Since when can't you respect something that you fear? You fear the anger of your parents when you are a child, but that does not negate the awe and admiration you also feel. The idea of God is in conjunction with human fear, yes, but also with a variety of different emotions. And what do you mean, "he doles out punishment/rewards sporadically"? That is alligned with a flaw in human understanding or adherance to religion. Taking a prominant example, Christianty: the foundation of the religion, Christ, repeatedly states that violence is completely wrong. Thus, the Crusadors had absolutely no moral justification for doing what they did within the confines of their own religion. They may have justified themselves in the way that you outlined, but this was due to their tendencies to fulfill their natural inclinations - a direct opposition to the teaching of their religion. With atheism, this justification can be made(i.e. eliminate what will hurt me/my people) in perfect adherance to the societal implications that arise with Darwinism(see: Eugenics).
The world's riches philantropist is an atheist. His name Bill Gates Yes I know about the statistics, though nothing was mentioned about premartial sex. LOL... Ayodhya I have to disagree with you, fear is the prime motivator of theism, hense if one does not believe, they will burn in hell, fear of not knowing, ignorance created the gods, it's not that one does not understand religion. It's that religion manipulates by force and fear! They force their idealogy, on the assumption that what they are doing is good, those who refuse, they use lack of knowledge. I.E what happens at death, and speculate of hell, to bring fear to those who would fall for this BS. Hence fear of not knowing, is used to manipulate their idealogy upon the ignorant masses!
This would only count if you were going to argue that the christian god and jewish god are not the same being. They are - later people just decided to lump a couple of other gods to this one god. If the crusaders were paying attention to the works of the OT god, (who is the same 'one and only' god that apparently exists), then they are fully justified. Not only was this god violent beyond measure, (killing every human, plant and animal on the planet, closing innocent womens wombs, threatening to kill people that hadn't chopped a bit of their penis off, drowning Egyptians for his own amusement etc), but he commanded violence from others.
Enterprise-D, How do you know it doesn't? Please explain how you have arrived at the conclusion regarding religion. My objections to who controls the wheels of power within this world, are, irrelevant. What is immoral about singing hymns as opposed to singing about sexual intercourse, in the presence of children? Apparently it is the law of the land, and as such it has to be upheld. This has been the system in the UK for a long time, yet it is heavily secular, atheistic and irreligious. How do you conclude that indoctrination has taken place, while at the same time pay no attention to the serious decline of moral standards, and intelligence, in this, our one-time great nation? Do you agree with hoards of young people accsesively binge drinking to the point where there is a serious concern for their health and well-being? It is a law of the land. I take it SL was born in the UK, and therefore attended school here, so he must have some idea as to what happens in public schools. It depends how you look at it. So why is the secularisation of the UK, an increasing phenomenon? Could it be that the sheep are being indoctrinated into becoming atheists? Then please demonstrate how this works, otherwise I can only conclude that you are a paranoid delusional. The sheep are systematically forced to worship a god, while at the same time not knowing that they are whilst at school. They leave these evil institutions to become free-thinking atheists, who believe their main aim in life is to make alot of money, then get completely rat-arsed at the weekend. I'm sorry, but I fail to see the reason in your jumbled-up dialogues. Maybe it's an atheist thing...eh! Have you considered that maybe SL sent his child to that school because it has a good academic reputation, and like any caring parent, he wants a piece of that for his child? I have read the post in question, and it seems to me that you are exajerating (spelling), to boulster-up a pointless argument. There can be no such thing as a gross theist/spiritual person, think about it. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Your point is silly, as nobody believes the wind actually cries mary. You believe the atheist has an academic understanding of faith-based religions, my point illustrates upon what level this understanding takes place. You claim to understand faith-based religions, and as such, given your opinions. I put it to you, based on your opinions, that clearly you do not understand faith-based religions outside of your biased atheistic opinions. Of course, this is my opinion. Can you cite any scripture which back up this claim? Science explains material phenomena (in short), how can that, alone, encourage a growth of intelligence? And how do you explain the increasing secularisation of Britian, while it children, past and present, have been forcefully indoctrinated with religion? There isn't even a rebelion against religion in this country. How on earth is this provable. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! If you say so, but I'm not convinced, I still think people use stats to give cred to their campaign. Tony Blair does it all the time, and it has become a joke. Called on it by whom? Your an atheist, and most probably a gross-materialist, what do you really understand, and how is it relevant to the essence of religion, other than to get rid of it quick, any which way, which, let's face it, is the easy way out. I'm afraid it is obvious. A christian, who worships Jesus as their saviour, is most un-likely to be getting rat-arsed in town at the weekend, in the same way a rat-arsed youth is un-likely to want to be asociated with christianity. THE TWO DON'T GO TOGETHER. :bugeye: What are you going on about? Do you really think that someone who celebrates christmas is necessarily a worshiper of Jesus, or even, a theist? By that logic then, the little kiddies who go trick or treating worship witches, ghouls and goblins. Do you really believe that? You have a lot to learn about essential religion, God, and spirituality. However, I suspect you aren't that bothered, based on your writings. Jan.
Because, empirical data is observable, calculateable and otherwise perceivable by EVERYONE, delusional or not. The claims of theists are comparable only to fantasy. Since no proof of reason can be offered, religion's value is literature only...which is subjective Who said anything about singing about sex? Why do theists keep bringing up who I f*ck? Is there some sort of drilled-in obsession about sex? At any rate...in proper response to your *cough* rebuttal, the act of "singing hymns" itself is not what we have a problem with. The fact that the school, or YOU take it upon yourself to assume we want to be involved in, or we would want OUR children to be involved in this silliness is the immoral thing. ASK first!!! and then accept the answer that some people will actually refuse! Unbelievable. I showed you the link. I even posted the PART in the link where it says parents can withdraw their children from worship without question. And yet you still harp on and on. Should I order you a sign? Maybe a plane can sky-write it for you. The letter from the school BY LAW is unfounded. Snakelord can withdraw his daughter without question or challenge. No it does not. History is History. Fantasy is Fantasy. Plain and simple. Your romanticism is getting in the way of the higher logical functions of your intelligence. Since when does a lack of belief require indoctrination? A lack of belief can occur simply by athiest parents NOT teaching their child or involving their child in worship. How is this indoctrination? Lol, name calling only signals a cry from a weakened position to me. What? WHAAAAAAAT? LOL HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ohhhhh Gs and Hs....I love it....*whew* waaait I can't breathe!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *gasp* *tears* And you call me a paranoid delusional? Ohh flip I can't stop laughing Let's rerun that folks: Oh dear...we non-religious folk are a bad lot aren't we? Snakelord, I'm going to hop on my personal helicopter (leather interior, complimentary Martini for the guests) and we'll get "rat-arsed" over this topic. What's your drink? Of course he did. And as a caring father, I'm sure he noted that the school has excellent academic results. However, as a responsible institution, they should inform Snakelord of their theist habits. Failing that, when Snakelord requested that his daughter not take part in it, as responsible law-abiding citizens, the administration of the school simply has to comply with the girl's father's command. Without question. That is the end of THAT. That was the issue of this thread, and that issue is answered. Gross (adj.) arrant, extreme, complete, out-and-out. IE FUNDAMENTALIST I loved this parallel. There was NO way you could respond to this without crashing. Jan...by the same token that people can listen to a completely made up song and NOT believe the Wind cried Mary!!, folks can read the piece of literature called the Bible and NOT believe that some super-duper being up there flooded the earth, or turned someone into salt, or split the sea in two. Let me put it another way. Your reaction (which was all I needed) was "nobody actually believes that the wind actually cries Mary". So why do you think it is logical to believe in god? Both the song and the bible offer exactly the same amount of proof to their claims...none. Of course this is your opinion. I understand it fully. There was once a time I would have been arguing against athiesm. When I was 14. Jan, I have analysed religion objectively, starting from 17 and continuing even now, and I find no redeeming trait...save those few who actually find a depth of self satisfaction and inner peace (these folks generally don't FORCE their beliefs or seek to preach at peers about their rat-arsing, or threaten that a lack of conversion will result in being thrown into the hellfires). Spirituality and religion have nothing to do with each other. Trying to get me on your battleground are you? 1. YOU are the one claiming that your god has to be worshipped, so much that you object that Snakelord (an athiest) chooses to exercise HIS right and remove his daughter from christian worship rituals. I therefore am not the one who needs to back up any claim. 2. I claimed NOTHING, I asked a real question (not a rhetorical one). Why do you think your god deserves worship? Why do you think six billion people are required simply to worship him? (I ask the second question due to the massive conversion drive christianity has...and this question can be applied to any religion). Because the scientific process nurtures thinking. Academia (inclusive of science, business, the arts etc) encourages question and challenge. Of course not, it is wasteful to fight an enemy who outnumbers you 8 to 1. Second, the increasing secularisation of Britian is occuring because your people are growing obsolete and being replaced by younger bodies with newer ideas. Very simple. I never said a consensus is EASY. I said it's provable. Or verifiable. You can go count yourself! Oh one thing we do agree on is that statistics are very very easy to manipulate. However, this does not draw from the fact that numbers are always verifiable. Any statistics you can check yourself. Jan...I called you on something you wish other people to accept as truth without question. Why can't you see that? Second, as a theist what do you really understand about reality? Serious question. Third, as eager as I am to see the topple of the Christian Reich and the Islam Empire et al. I am in no way labouring under the misapprehension that it can happen in my entire lifetime. And in no way do I see the destruction of religion as an easy answer. Forth, theists are the ones who accept easy answers ("god did it") as opposed to figuring out the mysteries of the universe. Absolute rubbish. Who are you Dionne Warwick? I suggest you actually leave your house on Saturday night. Go see who's ACTUALLY at the pubs. Well...I just drew a parallel. You seem to be associating a lack of christianity with alcoholism. Why? The story was about good old Uncle Harold (a devout churchgoer), who decided to have a little indulgence. In your world, is he burned for eternity? CORRECT!!! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I suggest you have a lot to learn about the difference between religion, god and spirituality. I guarantee you the three things are completely different.
As much as you might hate religion and/or theism Godless, you have too look at the facts. Religions could essentially be considered personal philosophies. Personal philosophies of who? Personal philosophies of those people who wrote the documents (Vedas, Bible, Quran, etc.). According to those in charge of the society (consider loosely, Marx and the creation/implementation of Communism), they created a system to create a peaceful society. Even though you may believe otherwise, I truly believe religion was originally created for peace. Since you are most familiar with Jesus, consider what he said. His word isn't original: Love thy neighbor. Simple. This idea has been around since time immemorial, but no one ever follows it. All else is dogma, wouldn't you say? Ignorance may be there (as in, people don't read their religion's scriptures), but I don't believe it is ignorance that turns religion into violence. Without a knowledge of eternity (after death, etc.), people fear their finite existences. That is the ignorance which torments people, not necessarily ignorance of their religion. If I behaved badly as a child, my parents sometimes beat me. And I guarantee you I didn't do whatever it was again. You need fear to keep people in line. Some people follow rules automatically; others don't. It's impossible for everyone to follow the rules - it's not within our imperfect human nature. Personally, nothing will change without religion. People are people and when they need to do bad things, it doesn't matter what their upbringing is.
I'll drink anything, even car diesel.. That's the atheist way. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
I forgot I wanted to highlight this again. This is exactly what I expect that the behemoth entity "the Vatican" aka "Christianity" wants: for their followers to believe that "free-thinking" is evil.
Remember the famous quote, 'religion is the opiate of the masses'. This rings true especially for the point. Let me reword your belief. Religion was created as a political tool, much the same way as the current government structure is concerned. By granting folks power thru religion, the masses would be quelled into acceptance of rule. The thing is though...the masses are becoming more educated daily, and beginning to see what a farce organized religion is. Keep in mind as well, that you yourself said religion is a personal philosophy. This is no longer justifiable enough to hold the overwhelming majority in check. Religion will eventually become obsolete as a control mechanism, as humans develop a collective high moral set and a better legal system. As I mentioned before tho, I hold no illusions that this will happen in my lifetime.
Enterprise-D, The "claims of theists", and whether religion has a percievable and calcucable value, are two different things. My question was; how do you know religion (based in scripture) does not possess these qualities? Please back-up your confident claim. Who do you think the kids are gonna pay more attention to, some hymns presided over by the school headmaster/mistress, accompanied by a piano, or p. diddy, fiddy-cent, beyonce, justin timberlake and the like? In the UK, we have one show called "songs of praise", which may have vague references to essential religion. Which show is gonna interest them more, that one, or "desparate housewives", "sex and the city", "eastenders", "holby city", "shameless!", "little britain", "da ali g show", "big brother, etc.... Ooh! I could go on all night long. Did you know that the UK is the leader, in europe, for underage pregnancies, sexually transmitted diseases, the worst binge-drink, and drug problem. Even worse than amsterdam. It has the lowest literary levels in europe, the worse case of youth gang related violence in europe. Why do you suppose that is? What is silly, is that you bypass the real, growing problems, in our society, and focus on the one thing that actually teaches some kind of human intelligence, as a problem. I find that amazing. Sorry, I thought that link formed part of your response to Sputnik. Okay seeing as your so sure, explain how it is different. And remember "religion" does not mean "christianity". You imply that belief in God is not a natual phenomenon, by that, what can only be a rhetorical question. I don't agree with you, everything is based on belief in God, even your lack of belief. But the child can still develop God-consciousness. How so? So you admit you cannot demonstrate how it works, yet you speak with upmost certainty and conviction. My position has been bolstered by your response. I don't think you quite understood my point; that is a written caricature of the points you make, mixed with the reality of day to day life in the UK. You are laughing at yourself. Why should they, if their institution yeild excellent results? How do you know their "theist habits" as you put it, isn't part of the reason for their success? Theists, to my knowledge, do not reject matter. Not only have you dodged the real point of the analogy, you have proved my analysis of atheists who take it upon themselves to claim that they understand faith-based religions. Either they see God with their own eyes, or they ask who created God, thereby assuming him to be a material being. Those are the only arguments they can muster, which only shows their ignorance of scripture. That's a fair point, but for me it is way too simplistic, and superficial. Its like saying someone must be a good person because they have a beautiful face. I'm not arguing against atheism, if that is the case, I may as well argue against winter and autumn. An atheist, to me, is some who does not accept the authority of God, for whatever reason. I can totally understand that. In fact, from the viewpoint of a jehovahs witness I am, of course, and have always been an atheist. Then your analysis, in my opinion, is a waste of time, unless of course by "religion", you refer to sectarianism, and not the scriptures, then in that case, it is entirely possible that you could be right, which would be based on a person by person analysis. Not really, but out of courtesy, I would like to know how you arrive at this brute-fact conclusion. But if you choose not to disclose the scripture in question, I will take it as yet another dead-end comment. I claimed no such thing, you did, remember. Which has nothing to do with religion (from my point of view). Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! This is an atheist forum, if I don't like it, then I leave. Same principles apply. Because he is the greatest. This question makes no sense, which is why I asked you to cite a scriptoral source So does religion. My question was; how is this provable? Why can't you see that getting rat-arsed, like a trooper, every weekend, is not a part of the christian life-style, and if a christian does do that, then he/she, by definition, is not a christian. That it is real...Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! What kind of a question is that? What? As opposed to "God didn't do it", the atheist answer. How do you know I don't? Not at all. I am associating lack of christianity with getting rat-arsed every friday and saturday night, as a cultural pastime. Wrong!! In your world. Jan.
Jan, do you like the noose around your neck? Enterprise has put the noose around your neck, and tightens it, with every post, you are helping him make that noose tighter. Sease and leave it at that, your done for, you've lost, move on, why keep making yourself look like an imbesil?
I'd actually be interested to see statistics concerning this, (I have seen vague media reports concerning a couple of these things [mainly underage pregnancy], but would like to see actual statistics). I'd also like to know why it came up. Surely you're not trying to say there is a link to this and lack of religion? If so you'd need something to back it up with.. I could argue for instance that Germany has a lower rate of underage pregnancies but also has a lower % religiosity than England, and so surely, if you were to claim these things were down to a lack of religion, Germany would be higher? You need to see that "getting rat-arsed" is irrelevant to what religion or lack thereof somebody would consider themselves of belonging to. While sure, you wont find many fundies in the local boozer, (nor will you find many grand chessmasters for that matter), you will probably find more people in the boozer that consider themselves christian than atheist. They might not be 'christian' in accordance to your specific ideals of what makes a christian a "real one" (tm), but that isn't really the issue here. I can do a survey if you want, (although very hard pushed to get any decent results too late on a Saturday night), but it wont work if you're denying someone the right to call themselves christian if they happen to drink. You're making your own statistics by doing that: A) "Real" christians don't drink. B) There were 100 drinkers in the pub Friday night C) None of them were christian because (A) says so. That's pretty silly.
Interesting enough, in one of the oldest pieces of the written word, the Vedas (Hindu scripture), there are several passages that could be interpreted as disbelief or at least uncertainty. So perhaps it was indeed a way of keeping the masses in check. You have to agree that as long as the society is quelled, it truly couldn't have been a completely disastrous invention? Men will do what they will - fight, make peace, make love, etc. regardless of religion's existence in my opinion, so to create a rule structure seemed natural. Isn't it? We all do it - constantly creating rules that is. The disintegration of organized religion is giving way to personal spirituality and personal philosophies. Yes, a personal philosophy extended to too many people who probably did not share (or weren't smart enough to create their own) their beliefs (this is especially evident in today's world). In my mind, morality is subjective on some accounts. To say, that we as humans are developing a higher moral set could be true on some levels, but overall, I don't think the major social evils in this world will ever be removed regardless of how far we "progress" as a society.
SnakeLord, I'd actually be interested to see statistics concerning this, (I have seen vague media reports concerning a couple of these things [mainly underage pregnancy], but would like to see actual statistics). http://uk.news.yahoo.com/23112006/140/uk-s-cocaine-problem-worst-europe.html http://www.ias.org.uk/newsroom/pressreleases/press010606.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ain.html?in_article_id=244507&in_page_id=1774 Read my posts. You seem worried about a few hymns while this tornado (above) which has nothing to do with singing hymns in assembly, spirals out of control. There is no scriptural religion that encourages people to get rat-arsed, or encourages illicit sexual relations, yet this is increasingly rife in the UK. Being worried that your daughter may be indoctrinated by singing a few hymns, in this type of atmosphere, seems silly. Plus, if you believe religion is a tool to indoctrinate people, and it encourages, at worst, drink in moderation, and at best, no intoxication whatsoever, then the people for whom getting rat-arsed is part of their culture, will include no religious people. So you believe that if someone calls themself a "christian", that is the only qualification needed, and they are automatically "a christian", or a muslim? What if they claim to be, but are not? What say you then? :bugeye: A christian is a follower of Jesus, therefore that, by definition, must be the utmost ideal. Coming down from that, a christian is a person who follows the doctrine of their particular sect, and I know of no sects which encourages binge-drinking. DO YOU? If someone whimsically claims he is a christian, but does as he likes, then what is the actual difference of action, compared to someone who does as they like. I am the greatest scientist in the world. Do you believe me? Define "a christian"? Jan.
Folks I apologize for the loooooong post :$ I should qualify this statement...the acceptance of religion as unchallengable historical fact, and reason to worship is intellectually barren. Religion had its place in controlling unruly and uncivilized masses. Now...you're once again asking me to join you on your turf where YOU have the advantage. Obviously I'm not going to be able to prove to you that religion is worthless based on scripture since the very thing I'm telling you is of no value IS scripture. I can however cite examples where religion's perceivable value comes into question. Right here on this board. Any theist save the MOST disillusioned can witness, perceive and understand the value of scientific pursuit, business pursuit, arts pursuit. For purposes of time I'll leave out examples assuming you're smart enough to realise it yourself. Accepting the assumptions of religion however goes completely opposite with what discoveries of physical evidence have exposed. As well, a simple definition of process of religious endeavour couldn't be agreed upon or even properly outlined by LG and ilk - probably numbering less than 10 in that argument, so how is this acceptable as a universally valuable pursuit on a wider scale? The above is my stab at it, however, I'll take a risk though against my better judgement. Scriptural oddities: (Leviticus 11:13-19, repeated in Deuteronomy 14:11-20) Where the bat is referred to as a bird. Scientifically useless. (Proverbs 23:7) "As he thinketh in his heart, so is he." KEEP in mind that English slang was not invented back in those days...so the heart as an personified emotive entity did not exist. That thought came from the heart was a literal belief. Scientifically useless. Also repeated in Deuteronomy 15:9, Judges 5:15, I Chronicles 29:18, Esther 6:6, Job 17:11, Psalm 10:6, Psalm 33:11, Jeremiah 23:20, Isaiah 10:7, Daniel 2:30, Acts 8:22. LOL you didn't answer my question. Besides I'd pay more attention to Justin Timberlake too anyday... Don't have a clue. However, your European secular counterparts do not have that problem. Maybe there's still too much religion in the UK? Anyway, Snakelord handled this. WHAAAAAAAAT? LOL hahahahahahaha Jan you are by far the funniest person I've located on these boards. lol. By your own words, viewers of our little back-and-forth can garner for themselves that you are a facilitator of the status-quo and a supporter of imprisoned minds. Since this is a product of your theistic opinions (educated guess here), your bold statement that religion teaches human intelligence is quite quixotic. AH! But therein lies the problem. Christianity (for example) forms an immutable part of humanity's history. It's destruction of pagan religions, it's hold on Rome, the justifications of the Vatican of old to wipe out and assimilate opposing cultures, it's eventual ratification to slightly better human behavior. All of that is history. This is a historical review of religion. One can even examine the literature of the bible/quran/bhagadvita (whatever) from a historical context, eg the evolution of morals, the development of language, even the extent of writer's imaginations and poetry of verbage. What is NOT history much of the actual content of these books. Holding up the writings of compendiums of literature as history when physical evidence shows quite the opposite is where theists replace history with fantasy. And teaching other people's children this brouhaha without their knowledge, or even fighting to keep an athiest's child IN worship is the moral issue here. LOL what crap. This is semantics based on your own bias and perspective. The same way they develop imaginary friends. Or construct Pokemon adventures in their minds with inanimate toys. What audacity. Touche and brava, I honestly missed that you could have been using sarcasm as another debating tactic. However, I still love your choice of words, because many fundamentalist theists actually hold beliefs such as that which you whimsically sprinkled. Because you sanctimonious prude, YOU do not hold the rights, and the SCHOOL does not hold the right to teach Snakelord's daughter something that is based on opinion. It matters not where their success came from, as this right is legally, ethically and intellectually independant of successful academic education. PS my opinion is that the teachers are able to separate themselves from religion in the classroom and wield effective teaching tools. Ok? Then Jan enlighten me, what was your point? Because Jan, I brought OTHER questions to bear, which place your beliefs in doubt. The WHY of worship. You assume much in thinking if I (or other non-religious folk) SEE god we'll automatically worship him. This by and large is not the case. Let's suppose I accept that god exists... -WHY should I worship this being? -WHY do you theist folk insist on converting others to your own religion insisting that all of us were created to praise him (Yahweh, Allah whatever). -WHY does a lack of worship buy us nonbelievers - who are otherwise very moral, charitable and sober people - a one way ticket to your hellfires? -WHY would your so called loving god destroy his 'children' for such inane reasons as not kneeling and praising? -WHY does an omnipotent being require praise anyway? Keep in mind that giving us life is NOT a sufficient answer. Him being omnipotent is also NOT a sufficient answer. Incomparable analogy. Or maybe I'm unenlightened. Then why side with the school? Snakelord has every legal right to insist that his daughter be removed from it's theist rituals, yet benefit from the academic education that his tax money is paying for. Yes and no; I was referring to spirituality like Oprah or Maya Angelou would display. While they're both christian, they project an aura of self-contained happiness, and do not seek to assimilate people or cultures to their own beliefs. Fine...scripture it is then. Even though I KNOW I should not be on your battleground, handle these two for now. "For thou shalt worship no other god: for the Lord, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God." (Exodus 34:14) How about even: "Bring into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." (II Corinthians 10:5) Doesn't that sound like demand of worship to you? Quote me where I CLAIMED it, instead of asking. You however claimed it indirectly when you became indignant that Snakelord dared question the school's worshippy habits. NO they do NOT. Snakelord, and yourself, pay TAXES for education. Therefore it is NOT a simple case of "if you don't like it, leave". This is not an acceptable answer (to me). I don't see the moral need to worship anyone because he's better than I am in certain tasks or attributes. Visible or invisible. Impotent or omnipotent. Real or fake. Sigh...Jan...it is the movement and habit of many theists (esp Christianity and Islam) to seek to convert. I need no scriptural reference, I just need my eyes and ears. Jehovah's witnesses visit constantly. Islamic fundamentalists seek to kill if you make a muslim cartoon. WHY? WHY? Tell me WHY Jan...what is the reason that all of you think that us 6 billion humans NEED to worship your respective god? How does religion generate a process that nurtures thinking Jan? Tell me. Outside of debating athiests that is Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! And my answer was YOU can go count for YOURSELF. I never said the proof was easy, cheap or quick. Snakelord dealt with this issue quite handily, even though I see you came up with your usual tattered response. I wont deal with the "rat-arsed" section again. LOL yes, it was sorta a wide question. Really should be a separate thread or something, never mind. AH but athiests go a step further and FIND the correct answers. YOU guys don't. Another point showing how theism fosters academic stagnance. Do you? Asking me if i know you don't doesn't tell me whether you sought to prove it. You seem to have disdain for both alcohol, and "hanging out" as the Americans say. Why? Forget Uncle Harold for now, the issue of associated level of sin to hellfires could be a separate thread.
Indeed? I did not know this. This brings to mind another saying. "The ends do not justify the means". Yes religions succeeded at controlling their respective societies. But what about the destruction that occured when religions clashed? Was that price worth it? Well, I agree to some extent. Humans love a conspiracy for example. I disagree that major social evils will never be removed. I'd like to think that criminal murder will cease to exist (example). If this ceases to exist, self defense killing would no longer be necessary (example extrapolated). That aside, evolution is as permanent as the human race...however long we last will tell how far our morals develop.
The christian believes that Jesus was their savior. Isn't that the definition of a christian? If you said that you believe you are the greatest scientist in the world, I would believe you. A christian is defined by belief, not by their actions. The same as every other religion. One who has faith that a person named Jesus was their Messiah.
Oniw...do you get "rat-arsed" sometimes? Edit: I'll leave the question, but I just noticed that in many areas it would be illegal for Oniw to get "rat-arsed" - assuming his age is correct.
