What age were you when you realised God didn't exist

Seaneh

krudler wrote: »

The irony being if more people realised god didnt exist you wouldnt have been in the lebanon to begin with

Because wars never start over land/resources/money/politics...

krudler

Seaneh wrote: »

Because wars never start over land/resources/money/politics...

yes and religion has never played a part in any war, ever.

philologos

krudler wrote: »

yes and religion has never played a part in any war, ever.

Wars are fought in the name of religion, but wars are never inspired by the teaching and example of Jesus. That's why I can honestly say that Christianity in and of itself has never caused a war, but the selfishness and greed of individuals in organisations which claim to be Christian have.

Freddie59

Deleted User wrote: »

Honestly lads, is Atheism the official religion of After Hours? Because the thread title assumes that *everyone* who comes into After Hour *is* Atheist, and that the non-existence of God is an established fact.

"when did you stop believing in God" would have been a far better title and asked pretty much the same question.

Why go for the incendiary option? So you can draw in some filthy theists and convert them to your Truth?

Should all of us theists f*ck off from AH then?

Answer: I've never stopped believing, and that point was reenforced when my grandmother, who is nearing the end of her life, went in for care, and I saw the strain on my mother. I had the chance to look in the prayer room at Dublin airport, so in a quiet moment I went in to look. It helped to sit and pray, and ask for my mother. First time through the door of a religious room in years apart from family occasions, and to make the request and sit in the quiet, it eased my mind.

Are you going to chastise me? Point and laugh? Derisively poo-poo my greif? And are to going to do it here? I'd expect all of the above in A&A, even respectful criticism of my actions in there. But why should it be in the more public After Hours that you put your assumptions?

I remember a time when I came to After Hours to escape from a family death for some comedy. All these "God/whatever is crap" threads mean I can no longer do so.

If you're greiving, f*ck off from After Hours. That's the message I'm getting.

Great post. I firmly believe in God. But equally I respect the rights of others not to do so. However, what I do find offensive is the caricaturing of God (not just in this thread) and the belittling of His followers.

Some point at the Virgin birth as a source of great mockery, but, if you consider that even some Christians find this impossible to accept, isn't it a mere party trick for Him in the great scheme of things? Having created everything anyway?

And SeaSlacker - I have had many, may moments like that in Church. The feeling of peace and serenity has to experienced to fully understand it. i hope your Mam will be OK. It is a very, very tough time. And if you have found solace and comfort in a religious moment then I, for one, will not mock you.

I don't normally join in the proliferation of threads on this subject, as people's minds are firmly made up. But all I would ask - especially at this weekend - is for people to think before jumping on the 'God doesn't exist' bandwagon.

DarkJager

Jakkass wrote: »

Wars are fought in the name of religion, but wars are never inspired by the teaching and example of Jesus. That's why I can honestly say that Christianity in and of itself has never caused a war, but the selfishness and greed of individuals in organisations which claim to be Christian have.

So the crusades were just a misunderstanding then?

gbee

Seaneh wrote: »

Because wars never start over land/resources/money/politics...

To be fair, and we all know our history, apart from the Crusades and other Holy Wars, most wars have used religion as an excuse.

In fact religion was used to enslave people and warp them so a small Government could get a vast population to do anything the Government wanted, including going to war and dying in great numbers.

It was in fact these people's stupidity [leave ignorance or education out of it, it's just plain stupidity TBH] that allowed them to believe what their King, Queen or PM says and they [the masses] will do 'God's Will' ~~ it's soo funny it's really sad.

krudler

DarkJager wrote: »

So the crusades were just a misunderstanding then?

no you see its ok for god to cause mass destruction and kill for his own amusement, when men do it in his name its wrong though and has no bearing whatsoever on gods teachings.

Dudess

Deleted User wrote: »

Honestly lads, is Atheism the official religion of After Hours? Because the thread title assumes that *everyone* who comes into After Hour *is* Atheist, and that the non-existence of God is an established fact.

"when did you stop believing in God" would have been a far better title and asked pretty much the same question.

Why go for the incendiary option? So you can draw in some filthy theists and convert them to your Truth?

Should all of us theists f*ck off from AH then?

Answer: I've never stopped believing, and that point was reenforced when my grandmother, who is nearing the end of her life, went in for care, and I saw the strain on my mother. I had the chance to look in the prayer room at Dublin airport, so in a quiet moment I went in to look. It helped to sit and pray, and ask for my mother. First time through the door of a religious room in years apart from family occasions, and to make the request and sit in the quiet, it eased my mind.

Are you going to chastise me? Point and laugh? Derisively poo-poo my greif? And are to going to do it here? I'd expect all of the above in A&A, even respectful criticism of my actions in there. But why should it be in the more public After Hours that you put your assumptions?

I remember a time when I came to After Hours to escape from a family death for some comedy. All these "God/whatever is crap" threads mean I can no longer do so.

If you're greiving, f*ck off from After Hours. That's the message I'm getting.

There are PLENTY fighting your corner here - many of them atheists. I know the people who deride you are obnoxious but there is a huge clamping down on them... to the point of reasonable atheists being lumped in with the arrogant ones.

Freddie59 wrote: »

I firmly believe in God. But equally I respect the rights of others not to do so.

I don't normally join in the proliferation of threads on this subject, as people's minds are firmly made up. But all I would ask - especially at this weekend - is for people to think before jumping on the 'God doesn't exist' bandwagon.

If you respect the rights of others not to do so than maybe don't refer to not believing as a "bandwagon"? It is how people genuinely feel, it is logical to them.

philologos

DarkJager wrote: »

So the crusades were just a misunderstanding then?

A huge gaping misunderstanding. The history of the crusades disgust me. On asking myself would Jesus have supported the crusades, the answer is a resounding no. That's what I mean when I separate religious institutions from the message of Jesus.

Trhiggy83

I love having this debate with people, not because i want to disprove anyone but because it just shows how easily lead the human race is in general. Lets start off with the basics as i see it.

From looking at the general principles of human behavior over time its obvious that people fundamentally feel the need to be a part of large groups in order to feel like they are accomplishing anything in life.

This for example takes many forms. Groups of people with common interests form all the time all over the world in every facet of life. A lot of people who are a part of these groups will often get there children involved as well because its the natural thing to do. I am not talking about just religion here but im talking about how anyone is introduced to new groups of people. For example some people say football is a religion, well it is in a sense that they all have a similar interest and gather in large groups.


Also ,you see other religions and they believe in their own god, they believe in a god but they dont believe in exactly what roman catholics believe in. Are they wrong, no they are not.

Religion is based on geographical location a lot of the time and also what your parents beliefs were and whether you were brainwashed as a child to also believe these thoughts.

Just for example You see cults in america in the news, and they are classed as extremists but they are just another group of people with different views. Their views might not be to everyones taste but thats what they believe in rightly or wrongly. Its the majority of society that dicates whether something is right or wrong at the end of the day.

Now i will go back to the start as far as i see it. Religion is like anything else, its the gathering of people with similar ideas/beliefs whether right or wrong.I dont believe in any particular religion and would class myself as non religious.

My advice to anyone reading this is make up your own mind, dont be a catholic because your parents are, don't conform blindly because someone else believes in something. I have looked for proof in the past and sadly it does not add up for me.

This debate will go on forever because everyone has different beliefs, thats the beauty of the world we live in.

CrazyRabbit

This thread proves just how over-sensitive religious people can be. The name of a thread can get them so angry...

Wibbs

Yahew wrote: »

Hitchens may be a smart guy but parroting hitchens isnt. Neither is parroting Dawkins.

+1

In any case there are plenty of stupid beliefs hanging around:

While I may disagree with parts of your list I'd agree with this.

The point about this is that it is not enough to be an atheist. This doesnt prove your intellectual ability, not in 2011 - particularly when most of the attacks on religion are group think anyway.

+1000 I pretty much guarantee the vast majority of the "free thinking" atheists out there would be good little boys and girls bending the knee in the pew a couple of generations ago. And that's cool, we've all got more choices now and if someone chooses to believe or not I say good luck to them, so long as it doesn't cause others hassle.

philologos

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

This thread proves just how over-sensitive religious people can be. The name of a thread can get them so angry...

Not angry, just dumbfounded at the sheer arrogance of assuming that everyone in here is an atheist :pac:

Feeona

The question itself is valid, but the baiting nature of the title leaves a sour taste, and seriously lacks in social grace.

The reality is it doesn't matter what you believe in. If you have the grace and social skill to get other people to believe what you believe, you're the one with all the power. If you have the grace and social skill to listen to another person's opinion without trying to score cheap points yourself, you'll be the person who others turn to for guidance. I've a long way to go myself to learn these skills, but they are invaluable. Some people are born with these skills, others pick them up along the way. You can bet that any truly successful individual you can think of has these skills in spades.

Belle E. Flops

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs or lack of. No-one should be belittled or insulted because they don't believe what you do.
I personally don't know if there is a God there or not, I know that I will probably never know but it would be nice if there was one there.
However, it sickens me the attitude some people have on this thread calling it 'bulls***' etc. It's highly offensive to a lot of people who are firm believers. Why some people feel that they know any more than anyone else is beyond me.

ScumLord

Belle E. Flops wrote: »

Everyone is entitled to their own beliefs or lack of. No-one should be belittled or insulted because they don't believe what you do.
I personally don't know if there is a God there or not, I know that I will probably never know but it would be nice if there was one there.
However, it sickens me the attitude some people have on this thread calling it 'bulls***' etc. It's highly offensive to a lot of people who are firm believers. Why some people feel that they know any more than anyone else is beyond me.

Yeah, doctors, who do they think they are, I believe what I made up about surgery is just as valid as anything they learn in school.

Irish Guitarist

CrazyRabbit wrote: »

This thread proves just how over-sensitive religious people can be. The name of a thread can get them so angry...

I agree. Athiests would never be so easily offended.

Mammanabammana

These threads make absolutely no sense to me. I can think of no other argument where people are so totally convinced that their viewpoint is right and the other viewpoint is wrong, where there's such little respect for the other side's argument that people simply can't believe that somebody on the opposing side could be so naive as to believe something so fundamentally wrong, where there's so little hope of one side even SEEING the other side's point of view, let alone agreeing with or coming around to it - and where all of this is so totally, totally pointless anyway because neither side has even the slightest hope of EVER proving themselves right or the other side wrong!

drkpower

Mammanabammana wrote: »

- and where all of this is so totally, totally pointless anyway because neither side has even the slightest hope of EVER proving themselves right or the other side wrong!

The two protagonists may have little choice of 'proving' the other wrong. But there is an awful lot of merit in these dicscussions continuing. Most particularly for those 'lurking'.

Amongst many people, there is still a taboo about discussing 'belief'. Amongst many people, admitting to family & friends that they do not believe is a taboo.

Encouraging people to openly discuss and question and challenge their belief (or lack thereof) is a good thing for everyone. And long may it continue. In the open.

drkpower

Jakkass wrote: »

Not angry, just dumbfounded at the sheer arrogance of assuming that everyone in here is an atheist :pac:

Im dumbfounded by the defensiveness of this (and similar) posts.

Would the question 'what age were you when you realised that beer is great' assume that everyone in AH is a beer-drinker, or would it be a call to those who are beer-drinkers to discuss the question?

Yahew

Irish Guitarist wrote: »

I agree. Athiests would never be so easily offended.

There's also the long running saga of the use of the term Christian names.

The OUTRAGE!

Donkey Oaty

Jakkass, thanks for your thoughts on the problem of evil.

Stephen Fry once said that nature is unconditionally beautiful - it is the man-made things that are ugly. You seem to have a similar view about the world being unconditionally just, apart from the man-made things.

It would be a bit crass to sum up your theology of evil as "no pain, no gain", but I'm sure you would agree that it does not pass Karl Popper's falsifiability test, i.e. there are no circumstances that could obtain that would cast any doubt on your conviction?

Yahew

drkpower wrote: »

Amongst many people, there is still a taboo about discussing 'belief'. Amongst many people, admitting to family & friends that they do not believe is a taboo.

The internet aint family. And you are wrong, anyway. I haven't believed since I was 9 but I dont got to Christmas dinner, or Easter and talk about zombie Jesus with "Aunt Mary" who is a believer. I assume my brother doesn't believe either, as he is also a scientist, and I dont know what my sister believes but she doesn't darken the doors of Churches very often.

The modern smug atheist is all about the condescension. The world, however, is not full of people with Asbergers with little or no social nous but people of different beliefs; in any case faith cannot be reasoned with, and mocking doesnt help any kind of social situation. I dont mock spiritualists either, and I live with one.

Live and let live. Atheism is correct but get over it.

There is a difference between being smart, and being wise.

Freddie59

Dudess wrote: »

There are PLENTY fighting your corner here - many of them atheists. I know the people who deride you are obnoxious but there is a huge clamping down on them... to the point of reasonable atheists being lumped in with the arrogant ones.


If you respect the rights of others not to do so than maybe don't refer to not believing as a "bandwagon"? It is how people genuinely feel, it is logical to them.

* Sighs * Hello Dudess.:rolleyes: For some it is indeed a bandwagon. I know several atheists whom I get on quite well with. I have the utmost of respect for them, and it is reciprocated. It is a turn of phrase, which I have often used with them - without any isse.

Donkey Oaty

Yahew wrote: »

I haven't believed since I was 9 but I dont got to Christmas dinner, or Easter and talk about zombie Jesus with "Aunt Mary" who is a believer.

If Mary started quoting the bible at you, and told you how to live your life, would the gloves come off (metaphorically), or would you diffuse the situation with well-meaning banalities about us all getting along?

I'm not casting judgment on you - I'm looking for tips!

Yahew

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

If Mary started quoting the bible at you, and told you how to live your life, would the gloves come off (metaphorically), or would you diffuse the situation with well-meaning banalities about us all getting along?

I'm not casting judgment on you - I'm looking for tips!

Yeah, in that case maybe. But I never experienced it. Its not like gay marriages come up. If they did I would try and change the subject, or disagree.

She is a lovely lady, though, so probably she is a liberal Christian. I dont meet too many battle axe Christians, if I did I would probably get stuck in, family excepted.

philologos

Donkey Oaty wrote: »

It would be a bit crass to sum up your theology of evil as "no pain, no gain", but I'm sure you would agree that it does not pass Karl Popper's falsifiability test, i.e. there are no circumstances that could obtain that would cast any doubt on your conviction?

Of course it doesn't pass Karl Popper's falsifiability test. Having looked to his philosophy of natural science the purpose of his falsifiability test is to determine what is science from non-science. I don't believe the Gospel is science, I believe it is more than science. Indeed, if you read his Science: Conjectures and Refutations a paper that he presented you will see that he rejects the analytic philosophical approach (that others in the Vienna Circle such as Ludwig Wittgenstein held to) of rejecting all that cannot be determined to be scientific as false.

It doesn't particularly surprise me that Karl Popper wouldn't consider Christianity to be a scientific discipline in as much as I am surprised that the sky is blue on a clear day.

I think that it is possible that I could reject God, I personally don't think it will happen though. From both experience and investigation I'm pretty convinced that Christianity is true. I don't know why it need be or should be another way.

Donkey Oaty

Jakkass wrote: »

I think that it is possible that I could reject God, I personally don't think it will happen though.

Fair points on Popper, but the terms of the debate often rest on a scientific view of the world, and Christians will often pick and chose bits to back up their world-view.

However, that dealt with, maybe you could speculate as to what events or circumstances would have to occur in order for you to reject God?

superelliptic

wow - heavy questions - Disco Stu is outta here...

Donkey Oaty

superelliptic wrote: »

wow - heavy questions - Disco Stu is outta here...

This is mere banter, Disco Stu...the heavy stuff is all in the original German or Latin.