Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

MaxWig · 15-04-2015 07:08AM

J C wrote:

It's not complicated at all ... you sin when you don't do unto others as you would like others to do unto you.

J C wrote:

If I were homeless, I think I would like other people to be considerate and kind to me.

J C wrote:

Last time I was out and I saw a poor homeless person I talked respectfully to him and gave him some money for his personal use.

J C wrote:

He is just as much a valued child of our loving God, a I am.

J C wrote:

I didn't ignore him and step over him in my rush to become a conspicuous consumer of a frothy coffee ... which would probably only increase my cholesterol, anyway!!! Anytime we're tempted to look down on somebody going throught a tough situation, just remember that 'there I go ... but for the grace of God'.

What about not understanding sarcasm?

Sin?

indioblack · 15-04-2015 05:42PM

ABC101 wrote: »

Well... I think you are making a assumption that God will cast people into Hell on a whim. (Figure of speach you using here I take it).

Firstly.... in answering your post....

1) Believing in God is open to everybody.... believers and Athiests. Personally you could change from a lack of belief to holding a belief. You get the same chances as I do. That is pretty fair.

2) You take issue with Judgement. Well you have to remember that at the end times.... Judgement will be passed on everybody.... NOT just Athiests.... but ALL persons. When I as a believer... write about Judgement day... it is for all humans... not just Athiests. Believers and Athiests face the same Judge.

Some people are very uncomfortable about this..... however personally I as a believer... did not make Judgement day up. It is mentioned in the Gospels by Jesus, mentioned in the Revelation and various books of the Bible. The people at the time were curious about how things would end, where would the bad guys go? What must be done to achieve getting into Heaven?

If you do research on Hades / Hell / underworld etc etc.... the concept goes back thousands of years.... long before Christianity. The concept of Hell seems to be around when humans first took up residence.

If the concept of good people going to paradise and bad people going to damnation is disagreeable... then why as the concept lasted for thousands of years? Because you cannot be the first or only person to object to the concept. Why has the human race (at the start) said... we would prefer if there was no Hell, just paradise... no matter what way you live your life?

If you are stating that religious people have got it wrong... about Heaven and Hell... fair enough. But how is it the concept exists, even among non Christian people?

Your point about the criteria for God Judging a soul. I cannot speak for God, I cannot say... "well if you do this... it will be o.k. you will stilll get entry into Heaven". I've never been a judge, or being on the other side in God's court....seeing how goes where etc. What I can say / write about is what is written in the Gospels / Bible / various letters etc. However your comment about criteria was asked in the time of Jesus Christ, it is mentioned in the Gospel.... a man asks Jesus... What must I do to merit eternal life.... Jesus answers Loving God, following the 10 commandments etc... and the man answers... All this have I done... and Jesus says... go sell all you have and give to the poor. The man went away downcast... because he had great wealth.

So we do have criteria... from what is written in the Gospels, OT and NT books etc.

Why would I require to back up that with proof? Would you accommodate people in your home who were very distasteful to your family? I don't believe you would. If you had visitors over.... and they started misbehaving.... I think you would throw them out..... or at the very least they would not be invited back for a meal again.

If you are free to chose certain people as friends, and ignore others... then why cannot God do the same? Considering God is a higher being... God must be able to choose.

It is common sense in a way... it is a logical deduction......God wants people who have loved him in Heaven... giving glory to God for eternity. God does not want people who hate him in Heaven. It would be unjust.

If good and bad people go to Heaven... then why bother being good? It would be like passing a driving test... whether you are a good or bad driver, or a medical degree from university, regardless of your result... . you get to qualify.

Well you don't have to get angry over somebody else's belief. Nobody is under any obligation to prove anything to you. Christian believers .... believe that the rules apply to all humans equally. If you enter into the belief system / concept / Theology then the concept of judgement natually comes up.

I can understand your anger... if you say to me... "I don't believe"... and I say to you..."You are going to Hell".... that is not a very nice thing to say to a person.

However... I would say that in my Religon... if you chose to reject God.... there is a increased chance of you being rejected yourself in the next world. That is not the same as saying... "You are definietly going to Hell".

In addition.... while it may not be politically correct to inform a person of their error today. I think it does no harm, it only does a person good... if while they are still alive... to point out the errors that they may be committing in a respectful manner.

If you are going to convience people that your argument is right... you have to kind of bring them with you.... getting their backs up is kind of counterproductive etc

The world is not mostly made up of good or bad people - there are elements of both in everybody. It's all a matter of degree.
I don't think it's about religious people getting it wrong. Is there an absolute right or wrong way? The different viewpoints from believers in this thread, from the mild to the trenchant, indicates quite a variation in religious' peoples attitudes to their beliefs. I'd prefer the believer who considers this journey a constant challenge to their beliefs to the slightly smug "I'm alright Jack" attitude that a few have demonstrated.
"Go sell all you have and give to the poor". Well, who does that? The man was wealthy. Irrelevant. Remember the widows mite.
Why should people who have rejected god be automatically assumed to be hating him? Those who don't believe haven't rejected anyone. They may be mistaken. Life, which god created, may have taken them down roads where belief is difficult or not possible. That should not necessarily indicate hate. Anger, perhaps.
If god is ignored does that make it OK for god to reciprocate in kind? You gave the answer yourself. He is a higher being.

J C · 15-04-2015 07:31PM

MaxWig wrote: »

What about not understanding sarcasm?

Sin?

You seemed to not understand sin.

... and I tried to help.

J C · 15-04-2015 07:33PM

indioblack wrote: »

The world is not mostly made up of good or bad people - there are elements of both in everybody. It's all a matter of degree.
I don't think it's about religious people getting it wrong. Is there an absolute right or wrong way? The different viewpoints from believers in this thread, from the mild to the trenchant, indicates quite a variation in religious' peoples attitudes to their beliefs. I'd prefer the believer who considers this journey a constant challenge to their beliefs to the slightly smug "I'm alright Jack" attitude that a few have demonstrated.
"Go sell all you have and give to the poor". Well, who does that? The man was wealthy. Irrelevant. Remember the widows mite.
Why should people who have rejected god be automatically assumed to be hating him? Those who don't believe haven't rejected anyone. They may be mistaken. Life, which god created, may have taken them down roads where belief is difficult or not possible. That should not necessarily indicate hate. Anger, perhaps.
If god is ignored does that make it OK for god to reciprocate in kind? You gave the answer yourself. He is a higher being.

Good points.

God is an infinite being ... and both His Justice and His Mercy are infinite.
Which aspect one chooses to be under is up to each person.

Safehands · 15-04-2015 10:30PM

J C wrote: »

God is an infinite being ... and both His Justice and His Mercy are infinite.

Clearly, this is not true. Anyone with infinite mercy would never kill people by flooding the Earth, as the bible states. There are many, many, many examples in the scriptures of his obvious lack of basic mercy, let alone infinite mercy.
You obviously don't understand the term "infinite".

djerk · 16-04-2015 03:33AM

hinault wrote: »

I'll bite.

Give us an example where you personally were beaten down by religious dogma.

I'm old enough to have been raised in a society where the influence of the church was far more tangible and far more apparent, upon Irish society. Even then I never experienced any sort of religious dogma beating me down.

These days the influence of the church is minimal to non-existent by comparison, upon society.

Sorry, late to the game but since you 'bit' I figured I might answer

Luckily I grew up in a world where both my parents questioned the 'dogma'.. and really, it was a dogma of society in those days.. not wanting to be different and such and such so everyone followed the herd as it were. I know people who've baptised their children just to get into a school because they might not be accepted otherwise, that is the reality of the day.

You ask me if I've ever been beaten down personally by religious dogma? Well yeah actually I have, from the day I was born.. because I don't believe in it and that was the only option that was ever given to me, otherwise, I was ostracized and so too were my brothers and sisters. My parents separated when I was 9yrs old, divorce wasn't even legal at the time.. many people in the community stopped speaking to my parents and treated them like lepers. Why? Well you know why, because people were afraid and this is a catholic country after all. That's not even the tip of the iceberg.

You might think that because of my experiences that I hate religion, I don't.I think the scriptures and their histories are quite amazing, I admire the culture and the aspirations of those people who tried to instill some love in the world. But, I also think that most people who read those scriptures think they're actually true, but none of them care that it doesn't matter which religion any of those words should belong to either. We are a human race, not a segregation of people born free of different Gods and saviours. Therefore, why have a religion? If we stopped teaching our children about any of these things that we were taught, stopped telling them stories of miracles and celebrating our holidays as we do.. do you really think they will suddenly stand up and proclaim the word of God? No, in all matter of fact, they probably won't and never will.

Why do some people find it so hard to understand and contemplate that this might actually be the one and only life that we might ever have? That our life should be so perfect somehow, as if we're so deserving of it, despite the fact that all anyone on this planet really does is destroy the garden of eden without giving a crap about what's happening to it at all.
Life on earth is.. a world that breaks my heart.

ABC101 · 16-04-2015 11:11AM

indioblack wrote: »

The world is not mostly made up of good or bad people - there are elements of both in everybody. It's all a matter of degree.
I don't think it's about religious people getting it wrong. Is there an absolute right or wrong way? The different viewpoints from believers in this thread, from the mild to the trenchant, indicates quite a variation in religious' peoples attitudes to their beliefs. I'd prefer the believer who considers this journey a constant challenge to their beliefs to the slightly smug "I'm alright Jack" attitude that a few have demonstrated.
"Go sell all you have and give to the poor". Well, who does that? The man was wealthy. Irrelevant. Remember the widows mite.
Why should people who have rejected god be automatically assumed to be hating him? Those who don't believe haven't rejected anyone. They may be mistaken. Life, which god created, may have taken them down roads where belief is difficult or not possible. That should not necessarily indicate hate. Anger, perhaps.
If god is ignored does that make it OK for god to reciprocate in kind? You gave the answer yourself. He is a higher being.

That quote was about a wealthy person asking Jesus about eternal salvation. Jesus replies to the man to abandon his earthly prosessions (love of materialism) and to serve the will of God i.e. follow Jesus, become a disciple etc.

As for the question "who does that?"

Well Priests and Nuns do and others such as Brothers etc. When ordained .... they take a vow of poverty... not to get attached to riches or material things etc.

Getting attached to material things.... can act as a barrier to being more generous to the poor etc.

So there are plenty of people... not just priests / religious... who don't chase material things... they live frugally enough... and yet still give to charity etc.

In relation to your comment about

"Why should people who have rejected god be automatically assumed to be hating him?"

With respect to this thread... one particular Athiest Poster has been banned. I'm not going to mention his name...because he is not able to post and defend himself.

However the posts he made about believers were grossly offensive. Describing believers as liars, feable minded people being just two examples. Another example is one where I saw a comment on Boards... where the Holy Trinity was described as "Group Sex".... debasing something which is very pure / very holy to the level of selfish hedonistic orgy. The poster probably thought they were being smart / funny... perhaps they did not realise that what they wrote was very hurtful.

Athiests require to understand... when it comes to dicsussion / criticism of religon... it can be very hurtful for a believer. Even if the Athiest poster... does not mean to offend.....offence can be easily done.

I do agree... there are Athiest posters who do not cause offense, they debate respectfully.... but there are a certain number who it would appear are driven by a pathological hatred of religion / belief, particularly Christianity.

orubiru · 16-04-2015 11:40AM

ABC101 wrote: »

In relation to your comment about

"Why should people who have rejected god be automatically assumed to be hating him?"

With respect to this thread... one particular Athiest Poster has been banned. I'm not going to mention his name...because he is not able to post and defend himself.

However the posts he made about believers were grossly offensive. Describing believers as liars, feable minded people being just two examples. Another example is one where I saw a comment on Boards... where the Holy Trinity was described as "Group Sex".... debasing something which is very pure / very holy to the level of selfish hedonistic orgy. The poster probably thought they were being smart / funny... perhaps they did not realise that what they wrote was very hurtful.

Athiests require to understand... when it comes to dicsussion / criticism of religon... it can be very hurtful for a believer. Even if the Athiest poster... does not mean to offend.....offence can be easily done.

I do agree... there are Athiest posters who do not cause offense, they debate respectfully.... but there are a certain number who it would appear are driven by a pathological hatred of religion / belief, particularly Christianity.

I don't know why believers should be hurt by this.

There is absolutely no evidence AT ALL that the Christian Mythology represents reality or history. We have to assume that it is fiction because there is no evidence that suggests otherwise.

On top of that many people will hold the opinion that The Bible is not particularly well written.

If I went on to the movie forums and said that the Star Wars prequels are the best movies ever I'd expect to get a bit of ridicule.

If I was going around claiming that the story was real? It'd be ridiculed mercilessly, and rightfully so.

The problem here is that you have taken a fictional story and you are claiming it is a true story. In addition to that, more and more people are realizing this as they have access to social media and the internet. Of course people are going to make comments and jokes about the bible content.

Of course some people in Ireland have a hatred of religion and/or the catholic church. That seems perfectly understandable to me. If your only response is "the things you say are hurtful to believers so please stop" then I'm sorry but that is not good enough.

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 11:49AM

orubiru wrote: »

The problem here is that you have taken a fictional story and you are claiming it is a true story. In addition to that, more and more people are realizing this as they have access to social media and the internet. Of course people are going to make comments and jokes about the bible content.

I think to reduce it to fiction is to underestimate it, and to make light of centuries of human thought and idea. Personally, I don't think religious parable or myth can be simplified to that extent.
To throw it out as fiction seems to me to be as silly as to believe the bible word for word.
I think you can of course bring that level of skepticism to fundamentalists, or creationists, especially if they are seeking to sabotage the advancement of science in our schools or what have you. But to attempt to undermine someone's faith by pointing out that the bible is fiction is akin to telling someone they know nothing about art because their favourite portrait does not make any sense to you.

Of course some people in Ireland have a hatred of religion and/or the catholic church. That seems perfectly understandable to me. If your only response is "the things you say are hurtful to believers so please stop" then I'm sorry but that is not good enough.

Why is it understandable. Anger towards the RCC as an institution, sure. But towards religion in general?
It seems misplaced to me.

orubiru · 16-04-2015 11:57AM

MaxWig wrote: »

I think to reduce it to fiction is to underestimate it, and to make light of centuries of human thought and idea. Personally, I don't think religious parable or myth can be simplified to that extent.
To throw it out as fiction seems to me to be as silly as to believe the bible word for word.
I think you can of course bring that level of skepticism to fundamentalists, or creationists, especially if they are seeking to sabotage the advancement of science in our schools or what have you. But to attempt to undermine someone's faith by pointing out that the bible is fiction is akin to telling someone they know nothing about art because their favourite portrait does not make any sense to you.

Why is it understandable. Anger towards the RCC as an institution, sure. But towards religion in general?
It seems misplaced to me.

I think it should be thrown out as fiction when someone suggests that it isn't.

People do it with Scientology all the time and nobody says anything.

Do it with Christianity though and suddenly its not on.

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 12:00PM

orubiru wrote: »

I think it should be thrown out as fiction when someone suggests that it isn't.

People do it with Scientology all the time and nobody says anything.

Do it with Christianity though and suddenly its not on.

I haven't read the bible, I'll be honest, but a lot of the parts I've heard are simply very profound parables about the difficulties that peoples face in just existing.

So maybe a warning sticker on front stating "Warning - this book contains verse that may or may not be true".

Would that suffice?

Safehands · 16-04-2015 12:35PM

MaxWig wrote: »

orubiru wrote: »

I think to reduce it to fiction is to underestimate it, and to make light of centuries of human thought and idea. Personally, I don't think religious parable or myth can be simplified to that extent.
To throw it out as fiction seems to me to be as silly as to believe the bible word for word.
I think you can of course bring that level of skepticism to fundamentalists, or creationists, especially if they are seeking to sabotage the advancement of science in our schools or what have you. But to attempt to undermine someone's faith by pointing out that the bible is fiction is akin to telling someone they know nothing about art because their favourite portrait does not make any sense to you.

The old Testament does not stand up to any scrutiny. It was written by people who knew very little about scientific facts. It is obviously quite fictional.

How was the new testament chosen as the real account of the life of Jesus? Were there not several other accounts which were rejected by church authorities for one reason or another? So the contents must be taken, not necessarily as pure fiction, but not all that accurate either. They are nice stories though.

orubiru · 16-04-2015 12:36PM

MaxWig wrote: »

I haven't read the bible, I'll be honest, but a lot of the parts I've heard are simply very profound parables about the difficulties that peoples face in just existing.

So maybe a warning sticker on front stating "Warning - this book contains verse that may or may not be true".

Would that suffice?

It wouldn't be necessary. No sticker required.

Which parables, specifically, did you find to be very profound?

We can then see if the Christians on the thread, who have read The Bible, think the passages you have chosen are referring to actual events or if they are just fictional tales.

tommy2bad · 16-04-2015 12:42PM

On top of that many people will hold the opinion that The Bible is not particularly well written.

Huh? The bible is not particularly well written! In fairness, that's a new one.

tommy2bad · 16-04-2015 12:44PM

orubiru wrote: »

It wouldn't be necessary. No sticker required.

Which parables, specifically, did you find to be very profound?

We can then see if the Christians on the thread, who have read The Bible, think the passages you have chosen are referring to actual events or if they are just fictional tales.

Oh for God's sake! Parables are by definition fictional. Your out of your depth here.

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 12:45PM

orubiru wrote: »

It wouldn't be necessary. No sticker required.

Which parables, specifically, did you find to be very profound?

We can then see if the Christians on the thread, who have read The Bible, think the passages you have chosen are referring to actual events or if they are just fictional tales.

Specifically?

haha - a challenge I can't accept for the simple fact that my knowledge of biblical stories is not sufficient to reference one accurately, and I know any error will be seized upon as a weakness

But if I was to go with you on it, I would probably talk about something like 'turning the other cheek', or his attitude towards sinners in general.

My point is that if you simply say 'There's no proof that Jesus ever said that' then, for me personally, you completely miss the point - not of the story, or of the message - but of what religion is

orubiru · 16-04-2015 12:45PM

tommy2bad wrote: »

Oh for God's sake! Parables are by definition fictional. Your out of your depth here.

I know. I just wanted to see what examples the poster came up with and see if Christians would agree that they are just parables.

orubiru · 16-04-2015 12:48PM

MaxWig wrote: »

Specifically?

haha - a challenge I can't accept for the simple fact that my knowledge of biblical stories is not sufficient to reference one accurately, and I know any error will be seized upon as a weakness

But if I was to go with you on it, I would probably talk about something like 'turning the other cheek', or his attitude towards sinners in general.

My point is that if you simply say 'There's no proof that Jesus ever said that' then, for me personally, you completely miss the point - not of the story, or of the message - but of what religion is

So you are saying that it doesn't really matter is Jesus ever said those things or not?

Does it matter if Jesus existed or not?

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 12:50PM

orubiru wrote: »

So you are saying that it doesn't really matter is Jesus ever said those things or not?

Does it matter if Jesus existed or not?

To me?

Not in the slightest.

Safehands · 16-04-2015 12:58PM

MaxWig wrote: »

To me?

Not in the slightest.

Wow, talk about missing the point! If Jesus didn't exist then there is no argument about it being fictional, is there?

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 01:02PM

Safehands wrote: »

Wow, talk about missing the point! If Jesus didn't exist then there is no argument about it being fictional, is there?

No.

So when I see people arguing about it, I picture them in short pants with superman capes on their back and ice cream stains on their mouths.

Whether the bible is fictional is irrelevant (to me).
What it represents to people is not.

Safehands · 16-04-2015 01:18PM

MaxWig wrote: »

No.
Whether the bible is fictional is irrelevant (to me).
What it represents to people is not.

If it is fictional it has no more relevance than the story of Robin Hood.

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 01:19PM

Safehands wrote: »

If it is fictional it has no more relevance than the story of Robin Hood.

Yes.

Clearly.

silverharp · 16-04-2015 01:27PM

MaxWig wrote: »

Yes.

Clearly.

But there are consequences to any religious beliefs right? I posted in the hazards of belief thread todsy for example that evangelical Christians in Texas killed a 2 year old so they could resurrect the child as It was possessed by demons.
The fact that people act in the real world based on false beliefs is one of the main problems with religion

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 01:30PM

silverharp wrote: »

But there are consequences to any religious beliefs right? I posted in the hazards of belief thread todsy for example that evangelical Christians in Texas killed a 2 year old so they could resurrect the child as It was possessed by demons.
The fact that people act in the real world based on false beliefs is one of the main problems with religion

No I would say it's a tiny minority of fundamentalists with psychological issues who do not have a firm grip on reality - That is if you are talking specifically about that sort of thing.

If you are talking about people behaving in a way they believe to be 'right' based on nothing but their perception of the world and what they believe is good and bad - then you are describing the human race - not religion

silverharp · 16-04-2015 01:37PM

MaxWig wrote: »

No I would say it's a tiny minority of fundamentalists with psychological issues who do not have a firm grip on reality - That is if you are talking specifically about that sort of thing.

If you are talking about people behaving in a way they believe to be 'right' based on nothing but their perception of the world and what they believe is good and bad - then you are describing the human race - not religion

We are describing the human race being held back. Even in Ireland the beliefs of religious people can be horrendus eg gay people , their religion is the reason and justification for their behaviour so they don't need to question their attitudes.
Islam the same but magnified because the religion is much more violent

ABC101 · 16-04-2015 01:38PM

orubiru wrote: »

I don't know why believers should be hurt by this.

There is absolutely no evidence AT ALL that the Christian Mythology represents reality or history. We have to assume that it is fiction because there is no evidence that suggests otherwise.

On top of that many people will hold the opinion that The Bible is not particularly well written.

If I went on to the movie forums and said that the Star Wars prequels are the best movies ever I'd expect to get a bit of ridicule.

If I was going around claiming that the story was real? It'd be ridiculed mercilessly, and rightfully so.

The problem here is that you have taken a fictional story and you are claiming it is a true story. In addition to that, more and more people are realizing this as they have access to social media and the internet. Of course people are going to make comments and jokes about the bible content.

Of course some people in Ireland have a hatred of religion and/or the catholic church. That seems perfectly understandable to me. If your only response is "the things you say are hurtful to believers so please stop" then I'm sorry but that is not good enough.

I cannot agree with you at all here.

From Wikipedia.... Historians are in agreement that Jesus Christ did actually exist.

The historicity of Jesus concerns whether Jesus of Nazareth existed as a historical figure, whether the episodes portrayed in the gospels can be confirmed as historical events as opposed to myth, legend, or fiction, and the weighing of the evidence relating to his life.[1][page needed][2]:168-173 The historicity of Jesus is distinct from the related study of the historical Jesus, which refers to scholarly reconstructions of the life of Jesus based primarily on critical analysis of the gospel texts.[3][4][5] Historicity is the historical actuality[6] or authenticity[7] of a person or event, as opposed to being a myth, legend, or fiction.

Since the 18th century scholars have attempted to reconstruct the life of the historical Jesus, developing historical-critical methods for analysing the available texts. The only sources are documentary; in conjunction with Biblical texts such as the Pauline Letters and the synoptic Gospels, three passages in non-Christian works have been used to support the historicity of Jesus: two in the writings of the Jewish historian Josephus, and one from the Roman historian Tacitus. Although the authenticity of all three has been questioned, and one is generally accepted as having been altered by Christians, most scholars believe they are at least partially authentic.

There is near unanimity among scholars that Jesus existed historically,[8][9][nb 1][nb 2][nb 3][nb 4] although biblical scholars differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the Gospels

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

You may if you wish.... chose to deny that Jesus did exist at all.... however that choice does not change the fact that a great many learned people (scholars, Historians etc) have no doubt he did exist.

WRT not giving offense to others about their belief...it is not just respect for religion.... it is respect for any person who choses to believe.

If we take the analogy of a Ford Car.

If I posted a comment that owners of Ford Mondeo's are weak feable liars.... just because they own a Mondeo it would be very hurtful. It is downright disrespectful to another person's free choice to own a Ford car.

I don't have a European made car.... but I most certainly don't ridicule or insult people for chosing to own one.

I respect their choice. I may not like European cars.... but that is just my choice for whatever reason.

silverharp · 16-04-2015 01:54PM

ABC101 wrote: »

WRT not giving offense to others about their belief...it is not just respect for religion.... it is respect for any person who choses to believe.

If we take the analogy of a Ford Car.

If I posted a comment that owners of Ford Mondeo's are weak feable liars.... just because they own a Mondeo it would be very hurtful. It is downright disrespectful to another person's free choice to own a Ford car.

I don't have a European made car.... but I most certainly don't ridicule or insult people for chosing to own one.

I respect their choice. I may not like European cars.... but that is just my choice for whatever reason.

Your analogy breaks down because everyone that owns a "ford" will say that great things will happen if you own one. If might fly or drive across water or if its in a crash it might repair itself. Oh and because fords are so cool they will be the only cars allowed on certain motorways....

MaxWig · 16-04-2015 02:21PM

silverharp wrote: »

We are describing the human race being held back. Even in Ireland the beliefs of religious people can be horrendus eg gay people , their religion is the reason and justification for their behaviour so they don't need to question their attitudes.
Islam the same but magnified because the religion is much more violent

The beliefs of people can be horrendous.

People, not religions, are prejudiced.

People, not religions, are cruel.

Your implication is that non-religious people are more prone to enlightened beliefs, and I find that dubious to say the least.

ABC101 · 16-04-2015 02:41PM

silverharp wrote: »

Your analogy breaks down because everyone that owns a "ford" will say that great things will happen if you own one. If might fly or drive across water or if its in a crash it might repair itself. Oh and because fords are so cool they will be the only cars allowed on certain motorways....

Saying something positive or over the top about a car is completely different from insulting other people for the choices they make.

WRT to religion... or holding a belief......there are some who not only ridicule the religion.... but also ridicule the people who chose to believe in said religon.

If you don't believe in gardening... that's fine... that is your choice.... but that does not give you the right to insult all gardeners, referring to them as weak feable minded liars.

I don't think you understand the difference here.

Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Part 2)

Comments