Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
If we do not hit our goal we will be forced to close the site.

Current status: https://keepboardsalive.com/

Annual subs are best for most impact. If you are still undecided on going Ad Free - you can also donate using the Paypal Donate option. All contribution helps. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

1…1819212324…141

Comments

  • #602
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    marienbad wrote: »
    This is just the same outlook as when we first looked up at the sky and thought we were the centre of the universe, and no different to those Brazilian tribes when they first saw an aeroplane , you can still see it in those Cargo Cults in the Pacific Islands referred to earlier in the thread.

    You see, this is what I'm talking about when I say one blinds themselves to philosophy; mocking religious belief by citing scientific progress is not a valid adult response; the fashionable idea which permeates this age is that science and religion are opposites; nothing could be further from the truth; rather, science and religion are bedfellows, aspects of our human attempts at understanding creation; indeed, I have the idea that the future progression of humanity is some sort of synthesis between the two, the evolution towards Homo Spiritualis, bringing us closer to understanding God.

    It may be gratifying to mock primitive tribes, but it is so unbecoming.
    marienbad wrote: »
    Can just give one example ,since the dawn of time , where what was previously attributed to God/Gods/Religion etc was not subsequently debunked by the march of science ?

    I asked this before and never got an answer.

    You have been answered numerous times; science cannot ever ever "debunk" faith.


  • #603
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    marienbad wrote: »
    This is just the same outlook as when we first looked up at the sky and thought we were the centre of the universe, and no different to those Brazilian tribes when they first saw an aeroplane , you can still see it in those Cargo Cults in the Pacific Islands referred to earlier in the thread.

    Can just give one example ,since the dawn of time , where what was previously attributed to God/Gods/Religion etc was not subsequently debunked by the march of science ?

    I asked this before and never got an answer.
    Could be ... but even cargo cults are based on evidence ... the evidence of contact with the commercial networks of colonizing societies that gave rise to these cults.

    Christianity is also based on evidence ... the evidence for a God who provides a particulary plausible explanation for the origins and existence of Mankind.
    Science hasn't actually 'debunked' anything central to the Christian Faith. Science has certainly added to our awe of life and living processes ... and by extension our awe of the God who generated it.


  • #604
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    Gunney wrote: »
    There is no answer because science cannot debunk God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit.

    Well it has with most everything else ! Thunder ,lighting, flat earth, geocentrism, and on and on and on ....

    If you compare what you believe right now to your co-religionists even a few hundred years ago you will find a world of difference , why is that ?
    Because you have trimmed your sails to take account of the latest knowledge .

    And so it will be right in to the future .


  • #605
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    marienbad wrote: »
    Well it has with most everything else ! Thunder ,lighting, flat earth, geocentrism, and on and on and on ....

    If you compare what you believe right now to your co-religionists even a few hundred years ago you will find a world of difference , why is that ?
    Because you have trimmed your sails to take account of the latest knowledge .

    And so it will be right in to the future .
    Thunder ,lighting, flat earth, geocentrism, and on and on and on .... were never central to a belief in the God of the Bible.
    I agree that as we make scientific progress ... we also make progress in our understanding of God ... and the magnificence of His Divine Will expressed in the physical Universe and all things therein.


  • #606
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    catallus wrote: »
    You see, this is what I'm talking about when I say one blinds themselves to philosophy; mocking religious belief by citing scientific progress is not a valid adult response; the fashionable idea which permeates this age is that science and religion are opposites; nothing could be further from the truth; rather, science and religion are bedfellows, aspects of our human attempts at understanding creation; indeed, I have the idea that the future progression of humanity is some sort of synthesis between the two, the evolution towards Homo Spiritualis, bringing us closer to understanding God.

    It may be gratifying to mock primitive tribes, but it is so unbecoming.



    You have been answered numerous times; science cannot ever ever "debunk" faith.

    Who is mocking anyone ? Stop seeing what isn't there .And no I haven't been answered once .

    Science has been debunking faith for thousands of years , do I need to give you more examples ?


  • Advertisement
  • #607
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    J C wrote: »
    You guys say ye don't think about God and ye don't deny Him ... yet ye post at least as much on this forum as most of the Christians on it ... and your postings largely revolve around denying the evidence for the existence of God.
    Sounds like ye do believe in something ... and that something is the denial of the existence of God.
    ... and just like every other belief, it brings with it a whole set of other beliefs and ways of viewing the world and everything in it.

    We do indeed , but not for the reasons you outline .You don't see many atheists arguing against Zeus or Ahura Mazda and that is because they have zero effect on our lives .

    Christianity on the other hand runs our education system , has a huge effect on our medical practice and permeates our constitution to such an extend that we are the only country in the 21st century to enact a blasphemy law .

    You have a proper separation of church and state and you would never hear from most of us again . You could be happily ignored just like the soccer forum or the chess forum or the classical music forum.


  • #608
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    katydid wrote: »
    You BELIEVE there is no God.

    So now you are telling me what I believe?

    Great.

    You don't really address any of the points so why don't you admit that your "argument" is nothing more than a tactic?

    You obviously acknowledge the inherent failings in your faith based belief and see that a lack of belief in something does not have the same failings. So the goal of insisting that I really, really, really, do beleive in something is just an attempt to try and tangle me up in the same restrictions and failings that are built in to your faith based belief.

    There is no proof that God exists, so I dismiss the claim until you bring me evidence. It has nothing to do with faith. It has nothing to do with belief.

    Atheism is not a disbelief. It is not "believeing there is no God". It is a lack of belief.

    I am honestly asking you, why can you not understand this? Why do you keep arguing that the Atheist position is faith based? Is it just stubbornness or are you actually incapable of understanding?


  • #609
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    orubiru wrote: »
    So now you are telling me what I believe?

    Great.

    You don't really address any of the points so why don't you admit that your "argument" is nothing more than a tactic?

    You obviously acknowledge the inherent failings in your faith based belief and see that a lack of belief in something does not have the same failings. So the goal of insisting that I really, really, really, do beleive in something is just an attempt to try and tangle me up in the same restrictions and failings that are built in to your faith based belief.

    There is no proof that God exists, so I dismiss the claim until you bring me evidence. It has nothing to do with faith. It has nothing to do with belief.

    Atheism is not a disbelief. It is not "believeing there is no God". It is a lack of belief.

    I am honestly asking you, why can you not understand this? Why do you keep arguing that the Atheist position is faith based? Is it just stubbornness or are you actually incapable of understanding?

    There are three possibilities. Either you don't believe in God, or you do believe in God, or you're not sure, in which case you are open to the possibility of belief. Whichever way, belief is a factor.


  • #610
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,189 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    marienbad, don't waste your time.


  • #611
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    marienbad wrote: »
    We do indeed , but not for the reasons you outline .You don't see many atheists arguing against Zeus or Ahura Mazda and that is because they have zero effect on our lives .

    Christianity on the other hand runs our education system , has a huge effect on our medical practice and permeates our constitution to such an extend that we are the only country in the 21st century to enact a blasphemy law .

    You have a proper separation of church and state and you would never hear from most of us again . You could be happily ignored just like the soccer forum or the chess forum or the classical music forum.

    The fact that any religion permeates our society in the way it does does not explain the obsession with atheists about it. I'm a Christian, and I don't wish to see Christianity or any other religion impact in any way on the institutions of our state, or on our constitution. This reality is an historical anomaly and something that many citizens believe has no place in modern Irish society. But to use it as an excuse to try to explain obsessing about something you don't believe in is just plain silly.


  • Advertisement
  • #612
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    J C wrote: »
    You are correct ... but Atheists think that they question everything ... but they actually question nothing that is required to bolster their Atheism ... because if they did ... they'd probably cease to be Atheists.

    I know ... because I was that soldier ... always questioning the (many) weaknesses of religion ... but never really questioning anything that might undermine Atheism.

    How can you undermine Atheism though? You would have to actually provide evidence that God exists. If you can't do this then you can't even put a dent in the Atheists "armour". So, what you guys do is convince yourselves that the same weakness that come with sincere religious faith are also present in non believers.

    The child-like "yeah, I can't prove God exists but YOU can't prove God doesn't exist! Heeeee!" Grow up.

    Of course your religion is open to ridicule. Some of the claims made are absurd. Some of the "beliefs" are laughable and so people laugh at them. This surprises you?

    Its well documented that in the early days "faith" in religion was enforced through threats, ostracism, persecution or violence. This would have been true in Ireland up until maybe even only 100 years ago. Speaking out was not a good idea if one valued their quality of life or their personal safety.

    Nowadays religion has no power over the people and so they can laugh at the ridiculous, baseless, claims and make fun of them without fear of reprisal.

    If heard people, grown educated adults, say "if there is no God then how can you explain the sunset"... I'm somehow expected to just shrug that off? Get real.

    The only thing that can undermine Atheism is proof that there is a God.


  • #613
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    katydid wrote: »
    There are three possibilities. Either you don't believe in God, or you do believe in God, or you're not sure, in which case you are open to the possibility of belief. Whichever way, belief is a factor.

    *shrugs* I'm giving up on you, katydid. There's only so many times I can make the same point with you utterly failing to grasp it. You are not even trying.


  • #614
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    katydid wrote: »
    .... I don't wish to see Christianity or any other religion impact in any way on the institutions of our state, or on our constitution. This reality is an historical anomaly and something that many citizens believe has no place in modern Irish society......

    Whoa there!!!

    The only reason we have a liberal state where we enjoy the freedoms we do is because of Christianity, not in spite of it!

    Religion is the bulwark against the darkness of total ideology.


  • #615
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    katydid wrote: »
    You BELIEVE there is no God.

    There we have it folks. Another reason to dismiss anything from Katy. She has in turn dismissed everything we say, and literally puts words in our mouths. Even when we take the time to explain very carefully our position, she sweeps it away and just insists on her own point.
    is that the proponents of such a zero-sum point of view always have to retreat into a position where they are so obviously blind to the miracle of creation.
    How is it a zero-sum point of view?
    As for blind...you've just made a fallacy there, by presupposing that there is a creation.
    Wittgenstein was thinking deeply when he came up with "...whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent";
    Which is what we do. That is what we are saying when we say "We do not know [at this present time]". We cannot speak with any determination about the origin of the universe, beyond the Big Bang that is (and that is itself being questioned by new mathematical equations), but after that, we remain silent. We don't dare impose what we want to be true onto something that we cannot determine with any accuracy.
    You guys say ye don't think about God and ye don't deny Him ... yet ye post at least as much on this forum as most of the Christians on it ... and your postings largely revolve around denying the evidence for the existence of God.
    Sounds like ye do believe in something ... and that something is the denial of the existence of God.
    ... and just like every other belief, it brings with it a whole set of other beliefs and ways of viewing the world and everything in it.
    I'm pretty sure J C you've been told in the past why the average atheist who argues in forums does this. It's not so much the god itself we're arguing against, it's those who believe in said god who then go on to use that god as justification for all sorts of social and/or legal moves in the future.
    The problem with atheists is that they do not question. They do not question why the universe is here, why the Big Bang happened, why life started.
    Do you honestly believe that is our modus operandi? I honestly have to question whether you've met an actual atheist in real life. I became such because of my questioning nature. I started out christian, but then began questioning it, including questions about life, the universe and everything. I want to know how and why the Big Bang happened (if there even is a why) but I am not going to be intellectually dishonest and impose a god as an answer before such a thing can be reliably determined.
    This is why I sometimes act so annoyed with theists such as yourself. You don't listen to how it is we explain ourselves, you just impose what it is you think we are and then attack that. Classic strawman fallacy.
    Heck, they cannot even ask the question how the universe exists or how life exists.
    Ask...or answer? Which is it? We ask the question of ourselves all the time, just as much as you. However, I dare say we are more stringent in what we accept as a legitimate answer. We do not just throw out an answer willy nilly.
    There is no answer because science cannot debunk God, Jesus, or the Holy Spirit.
    Really? Resurrection then. Jesus dying on the cross, coming back to life, then later ascending into heaven. That is an event that either did happen or did not happen. It's one or the other. Science is used to try and answer questions of "Did X Happen?"
    Is it at all possible that this event did not happen? That it was made up?
    IF you say no "There is no possibility of the event not happening", congrats. You've just committed the logical fallacy of special pleading, where the core event for your religion is not subject at all to the laws of logic, but those of other religions are (since you are ready and willing to dismiss them).
    If you say yes "There is a possibility that such an event did not happen, even though I believe it did", then science can be used to investigate it.
    If you're not willing to apply science to this question (like Katy), why? Why do you compartmentalize your thinking this way? Everything else in your life you question through the lens of science, but this one aspect, you don't.
    the evidence for a God who provides a particulary plausible explanation for the origins and existence of Mankind.
    Except that this evidence is contradicted by over one hundred and fifty years worth of evidence that points in an opposite direction. I wouldn't call what you cite plausible. It's like you coming into a murder scene, waving a book around and saying "This book says John Brown murdered Reverend Green", but the rest of the detectives look at all the other evidence (such as surveillance footage, fingerprints, DNA, etc) that points to Mike Smith having murdered Butcher Thompson.
    Science hasn't actually 'debunked' anything central to the Christian Faith.
    Pretty sure that the story of Moses is sorta central to both Judaism and Christianity. Despite decades of searching, no evidence has ever been found in support of the Exodus story. Since there is a dearth of evidence, we can safely conclude that there never was a slave population of Hebrews escaping from Egypt. Given that the bible attributes Jesus as speaking about Moses on more than one occassion, we can safely conclude that he must not have been an all knowing God, to make this mistake.


  • #616
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    RikuoAmero wrote: »
    There we have it folks. Another reason to dismiss anything from Katy. She has in turn dismissed everything we say, and literally puts words in our mouths. Even when we take the time to explain very carefully our position, she sweeps it away and just insists on her own point.


    How is it a zero-sum point of view?
    As for blind...you've just made a fallacy there, by presupposing that there is a creation.


    Which is what we do. That is what we are saying when we say "We do not know [at this present time]". We cannot speak with any determination about the origin of the universe, beyond the Big Bang that is (and that is itself being questioned by new mathematical equations), but after that, we remain silent. We don't dare impose what we want to be true onto something that we cannot determine with any accuracy.


    I'm pretty sure J C you've been told in the past why the average atheist who argues in forums does this. It's not so much the god itself we're arguing against, it's those who believe in said god who then go on to use that god as justification for all sorts of social and/or legal moves in the future.


    Do you honestly believe that is our modus operandi? I honestly have to question whether you've met an actual atheist in real life. I became such because of my questioning nature. I started out christian, but then began questioning it, including questions about life, the universe and everything. I want to know how and why the Big Bang happened (if there even is a why) but I am not going to be intellectually dishonest and impose a god as an answer before such a thing can be reliably determined.
    This is why I sometimes act so annoyed with theists such as yourself. You don't listen to how it is we explain ourselves, you just impose what it is you think we are and then attack that. Classic strawman fallacy.


    Ask...or answer? Which is it? We ask the question of ourselves all the time, just as much as you. However, I dare say we are more stringent in what we accept as a legitimate answer. We do not just throw out an answer willy nilly.


    Really? Resurrection then. Jesus dying on the cross, coming back to life, then later ascending into heaven. That is an event that either did happen or did not happen. It's one or the other. Science is used to try and answer questions of "Did X Happen?"
    Is it at all possible that this event did not happen? That it was made up?
    IF you say no "There is no possibility of the event not happening", congrats. You've just committed the logical fallacy of special pleading, where the core event for your religion is not subject at all to the laws of logic, but those of other religions are (since you are ready and willing to dismiss them).
    If you say yes "There is a possibility that such an event did not happen, even though I believe it did", then science can be used to investigate it.
    If you're not willing to apply science to this question (like Katy), why? Why do you compartmentalize your thinking this way? Everything else in your life you question through the lens of science, but this one aspect, you don't.


    Except that this evidence is contradicted by over one hundred and fifty years worth of evidence that points in an opposite direction. I wouldn't call what you cite plausible. It's like you coming into a murder scene, waving a book around and saying "This book says John Brown murdered Reverend Green", but the rest of the detectives look at all the other evidence (such as surveillance footage, fingerprints, DNA, etc) that points to Mike Smith having murdered Butcher Thompson.


    Pretty sure that the story of Moses is sorta central to both Judaism and Christianity. Despite decades of searching, no evidence has ever been found in support of the Exodus story. Since there is a dearth of evidence, we can safely conclude that there never was a slave population of Hebrews escaping from Egypt. Given that the bible attributes Jesus as speaking about Moses on more than one occassion, we can safely conclude that he must not have been an all knowing God, to make this mistake.

    How am I putting words into your mouth? There's a concept called God. Some people believe he exists. Some people believe he does not exist. How hard is that to understand?


  • #617
    catallus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,106 ✭✭✭catallus


    RikuoAmero wrote: »
    .you've just made a fallacy there, by presupposing that there is a creation.

    :pac:

    Are you having a laugh?

    Yeah, I am presuming the universe exists.

    Do you not?


  • #618
    PopePalpatine
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,189 ✭✭✭✭PopePalpatine


    catallus wrote: »
    Whoa there!!!

    The only reason we have a liberal state where we enjoy the freedoms we do is because of Christianity, not in spite of it!

    Religion is the bulwark against the darkness of total ideology.

    This country's history says otherwise: industrial schools, Magdalene Laundries, contraceptive bans, divorce being banned in the Constitution, the criminalisation of homosexuality etc. Religion has not been averse to contributing to totalitarian darkness.


  • #619
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    katydid wrote: »
    The fact that any religion permeates our society in the way it does does not explain the obsession with atheists about it. I'm a Christian, and I don't wish to see Christianity or any other religion impact in any way on the institutions of our state, or on our constitution. This reality is an historical anomaly and something that many citizens believe has no place in modern Irish society. But to use it as an excuse to try to explain obsessing about something you don't believe in is just plain silly.

    Here you go again telling someone else what they believe ! That is what is just plain silly .


  • #620
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    marienbad wrote: »
    We do indeed , but not for the reasons you outline .You don't see many atheists arguing against Zeus or Ahura Mazda and that is because they have zero effect on our lives .

    Christianity on the other hand runs our education system , has a huge effect on our medical practice and permeates our constitution to such an extend that we are the only country in the 21st century to enact a blasphemy law .

    You have a proper separation of church and state and you would never hear from most of us again . You could be happily ignored just like the soccer forum or the chess forum or the classical music forum.
    What you mean is that we would never hear from you again if you and like-minds fully ran every aspect of our society in your own image and likeness.

    ... and we would end up dancing completely to the tune of a tiny, but very vocal minority of Atheists and Secularists ... despite well over 90% of the population being Christians and/or Theists.

    This happened before in Soviet Russia, where the atheist communists suppressed everbody else, as well as many of themselves, despite being only a minority of less than 7% of the population.
    For example, only 19 million out of a population of 290 million were members of the Communist Party in 1986 ... yet they totally dictated what the rest of the population could and couldn't do, as well as making numerous attempts to eliminate Christianity totally from Russian Society.

    I'm not saying that this would happen in Ireland ... but talk about 'ignoring' Christians (who make up 90% of the population) does have a sinister parallel with what happened with the suppression of Christians in Russia, despite also being in a majority in Russia at the time.


  • #621
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    catallus wrote: »
    :pac:

    Are you having a laugh?

    Yeah, I am presuming the universe exists.

    Do you not?

    That's not what I said. "The universe exists" and "There was a creation" are two very different concepts.


  • Advertisement
  • #622
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    catallus wrote: »
    Whoa there!!!

    The only reason we have a liberal state where we enjoy the freedoms we do is because of Christianity, not in spite of it!

    Religion is the bulwark against the darkness of total ideology.

    This hoary old chestnut again ! Every freedom we have had to be wrested tooth and nail from Christianity and the other religions .

    What history books are you reading ? Next you will be telling us that we wouldn't be educated without the church .


  • #623
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    katydid wrote: »
    How am I putting words into your mouth? There's a concept called God. Some people believe he exists. Some people believe he does not exist. How hard is that to understand?

    Lack of belief (not being convinced) on our parts in your world view some means an active disbelief and rejection of the claim there is a god.


  • #624
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    catallus wrote: »
    The funny and sad thing about "unbelief" or "atheism" is that the proponents of such a zero-sum point of view always have to retreat into a position where they are so obviously blind to the miracle of creation.

    As for those who do see that creation and believe, I can see how such a position looks just as ridiculous from an atheistic point of view, but only insofar as one blinds oneself to all of philosophy. Great minds over the centuries have struggled with such questions, from the old theologians to the modern philosophers; Wittgenstein was thinking deeply when he came up with "...whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent"; the greatest influences for me are modern novelists and poets, who question the whole hullaballoo through the "rag and bone shop" of the human heart.

    Creation of what?

    Could you be more specific?

    Did God create all the sub atomic particles and set them off interacting and over time the result became us?

    Or did God craft each Star, planet, rock, plant, animal individually and then left them to develop?

    Or did God specifically create every thing individually with a specific purpose?

    Was I, personally, created by God or was it just the Human species that God created and I am just a random result of the reproductive process?

    Or did God create the earlier "versions" of Man that would subsequently evolve (or not) to become us.

    You mention the "Miracle of Creation" as if it is a simple concept that doesn't have a ton of follow up questions.

    What did God create and how much space did God allow for his creation to expand and develop and change?

    So, for example again, what if God created humans and said "OK, only men and women can marry" was that something he intended to have set in stone or is it possible God would allow room for us to develop to a point where we'd accept same sex marriage?

    If God made us in his image then where did he get his inspiration for all the other stuff we see around?

    So what is the extent of this "Miracle of Creation"? What was created and what was given scope to develop and change?


  • #625
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    orubiru wrote: »
    Creation of what?

    Could you be more specific?

    Did God create all the sub atomic particles and set them off interacting and over time the result became us?

    Or did God craft each Star, planet, rock, plant, animal individually and then left them to develop?

    Or did God specifically create every thing individually with a specific purpose?

    Was I, personally, created by God or was it just the Human species that God created and I am just a random result of the reproductive process?

    Or did God create the earlier "versions" of Man that would subsequently evolve (or not) to become us.

    You mention the "Miracle of Creation" as if it is a simple concept that doesn't have a ton of follow up questions.

    What did God create and how much space did God allow for his creation to expand and develop and change?

    So, for example again, what if God created humans and said "OK, only men and women can marry" was that something he intended to have set in stone or is it possible God would allow room for us to develop to a point where we'd accept same sex marriage?

    If God made us in his image then where did he get his inspiration for all the other stuff we see around?

    So what is the extent of this "Miracle of Creation"? What was created and what was given scope to develop and change?

    Great response. Even in the extremely unlikely scenario I were to accept the God claim...I'd still have all these questions. Asking the question "How was the universe created" and having the extremely simple answer "Goddidit" tells me nothing. There is no information there. No how (unless you accept the literal "Let there be light" and somehow that causes light to come into being?).


  • #626
    marienbad
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,463 ✭✭✭marienbad


    J C wrote: »
    What you mean is that we would never hear from you again if you and like-minds fully ran every aspect of our society in your own image and likeness.

    ... and we would end up dancing completely to the tune of a tiny, but very vocal minority of Atheists and Secularists ... despite well over 90% of the population being Christians and/or Theists.

    This happened before in Soviet Russia, where the atheist communists suppressed everbody else, as well as many of themselves, despite being only a minority of less than 7% of the population.
    For example, only 19 million out of a population of 290 million were members of the Communist Party in 1986 ... yet they totally dictated what the rest of the population could and couldn't do, as well as making numerous attempts to eliminate Christianity totally from Russian Society.

    I'm not saying that this would happen in Ireland ... but talk about 'ignoring' Christians (who make up 90% of the population) does have a sinister parallel with what happened with the suppression of Christians in Russia, despite also being in a majority in Russia at the time.

    No, that is not what I mean .

    I don't want the Catholic church ever again having the grip on Irish Society that it once had and still does in many areas .

    I don't want Sharia law ,

    I don't want Orthodox Monks in Russia cheerleading for Putin as he beats up gay people .

    I don't want born again Christians forcing creationism into science classes .

    I don't want the angelus on the state broadcaster.

    I don't want any more women to die because the medical profession are paralysed by unworkable laws

    I want people to be able to drink on Good Friday and shop on a Sunday if they choose .

    I want same sex civil marriage.

    I want the same discrimination laws applied to education as everywhere else .

    and that just a start. Other than that I fully support the right of any and all religions to carry on their business


  • #627
    J C
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,615 ✭✭✭✭J C


    PopePalpatine wrote: »
    This country's history says otherwise: industrial schools, Magdalene Laundries, contraceptive bans, divorce being banned in the Constitution, the criminalisation of homosexuality etc. Religion has not been averse to contributing to totalitarian darkness.
    Yes there was all these things in Ireland ... but please remember that at the same time as these things existed in ireland ... the Atheistic Communists in Russia were killling and starving many of it's dissidents to death in various Gulags ... with many more sent for brainwashing AKA 're-education'.
    ... and the record of the Atheist Communists on criminalising homosexuality is also mixed, to say the least:-
    Quote Wikipedia:-
    In 1917 in the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, Vladimir Lenin decriminalized homosexuality, and allowed openly homosexual people to serve in the government. Joseph Stalin re-criminalized homosexuality in 1933 (Stalin's criminal code punishing gay men by up to five years in prison with hard labor) and the law withstood through the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and was only repealed with the fall of communism in 1993.

    I'd say that everybody in a glasshouse should avoid throwing stones ... and the deficiencies of both religion and irreligion should give everyone pause to ponder. It would seem that these deficiencies are a part of Human Nature that emerge when either religion of irreligion have uncontested and near monopoly access to power.


  • #628
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    J C wrote: »
    What you mean is that we would never hear from you again if you and like-minds fully ran every aspect of our society in your own image and likeness...<snip>

    Why the false dichotomy J C? Why is it apparently only these two options
    1) Follow the will of the majority of the population who are christian (most of whom I would say are more cultural christian and don't think much if anything about what their religion actually says)
    2) Hard line communist rule a la the USSR.


  • #629
    orubiru
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,290 ✭✭✭orubiru


    J C wrote: »
    What you mean is that we would never hear from you again if you and like-minds fully ran every aspect of our society in your own image and likeness.

    ... and we would end up dancing completely to the tune of a tiny, but very vocal minority of Atheists and Secularists ... despite well over 90% of the population being Christians and/or Theists.

    This happened before in Soviet Russia, where the atheist communists suppressed everbody else, as well as many of themselves, despite being only a minority of less than 7% of the population.
    For example, only 19 million out of a population of 290 million were members of the Communist Party in 1986 ... yet they totally dictated what the rest of the population could and couldn't do, as well as making numerous attempts to eliminate Christianity totally from Russian Society.

    I'm not saying that this would happen in Ireland ... but talk about 'ignoring' Christians (who make up 90% of the population) does have a sinister parallel with what happened with the suppression of Christians in Russia, despite also being in a majority in Russia at the time.

    J C if you believe in the "miracle of creation" then surely God intended for these things to happen?

    If so then why are you even trying to use it to make a point?

    Did God create Atheists? Why?


  • #630
    katydid
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 6,351 ✭✭✭katydid


    RikuoAmero wrote: »
    No how (unless you accept the literal "Let there be light" and somehow that causes light to come into being?).
    Which most Christians don't accept. It's a MYTH.


  • Advertisement
  • #631
    RikuoAmero
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,135 ✭✭✭RikuoAmero


    katydid wrote: »
    Which most Christians don't accept. It's a MYTH.

    This oughta be fun. If the myth is false then...then how do you explain the creation of the universe? If the account in Genesis is not to believed, then what's your explanation?
    Don't reply back with a simple "Goddidit". I want more than that.


Advertisement