rewrite that same argument to apply to ... oh I don't know ... people who need a sacred scripture for reassurance and then go to the streets to shout about it aloud in no general direction. But then that doesn't bother me. I think they are wrong, but I respect and cherish their right to free speech.

Atheists are overwhelmingly more closeted than religious people about their beliefs. That just makes a complete mockery of your last sentence.

[arista]

"Atheists are overwhelmingly more closeted than religious people about their beliefs."


Bang On Right
Stu.

[Marsh.]

Oh give that tired old rhetoric a rest would you. Everything you said their could be applied to religious people too if I were into weak arse, wank assumptions. No matter how much I love or hate atheists that's just such a lazy argument from people of faith. Of course atheists are going to broadcast their stance on the issue, share information on the universe with other atheists and so on. Very few people are natural atheists considering most of us were reared with religion. Information had to convert them and they now share this information with others.

Are you saying because atheists don't believe that they should not be allowed debate with religious people? After all they know and have their own beliefs. Why don't they just shut up unlike the religious people. Yeah. Atheists should just shut the hell up. So should people in various other positions to give out knowledge or their interpretation and opinion on it. Yeah. Just shut up. You big loosers. We don't want to hear your side of the story because it might in some way threaten ours.

Prominent atheists are not trying to padlock local churches. They are trying to point out that maybe ... just maybe ... religious faith is fallacious in nature and maybe just maybe it has caused a lot of harm and we ought to rethink it a bit. They have every right in the world to do that.

That pissant generalization of 'oh you believe too and you need reassurance too nyah nyah nyah nyah nya nya' applies even more to religious people. I could rewrite that same argument to apply to ... oh I don't know ... people who need a sacred scripture for reassurance and then go to the streets to shout about it aloud in no general direction. But then that doesn't bother me. I think they are wrong, but I respect and cherish their right to free speech.

Atheists are overwhelmingly more closeted than religious people about their beliefs. That just makes a complete mockery of your last sentence.


Did I say that my point couldn't be applied to religious people too?

Sorry that you just wasted your time typing up that very long reply when you didn't really need to.
My point was about the atheist we are discussing: the man in the video and to an extent Arista. I could have worded my reply more clearly but it was in response to Arista's post which was basically being patronising to all religious people. It's like saying all muslim's are terrorists, it's not true.

And religious people don't need the sacred scripture to back up anything. The scripture is the cause of their beliefs and religion is all about faith, which isn't about having solid proof.

Suppose it just winds me up when people rant about religion being wrong. "There is no god", "How can you believe in something you can't see" etc, etc. Yet do they have proof that God doesn't exist?

And whoever posted "Whatever the truth is, Religion is far from it". Well, religion is a pretty broad spectrum in general, they don't all believe in the same things. And whether a specific religion is "whatever the truth is" or not, how would you know?

[Sticks]

Atheists show quite a lot of faith

They have to believe that nothing gives rise to something, That which is non living gives rise to to living, in spite of all experiments proving the contrary and unconscious gives rise to conscious.

[InOne]

I think "Atheists" that argue Religion and there isn't a God all that time aren't proper Atheists, they care too much. I was like that at one point, got quite into Dawkins and all that, now I just don't bother or even think about it.

[Angus]

Still not one shred of proof either way really, is there?

[InOne]

Still not one shred of proof either way really, is there?

Depends what your idea of a God is?

[Livia]

Yes it should be
all these God Freaks Preach Rubbish.

Do you think that only people like the man on your video should be afforded a voice?

I would like to think that you can believe what you want to believe and leave me alone to believe what I believe without ridiculing me. That's all I ask. I can't believe some people get so angry and upset because other people believe in God or worship in a different way.

[arista]

Do you think that only people like the man on your video should be afforded a voice?

I would like to think that you can believe what you want to believe and leave me alone to believe what I believe without ridiculing me. That's all I ask. I can't believe some people get so angry and upset because other people believe in God or worship in a different way.


So May God Freaks Do Damage
to this World.


I can Fully Understand the Anger at God Nutters
like Bin Laden or GW Bush.
Both used there God as the backer to what hell they did.



There is No Proven God


It is the best way to be
No God.

[BB_Eye]

I disagree that atheism is a faith like religions are. Atheism, at least in the anglophone tradition, is taking an empirical argument and using it as your grounds for knowledge. If you don't agree that knowledge can be mostly, if not exclusively, derived from experience, then fair enough. It's open to debate, but doubt is not the same thing as faith.

Personally I don't think you can profess a non-belief in God without also dismissing the Judaeo-Christian idea of good and evil (is Christian morality not equally as supernatural as Christian faith?) and I'll bet very few self-proclaimed atheists would be willing to do that

[Livia]

So May God Freaks Do Damage
to this World.... etc etc.



Being a Jew, I'm well aware of the damage people do to each other because they misunderstand each other's faith or lack of it. I believe we have to be tolerant of each other without trying to convert others. If you don't believe in God, that's your of personal feeling. I don't agree; but I have no interest in trying to convince or convert you. We can agree to disagree.

[Angus]

Depends what your idea of a God is?

Empirical evidence does not yet exist either for or against the existence of deity(ies), so ultimately a person's idea of God will fit in with their unique belief system and they will rationalise and justify the existence of their deity(ies) of choice. I neither believe nor disbelieve in God(s), as I think the jury is still out, but rather in a way of life that I feel comfortable living, the principle tenet of which is to treat others as you would like to be treated. That simple principle covers most bases.

[InOne]

Empirical evidence does not yet exist either for or against the existence of deity(ies), so ultimately a person's idea of God will fit in with their unique belief system and they will rationalise and justify the existence of their deity(ies) of choice. I neither believe nor disbelieve in God(s), as I think the jury is still out, but rather in a way of life that I feel comfortable living, the principle tenet of which is to treat others as you would like to be treated. That simple principle covers most bases.

Still, any idea you have is an invented one (by man) And you don't need to be religious to follow the golden rule

[Marsh.]

So May God Freaks Do Damage
to this World.


I can Fully Understand the Anger at God Nutters
like Bin Laden or GW Bush.
Both used there God as the backer to what hell they did.



There is No Proven God


It is the best way to be
No God.


Funny how you ridicule religious people for pushing their views on other people, or trying to convert people yet you're the one stating your OPINIONS as fact and stating that there is categorically NO GOD. The term "God" being a diverse term anyway.

I'm willing to participate in a discussion about religion and faith but you're just rude. Don't even listen to people's points. Just ignore it, say "You're wrong" and move on. Very intelligent.

[Angus]

Still, any idea you have is an invented one (by man) And you don't need to be religious to follow the golden rule

It does seem strange that in this day and age with all the scientific advances and technology etc, no-one is able to definitively disprove the existence of God(s), anymore than all the religions in the world are able to offer definitive proof of the existence of their worshipped deity(ies). My point exactly is that the only tenet necessary to ensure harmony, justice, fairness and decency IS the "golden rule" I, and thankfully many others live by. I consider atheism as much a "religious" belief as any other, since it is entrenched, stubbornly held and blindly followed despite there being no empirical evidence to support it.

[arista]

Funny how you ridicule religious people for pushing their views on other people, or trying to convert people yet you're the one stating your OPINIONS as fact and stating that there is categorically NO GOD. The term "God" being a diverse term anyway.

I'm willing to participate in a discussion about religion and faith but you're just rude. Don't even listen to people's points. Just ignore it, say "You're wrong" and move on. Very intelligent.



If Only Life was that Simple.

[Stu]

Did I say that my point couldn't be applied to religious people too?

Sorry that you just wasted your time typing up that very long reply when you didn't really need to.
My point was about the atheist we are discussing: the man in the video and to an extent Arista. I could have worded my reply more clearly but it was in response to Arista's post which was basically being patronising to all religious people. It's like saying all muslim's are terrorists, it's not true.

And religious people don't need the sacred scripture to back up anything. The scripture is the cause of their beliefs and religion is all about faith, which isn't about having solid proof.

Suppose it just winds me up when people rant about religion being wrong. "There is no god", "How can you believe in something you can't see" etc, etc. Yet do they have proof that God doesn't exist?

And whoever posted "Whatever the truth is, Religion is far from it". Well, religion is a pretty broad spectrum in general, they don't all believe in the same things. And whether a specific religion is "whatever the truth is" or not, how would you know?
What about the man in the video and Arista? They are every bit as hopelessly fundamentalist as ... well ... fundamentalists it would seem. I'm still not in favour of levelling the 'no you shut up!' argument at them.

I'm not a strict atheists by the way. I just sound a lot like one considering I would rather defend them in their cause to wrangle any semblance of world power away from the type of religious people who believe word for word in The Bible and suchlike.

I have my own quasi-spiritual-cosmic-arse-psychedelic-casualty views I usually revert back to every four or five days when I realize that strict atheism as simple as it is to get on with simply doesn't satisfy me enough.

[Marsh.]

If Only Life was that Simple.

I wasn't telling you to move on.

[Marsh.]

I'm still not in favour of levelling the 'no you shut up!' argument at them.

Then you misunderstood my original post. That wasn't my intention and like I said in my second post, I could have worded it better.

[arista]

http://images.play.com/bc/1014528x.jpg


For 08Marsh

Me Rude?

[arista]

I wasn't telling you to move on.


I know you were not.

Thats why I picked it.

[Sticks]

On the other hand

This title

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41OpFORY9YL._BO2,204,203,200_PIsitb-sticker-arrow-click,TopRight,35,-76_AA300_SH20_OU01_.jpg

Is also available from Amazon :whistle:

[arista]

Of course Sticks
But mine was from Play.com

[arista]

Of course Sticks
But mine was from Play.com

[Harry!]

Of course Sticks
But mine was from Play.com

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_mmBw3uzPnJI/S_5IHGcf5II/AAAAAAABSjk/9PsNThMctCM/s1600/Haters_Gonna_Hate_03.jpg

[Marsh.]

http://images.play.com/bc/1014528x.jpg


For 08Marsh

Me Rude?


I love science fiction. Thanks for the tip.

[Stu]

It's not science fiction though. It's conclusion is that '... there is probably no God'. It doesn't make anything up or set forth an absoloute theory of everything for a model dependant universe, regardless of Dawkin's own beliefs.

[arista]

I love science fiction. Thanks for the tip.


No he even did a great Ch4 Docu on it.


There Is No God

I am Rude on that.

[Angus]

No he even did a great Ch4 Docu on it.


There Is No God

I am Rude on that.

Yet you still offer no absolute PROOF.

[Marsh.]

There's even a movie to go with it. Hmm, might give it a try.
Are there any sequels?

[arista]

Yet you still offer no absolute PROOF.

I do not have to.


You as the God Trustee
Have to Prove it.

[arista]

There's even a movie to go with it. Hmm, might give it a try.
Are there any sequels?


Yes there will be.



Keep On Keepin' On 08marsh

[Stu]

Yes, Repetetive Posting II : I Think This Is Going Nowhere.

Dawkins plays the Abrahamic God in it only he never appears on screen. His in the credits, though, and the dialogue makes numerous mention of him.

[Angus]

I do not have to.


You as the God Trustee
Have to Prove it.

Ah, but I'm not the God Trustee, I don't bat for either side since neither side can provide any proof. You, however, are adamant there is NO God yet you have not offered proof just your opinion, so YES you do have to prove it, whilst I, who have not made any assertion that there IS a God do not:wink:

[arista]

I do not Need Proof.

Only You Do.

There Is No God.

[Angus]

I do not Need Proof.

Only You Do.

There Is No God.

No Arista - my point is that you cannot present your own personal opinion as a fact without any actual proof - that makes your opinion as invalid as that of the very people you despise.

[arista]

No Arista - my point is that you cannot present your own personal opinion as a fact without any actual proof - that makes your opinion as invalid as that of the very people you despise.

Only To You.

[BB_Eye]

Yet you still offer no absolute PROOF.
Why do you need absolute proof? Lets both agree that there is no benevolent primordial creator physically intervening in the affairs of the world. The merciless cruelty and moral indifference of the world is proof enough of that.

Christians are right to point out that the existence of a world independent of our senses can never be absolutely disproven. But the greatest error Christians make (and many non-Christians too) is to propose that knowledge of 'a priori truths' such as the existence of God, the eternal or universal truths offer us any lasting insight into the human condition or even any such possible metaphysical world. Only a Christian needs such absolution.

[Angus]

Why do you need absolute proof? Lets both agree that there is no benevolent primordial creator physically intervening in the affairs of the world. The merciless cruelty and moral indifference of the world is proof enough of that.

Christians are right to point out that the existence of a world independent of our senses can never be absolutely disproven. But the greatest error Christians make (and many non-Christians too) is to propose that knowledge of 'a priori truths' such as the existence of God, the eternal or universal truths offer us any lasting insight into the human condition or even any such possible metaphysical world. Only a Christian needs such absolution.

Why should I agree when once again you offer nothing but your own opinion, whilst deriding the lack of evidence that you say is absent from those who follow their various religions? Why is there one standard of proof required from them, but a lesser one from those who arrogantly and imperiously state quite categorically there is no God.

For the record, I personally do not require any definitive proof for either position - I am acting as the devil's advocate in pointing out that neither position can offer any empirical evidence, just conjecture based on subjective observations of the world around us.

I reject both positions as irrelevant, since commonsense tells me that there is only one moral truth necessary for all of us to live harmoniously, respectfully, considerately and compassionately and that is to treat others as you would wish to be treated. Simplistic? sure. Logical? of course. Implementable? Probably not, precisely because of the age old jockeying for power and influence by the various religious and secular factions.

Sadly, there are many in this world who do harm and cause misery to others, often citing their religious OR secular beliefs as justification for unconscionable actions. I can't see an end to that situation any time this millennium, or the next.

[BB_Eye]

Why should I agree when once again you offer nothing but your own opinion, whilst deriding the lack of evidence that you say is absent from those who follow their various religions? Why is there one standard of proof required from them, but a lesser one from those who arrogantly and imperiously state quite categorically there is no God.I am not asking you to agree there is no God. I am saying we ought to agree there is no corporeal God who co-exists with us in the physical world, who created the world in seven days and who intervenes in our lives. An example this would be trial by ordeal where God alone supposedly decides the guilt or innocence of the convicted. I figured rejecting this view was a given seen as we are not superstitious or living in the middle ages. If God presided over the events of our lives, how could he possibly allow injustice to occur?

For the record, I personally do not require any definitive proof for either position - I am acting as the devil's advocate in pointing out that neither position can offer any empirical evidence, just conjecture based on subjective observations of the world around us.
It is not possible for an omnipotent, morally perfect God to allow the state of affairs that the world finds itself in. No Christian God can be said to have any agency in a world that is bereft of moral order like ours is. Good people are very often dealt the **** card in life and vice versa. This is the reason Christians needed to believe in an afterlife in the first place. It follows from this that in order for the Christian God to exist, our senses must somehow be deceiving us and that only self-evident statements can tell us everything we can know about the 'true world'. That God and the human soul are somehow necessary truths. This is the position that most modern Christians take. I am arguing from the position that reason cannot tell us anything about what lies beyond what we can see with our own eyes, given that reason is a relatively recent invention in human history.

I reject both positions as irrelevant, since commonsense tells me that there is only one moral truth necessary for all of us to live harmoniously, respectfully, considerately and compassionately and that is to treat others as you would wish to be treated. Simplistic? sure. Logical? of course. Implementable? Probably not, precisely because of the age old jockeying for power and influence by the various religious and secular factions.But morality is not common sense at all. There have been many cultures with moral codes and norms completely abbhorent to our Western, neo-Christian sensibilities. How did common sense elude the Greeks and Romans when they took slaves and gave them no rights whatsoever? What about Indian cultures that abided by a strict caste system and excluded those born into 'chandala' families from activities afforded to everybody else, including drinking water from anywhere other than puddles and swamps? And even today, we have the prevalence of muslim countries which afford few rights to women and persecute Christians and Jews. This was/is a normal way of life for these people. Genocide was morally acceptable for the Mongols, imperial Russia, the Ottoman Empire, imperial Japan, the Nazis, communists, etc. Human nature doesn't paint such a flattering picture. Morality as we know is not innate or intuitive. Universal notions of the rights of man and that everybody is equal are an invention of Christianity.

Sadly, there are many in this world who do harm and cause misery to others, often citing their religious OR secular beliefs as justification for unconscionable actions. I can't see an end to that situation any time this millennium, or the next.I agree. No universal thought system has ever worked in moulding the world in its own image. It's time we gave up.

[MTVN]

Why do you need absolute proof? Lets both agree that there is no benevolent primordial creator physically intervening in the affairs of the world. The merciless cruelty and moral indifference of the world is proof enough of that.

Christians are right to point out that the existence of a world independent of our senses can never be absolutely disproven. But the greatest error Christians make (and many non-Christians too) is to propose that knowledge of 'a priori truths' such as the existence of God, the eternal or universal truths offer us any lasting insight into the human condition or even any such possible metaphysical world. Only a Christian needs such absolution.

I agree. At a push I can sort of understand the argument sometimes used that God gives everyone a choice and so that's why atrocities such as the Holocaust were commited. But I cant see how any Christian could look at a natural disaster like Haiti, or the Tsunami and still maintain that God has the ability to intervene in the world.

[keithafc]

Iv always said, there is probably more chance of a spirit world than a lone god who created the world in 7 days..

[Stu]

It's hillarious because in Genesis days were only created on the fourth 'day' anyway.

[Sticks]

Iv always said, there is probably more chance of a spirit world than a lone god who created the world in 7 days..

6 days he rested on the 7th

[Angus]

originally posted by BB Eye
"But morality is not common sense at all. There have been many cultures with moral codes and norms completely abbhorent to our Western, neo-Christian sensibilities. How did common sense elude the Greeks and Romans when they took slaves and gave them no rights whatsoever? What about Indian cultures that abided by a strict caste system and excluded those born into 'chandala' families from activities afforded to everybody else, including drinking water from anywhere other than puddles and swamps? And even today, we have the prevalence of muslim countries which afford few rights to women and persecute Christians and Jews. This was/is a normal way of life for these people. Genocide was morally acceptable for the Mongols, imperial Russia, the Ottoman Empire, imperial Japan, the Nazis, communists, etc. Human nature doesn't paint such a flattering picture. Morality as we know is not innate or intuitive. Universal notions of the rights of man and that everybody is equal are an invention of Christianity."




I completely agree that morality is neither innate or intuitive, it evolves over time and through experience. For me my morality is rooted in pragmatism - I have to function and live in a society with so many different people with often diametrically opposed beliefs, backgrounds, culture etc etc, whose ideas of morality I sometimes find abhorrent since they cause dissent, offence, oppression or harm to others. The tenet by which I live my life is commonsense to ME since it covers both my own instinctive desire not to cause harm, distress or offence to others, but it also sits well with societal demands that require the same restraints.

Irrespective of which philosophy or religion the notions of equality and compassion for others originated from, I cannot help but agree with them. After all, every act of evil and injustice in this world is committed by those who do not recognise the rights of others to live the one life they have without fear of oppression or harm.

However, just because I follow the golden rule does not make me a push over. The golden rule requires recipricocity. Treating others as you would be treated is a two way street - if a person chooses to cause harm to another, then they can only expect to be treated likewise. I don't subscribe to the "turn the other cheek" philosophy since that simply enables and validates abhorrent behaviour.

[Angus]

6 days he rested on the 7th

It is also generally agreed by Bible scholars that "days" is a metaphorical term whereby a single day might have been millennia. Nevertheless, if one believes in an omnipotent God, then surely that God would be capable of doing anything within any time frame?