Well that's cool. I'll just live my life how I want to then and when I die, if god exists then I'll accept him and be forgiven. Until then, I couldn't care less about religion and don't want to hear about it and I'll 'sin' as much as I want.
It is when you're drilling into the minds of children who know no better.
According to Christians that's too late. You live this life and then you're judged. Acceptance would also have to be in earnest rather than saying "I want in now".
If you genuinely don't want to hear about it I'd suggest that you don't look at or post in threads that have to do with atheism and faith. The other option is to place me on ignore which I'm totally OK with.
Are you a child who doesn't know any better? does phil go around lecturing children? I doubt it
So you have to live in fear just in case?
Near 1000 replies in less than a week. Well done
... it is YOU not Dawkins who equated ridiculing a belief with calling the person stupid. It is important to note that there is a massive difference between the two and one which Dawkins is very much aware of.
Even the most intelligent people can have beliefs that are silly, wrong or even dangerous. Look at Newton, one of the most lauded scientists in our history. No one doubts his intelligence and his contributions to our society. The man had some seriously ridiculous ideas around health and alchemy however.
One can attack and ridicule bad ideas in isolation from those that hold them. Not only CAN but SHOULD. Ideas, especially entirely unsubstantiated and unfounded ones, can be dangerous things and we owe it to each other and ourselves to confront bad ones wherever we find them.
This is NOT the same as attacking or disrespecting the holder of the idea. In fact I see it as a gesture of respect that we care enough about our fellow man to even spend our precious time attempting to denude them of their more ridiculous and unfounded notions.
You're above argument assumes a very silly and primitive notion of contra causal free will(sorry for bringing it up folks). It also flies in the face of a lot evidence to the contrary about human behaviour. We are animals lets not forget that important fact.
If you weren't a Christian would you have no problem doing these things?
In other words is it only your god preventing you from stealing, sleeping with a friends wife etc....
Well I don't have children. So no. Honestly though people will make up anything about you for the sake of skewing an argument if they can
This subdiscussion arose out of free will. It led into a judgement and the here-after and I've simply been addressing questions / counter-points in respect to what I believe.
No, I think a lot of atheists are opposed to this as a result of the conscience that they were given by God. I believe atheists can live a mostly ethical existence but we've still violated God's standards.
FYP so I can agree with you.
Certainly we should show respect for people even if they have ridiculous views, but why would we show respect for people who hold depraved views, like the view that it is just that people who don't believe in God should suffer eternal pain and suffering?
You keep mentioning god's standards, yet what you are talking about are basic standards needed for the proper functioning of our social species, just because someone gathered these basic rules together and said a certain deity forbids them doesn't make them his rules.
Because it's a personal opinion he holds and he's not forcing it on anyone.
From what I can see Philologos has not attacked anyone here on a personal level, you may disagree with his opinions so attack his arguments; not his person.
I think one of the main reasons religion is around is to keep order in society and to ensure a man can have a woman all to himself without her having sex with other men. That's why women are often told to cover up there attractive features in religions and to be ashamed of sex. Why do you a husband could rape his wife all he wanted. The rules were designed to protect the husband from being cheated on. So another man raping her was a big deal. It wasn't a problem at all for a man to rape his wife. It's one big trick by making up false rewards and punishments in some abstract afterlife.
philologos, do you feel the that people who follow other religions with different rules will be judged by your god and not theirs?