those london floods? for Christians only

[holy god of nil]

might be slightly off topic now, but have we all heard the one about the christian going to heaven? (told by a catholic priest to me):

A religious jew (substitutable with basically anyone) dies and finds himself in heaven. He's walking along being shown around a little by an angel and after a while the angel tells him he has to be very quiet for a bit. They continue walking and go past a huge, walled in area. Eventually they get past and the guy asks what the area was and why they had to be so quiet. The angel tells him that it was the christians' bit, and they had to be quiet as they think they're the only ones up there

BTW for anyone who wishes to know, I'm a staunch atheist.

[TeePee]

Either we are all deluded / simple / blind / pig ignorant / fearful, or we are intelligent beings, capable of rational thought, who have weighed the evidence and found in favour of God.

Exactly what 'Evidence' would that be? What rational argument finds in favour of god? There must be a dozen threads relating to religion here and you've yet to state a shred of evidence or a rational argument. Anytime you'd like to start?

The only deluded, pig ignorant and fearful person I've seen here is you.

[fuddam]

So i'm either deluded/simple/blind/pig ignorant/fearful because I don't believe in God. Don't you find it funny that most atheists have exactly the same opinion of the devout/religion subscriber?

If that's not what you meant, please let me know.

I have to say plain and simple that i'm not usually one for bare-faced, unveiled remarks, but you are a fool fuddam, an utter nut, and you make me smile.

lol, you REALLY think I'm trying to say that about you? I see how you can deduce that, but was not my intention. I (generally) don't resort to inflammatory insults, ESPECIALLY over beliefs.

I was merely saying describing how many atheists / agnostics view Christians. As illustrated in this very thread - no surprise there.

the fact that I make you smile is good, esp in this season of good cheer. I hope to bless you in as many ways as possible

[fuddam]

Here's a handy tale I picked up this morning:

>>>>
During the Christmas season of 1879, an agnostic reporter in Boston saw three little girls standing in front of a store window full of toys. One of them was blind. He heard the other two describing the toys to their friend. He had never considered how difficult it was to explain to someone without sight what something looks like. That incident became the basis for a newspaper story.

Two weeks later the reporter attended a meeting held by Dwight L. Moody. His purpose was to catch the evangelist in an inconsistency. He was surprised when Moody used his account of the children to illustrate a truth. “Just as the blind girl couldn’t visualize the toys,” said Moody, “so an unsaved person can’t see Christ in all His glory.”

On that first Christmas, only a few people understood who Jesus really was. Many heard the report of the shepherds and were amazed, but they didn’t view the baby in the manger as the Son of God.

Today, multitudes are unaware of the true identity of Jesus because they are spiritually blind. If this describes you, ask God to open your eyes. Believe that the Lord of glory died for your sins. Then trust Him. Your eyes will be opened, and you’ll recognize who He really is. —Herbert Vander Lugt
<<<

[kempez]

I hope to bless you in as many ways as possible

The bible states that this isn't allowed surely

[fuddam]

The bible states that this isn't allowed surely

well, reading between the lines, I personally wouldn't consider that a blessing

[Rack]

My turn!

The thing that really really gets me about religions is that they are stagnant. They typically do not allow open minded discussions because they are based on something irrational - the belief of the reality of a cosmic figure, based on writings that are:
a) 2000 years old
b) manipulated by lots of different leaders over the years
c) were hand selected by some of these leaders according to what was written and if it agreed with their way of manipulating people.
d) translated several times with different meanings

If we as a human race are to move forward we need to be able to change and adapt - thinking for ourselves and accepting changes with an open mind to the good/bad things they bring without bias. How can we do that if we are living according to rules/ideas from a 2000 yo book? How can we be free thinking if we rely on a god to tell us what is right and wrong?

I agree with some of jesus teachings, but that's about how I consider them, teachings, much like Mohammed's or Buddha's, to be taken in context with the society of the time.

The old testament is a legacy of an era we should be glad we have moved on from (at least in some parts of the world.)

[autopilot]

I'm an atheist but i can almost forgive people for wanting to believe in a supreme creator. But why any sane intelligent person would even pay the Bible a seconds attention is truly amazing. I don't even buy the excuse that it provides a moral framework for us because i find it utterly disgusting in parts.

But it's rare to be able to convince a religious person that its all BS. They don't believe in god because they have a good reason, they believe in god simply because they WANT him to exist.

[yamangman]

You're wrong autopilot. God talks to fuddam directly. I mean, what more emperical evidence do you need?

[Stewart]

I stand by my scared of death statement. If you don't want to accept your own mortality then simply don't believe its the end. Kid yourself its only the begining.

As a bonus, because you only get in if you have been a good boy, it doubles as a handy method for contolling the gullable while they are alive.

Genius!

[autopilot]

Here's a handy tale I picked up this morning:

>>>>
During the Christmas season of 1879, an agnostic reporter in Boston saw three little girls standing in front of a store window full of toys. One of them was blind. He heard the other two describing the toys to their friend. He had never considered how difficult it was to explain to someone without sight what something looks like. That incident became the basis for a newspaper story.

Two weeks later the reporter attended a meeting held by Dwight L. Moody. His purpose was to catch the evangelist in an inconsistency. He was surprised when Moody used his account of the children to illustrate a truth. “Just as the blind girl couldn’t visualize the toys,” said Moody, “so an unsaved person can’t see Christ in all His glory.”

On that first Christmas, only a few people understood who Jesus really was. Many heard the report of the shepherds and were amazed, but they didn’t view the baby in the manger as the Son of God.

Today, multitudes are unaware of the true identity of Jesus because they are spiritually blind. If this describes you, ask God to open your eyes. Believe that the Lord of glory died for your sins. Then trust Him. Your eyes will be opened, and you’ll recognize who He really is. —Herbert Vander Lugt
<<<

Handy for what?

If you don't believe in something, make yourself believe in it?

fuddam, do you actually believe the Bible is all true? And if you were born in and lived all your life in a Muslim only country, do you think you would still be a Christian?

[G4Z]

Either we are all deluded / simple / blind / pig ignorant / fearful, or we are intelligent beings, capable of rational thought, who have weighed the evidence and found in favour of God.

After listening to what you and people like you say, and weighing up the evidence as a rational person I have to find the former more likely than the latter.

[kasavien]

I'm an atheist but i can almost forgive people for wanting to believe in a supreme creator. But why any sane intelligent person would even pay the Bible a seconds attention is truly amazing. I don't even buy the excuse that it provides a moral framework for us because i find it utterly disgusting in parts.

But it's rare to be able to convince a religious person that its all BS. They don't believe in god because they have a good reason, they believe in god simply because they WANT him to exist.

Certainly that's true, especially the part about christians wanting god to exist. i used to call myself a christian, but i went to university and started to think for myself, and learn and reason things out for myself (and besides god never seemed to want to talk to me ).

My parents are still devout christians and i wouldn't dream of persuading them otherwise, i have immense respect for them and what they believe in. So i have to disagree and say that parts of the bible contain a good moral framework, i can only hope that i turn out to be like my parents and share the morals and standards that they have.

Edit: incidentally bruce almighty is on in a few mins, now if god was like morgan freeman, i would want him to exist

[G4Z]

Ok, watched that program, few points :

1. Atheists are becoming dogmatic and intransigent. (becoming a religion)

That old argument, utterly stupid, thats the entire polar opposite of what science is about, science is a method not a religion. If evidence is found to support a hypothesis that could replace a previously accepted hypothesis there is a process to see which should be adopted. Thats the basis of Atheism, science not religion.

He keeps equivocating atheism with evangelism and religion and its plain wrong, people who come to this conclusion are not just told "this is so" they really really think about it. Once you apply some actual reason you cannot come up with any other conclusion than god does not exist. If you come up with another conclusion based on evidence from a 2000 year old book, your logic is flawed.

2. Atheism has blood on its hands, Soviet Russia for example.

Ok so it was a secular, but it was also communist and controlled by a very ruthless dictator. Nobody is saying that all atheists are good and moral (as we see morality), simply that if everybody applied reason instead of faith things might get better.

3. Eminent scientists that believe in god.

Quite honestly these people are engaging in whats known as
doublethink.

Either that or they are lying.

4. Fine tuning of the universe.

Ok this is an argument that at least has a scientific basis, however the fundamental flaw in his assumption is that the event that created our universe only happened once.

5. The importance of Darwin.

To me, he blurs the line between Darwin as a man and his ideas, Atheists do not revere the man as a prophet at all they admire his genius yes. What they are really being enlightened by are his ideas and his theory's that have been consistently supported by more and more evidence for 150 years.

oh and 'limits of Darwinism', what is he going on about? finding holes? what a load of twaddle, instantly appearing species in the fossil record? Again, twaddle, given the tiny percentage of fossils that survive for millions of years why should anybody be surprised that there are gaps and new bits appearing here and there? That 'scientist' is a fool ignoring the most obvious explanation (Occam's razor applies here I am sure).

6. Eugenics

Ok, so the sheer fact is that this theory is in fact very compelling, there is no denying it if you accept evolution. That does not make it morally right to persue to its logical conclusion, it has been used to justify genocide, obviously this led to disgusting atrocities. We have morality as a result of natural selection so we have to balance our morality with science in this case. Most people would conclude that it is wrong to kill disabled people or on the basis of race. Why? simply because we all can empathise with others and therefore would not like to inflict things on others that we would not want to be inflicted on ourselves.

[autopilot]

... i have to disagree and say that parts of the bible contain a good moral framework, i can only hope that i turn out to be like my parents and share the morals and standards that they have.

But some parts don't. And when people take the pick'n'mix attitude (that you kind of have to really) with the morals in the bible, it's becomes completely subjective and defeats the point entirely. And on what grounds do you chose which morals to take and which to leave? Who dictates this? And if it's purely your own choice, then you don't need the bible anyway because by making the choice you have proved you already believe in those morals in the first place, again making it pointless.

It's a tough concept to grasp, but you don't need religion to have good morals. Many people can't get that and i believe it's one of the reasons people turn to religion, even when deep inside they probably don't really believe in god.

Also, i would never take guidance from a book that is so blatantly a complete pack of lies and advocates complete genocide of innocent people, just because a few annoyed you. Noah's Ark is one the most endearing stories, yet when you think about it its pretty sick really.

[Butcher]

2. Atheism has blood on its hands, Soviet Russia for example.

I missed the program, but wow did he really try that one?! Given how many wars have (and still are) occured over religion, that's a bit hypocritical to say the least.