When atheists go too far

AhSureTisGrand · 12-06-2011 8:29pm

philologos wrote: »

I think Christianity is pretty much in keeping with common sense. What would take a leap would be me becoming an atheist.

So could someone accept Jesus without this "faith" thing, just as one accepts germ theory as most probably true?

Asry · 12-06-2011 8:30pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

That's not an attack, it's the truth. Does the truth normally make you overly sensitive?

Oh no, not at all

It just read in an insulting tone in my head is all. Sorry for accusing you of going on the offensive. Your lies, my truth, my lies, your truth. We'll get nowhere with this, I suppose.

MagicMarker · 12-06-2011 8:33pm

Asry wrote: »

Oh no, not at all It just read in an insulting tone in my head is all. Sorry for accusing you of going on the offensive. Your lies, my truth, my lies, your truth. We'll get nowhere with this, I suppose.

I'm curious, how can you believe in a god that's going to send you to hell?

philologos · 12-06-2011 8:42pm

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So could someone accept Jesus without this "faith" thing, just as one accepts germ theory as most probably true?

Faith is putting your trust in what is most reasonable. It isn't blind as far as I would see it. I have reasons why I believe that I've discussed at length on this forum and others before. Have I doubted? Yes. Was it a constructive process? Yes, in that it encouraged me to find out more about Christianity. Are my discussions with atheists constructive? Incredibly so the questions that they have asked me have encouraged me to look into things that perhaps I wouldn't have looked into before.

But, has it destroyed my faith? No.

Ellis Dee · 12-06-2011 8:43pm

philologos wrote: »

I think Christianity is pretty much in keeping with common sense. What would take a leap would be me becoming an atheist.

How can that be? For an atheist to become a Christian - or a Muslim or a Jew or a Zoroastrian or whatever - would require either a leap, a leap of faith, or else evidence that a supernatural being exists. Common sense tells one that something for which there is no evidence almost certainly does not exist, and that is a situation that will not change until evidence manifests itself. On the other hand, no evidence is needed to support a refusal to believe in something for which no evidence exists.

For example, if you tell me there are definitely leprechauns in the Wicklow mountains, and it seems that thousands of people believe the same, but yet no one has ever furnished any proof, direct or indirect, of their existence and I argue that leprechauns do not exist, which of us is on firmer ground in the common sense department?:rolleyes:

Asry · 12-06-2011 8:44pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

I'm curious, how can you believe in a god that's going to send you to hell?

I believe I was made by God, and belong to God, but also have free will to choose my actions. I'm LGBT, by the way, and choose not to act on my baser urges (when I have them under control that is....).

But, see, I love God. It's weird because it makes no sense, you know? I know all the arguments against it, and they're logical and rational but still don't explain away the ball of light in my chest that I have, for want of a better description.

So I try to do my best with what I have. It's not easy. It never has been. If I ever did try to talk to my boyfriend about joy and faith and love, it's only ever been because it seems like he's so unhappy sometimes, that maybe he's lacking something.

How can something that fills me with such happiness be wrong? I know that things have been done in the name of God, dreadful, awful things, like the Crusades and the Inquisition. But I still believe. And at the end of the day, really, it's me and God.

That probably doesn't explain anything, really, does it

I might not be the right person you need to ask. I can never really explain how I feel properly.

As for religions and things, though, they're something else entirely. I'm a member of the RCC at the moment, but my faith in it is being severely ******* right now, and I'm considering a formal renunciation, both as a self-respecting woman, and as a member of the LGBT community.

But that's Catholicism, not God.

Em. Sorry. Rambling, amn't I :rolleyes:

I guess, to maybe answer the question, if I go to Hell, I fully deserve it.

The end.

MagicMarker · 12-06-2011 8:53pm

Asry wrote: »

I believe I was made by God, and belong to God, but also have free will to choose my actions. I'm LGBT, by the way, and choose not to act on my baser urges (when I have them under control that is....).

But, see, I love God. It's weird because it makes no sense, you know? I know all the arguments against it, and they're logical and rational but still don't explain away the ball of light in my chest that I have, for want of a better description.

So I try to do my best with what I have. It's not easy. It never has been. If I ever did try to talk to my boyfriend about joy and faith and love, it's only ever been because it seems like he's so unhappy sometimes, that maybe he's lacking something.

How can something that fills me with such happiness be wrong? I know that things have been done in the name of God, dreadful, awful things, like the Crusades and the Inquisition. But I still believe. And at the end of the day, really, it's me and God.

That probably doesn't explain anything, really, does it I might not be the right person you need to ask. I can never really explain how I feel properly.

As for religions and things, though, they're something else entirely. I'm a member of the RCC at the moment, but my faith in it is being severely ******* right now, and I'm considering a formal renunciation, both as a self-respecting woman, and as a member of the LGBT community.

But that's Catholicism, not God.

Em. Sorry. Rambling, amn't I :rolleyes:

I guess, to maybe answer the question, if I go to Hell, I fully deserve it.

The end.

This is exactly the reason why childhood indoctrination is pure evil. Children have been spoon fed horseshít, just like you were, and now you genuinely believe that if you act on your natural urges that you will go to hell, but not only that, you believe that you deserve it. Can't you see how wrong that is? Can't you see how abusive that is?

By the way, you can never formally leave the RCC.

philologos · 12-06-2011 8:55pm

Ellis Dee - I don't compare the belief in God to fairies or leprachauns. In fact the comparison would never come to mind because a belief in God concerns the essential origins of the universe. The existence of fairies and leprachauns fades in comparison. It is conceivable and reasonable to think that there was an intelligent Creator behind the universe we currently inhabit.

What would be a leap to me would be the suggestion that the universe created itself.

Asry · 12-06-2011 8:56pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

This is exactly the reason why childhood indoctrination is pure evil. Children have been spoon fed horseshít, just like you were, and now you genuinely believe that if you act on your natural urges that you will go to hell, but not only that, you believe that you deserve it. Can't you see how wrong that is? Can't you see how abusive that is?

By the way, you can never formally leave the RCC.

That's just what my boyfriend said!

And yes, you can

You need to write a letter to your bishop asking to be struck off the baptismal record, and maybe just fudge up a reason like, I don't believe in Jesus and I'm Jewish now and bing bing you're a free man. Or girl, as it may be. Lots of people are praying that I come to my senses, LOL

[I'd like to see your face as you read that] And I can't imagine ever telling my mother that I left the Church.

Interesting, actually, just about what you said there - I went to a private Catholic school as a child and went to mass every single day...and mysteriously have no memory of it at all! Isn't that weird?

AhSureTisGrand · 12-06-2011 8:56pm

philologos wrote: »

Faith is putting your trust in what is most reasonable. It isn't blind as far as I would see it. I have reasons why I believe that I've discussed at length on this forum and others before. Have I doubted? Yes. Was it a constructive process? Yes, in that it encouraged me to find out more about Christianity. Are my discussions with atheists constructive? Incredibly so the questions that they have asked me have encouraged me to look into things that perhaps I wouldn't have looked into before.

But, has it destroyed my faith? No.

So what's your interpretation of "blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed"? Seems to me Jesus was praising blind faith

Cú Giobach · 12-06-2011 8:56pm

Asry wrote: »

How can something that fills me with such happiness be wrong?

People had exactly the same feelings and emotions for Hitler and Mao, its quite normal and natural but not a sign that the object of your affection is necessarily good.

AhSureTisGrand · 12-06-2011 8:59pm

Asry wrote: »

Interesting, actually, just about what you said there - I went to a private Catholic school as a child and went to mass every single day...and mysteriously have no memory of it at all! Isn't that weird?

None at all? That's not so much weird as alarming

MagicMarker · 12-06-2011 9:00pm

Asry wrote: »

And yes, you can You need to write a letter to your bishop asking to be struck off the baptismal record

Not anymore you can't.

http://www.countmeout.ie/suspension/

philologos · 12-06-2011 9:01pm

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So what's your interpretation of "blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed"? Seems to me Jesus was praising blind faith

He is referring to those people who will be believers after Thomas. I reject the idea that the material is the only real thing in existence, it's lazy reasoning and very philosophically questionable.

Asry · 12-06-2011 9:03pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

Not anymore you can't.

http://www.countmeout.ie/suspension/

When I read that, I just wanted to impart here that I said a really bad word, really loudly, and unfortunately cannot repeat it here. So to that end, I'll do this:

&*^%$£"!!!

Asry · 12-06-2011 9:05pm

Cú Giobach wrote: »

People had exactly the same feelings and emotions for Hitler and Mao, its quite normal and natural but not a sign that the object of your affection is necessarily good.

Emmmmmmmmm......no comment?

No, really, I can think of nothing to say to that. Clearly if I were a better Christian, I would, but I've drawn a blank :S

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

None at all? That's not so much weird as alarming

Nah, I was just a little kid, it's not alarming. Plus I'm fairly thick in the head now and I'm 26, so I'm not surprised I can't remember those years.

Ellis Dee · 12-06-2011 9:08pm

philologos wrote: »

Ellis Dee - I don't compare the belief in God to fairies or leprachauns. In fact the comparison would never come to mind because a belief in God concerns the essential origins of the universe. The existence of fairies and leprachauns fades in comparison. It is conceivable and reasonable to think that there was an intelligent Creator behind the universe we currently inhabit.

What would be a leap to me would be the suggestion that the universe created itself.

Why can't you make that comparison? There is no more and no less evidence that your god exists than there is that fairies, leprechauns, trolls (of the non-Internet kind) or wookies exist, either.

Believing in a god does not solve the question of the origins of the universe, because if the answer is god, then the inevitable next question is what created god, and so on. Or as Dean Swift put it: "So Nat'ralists observe, a Flea Hath smaller Fleas that on him prey, And these have smaller Fleas to bite 'em, And so proceed ad infinitum."

Maybe there was no beginning and there will be no end. Just because everything in our limited experience has a beginning and an end doesn't mean there are not things beyond our comprehension, such as a universe or multiverse that always was and always will be. Something that is not necessarily aware of our existence, or even of its own.:)

lmaopml · 12-06-2011 9:11pm

Richard Dawkins is a fabulous scientist. He's also a very eloquent speaker and super intelligent. He's arrogant though, intelligence and arrogance aren't mutually exclusive, and imo arrogance is not a virtue - this puts me off him somewhat.

After 9/11 he was so appalled at what happened that he gave himself a bit of a mission of sorts, and it's blossomed....So, essentially he is very human like everybody else.

I don't mind atheists, lots of my friends are atheist/ignostic...etc. and I get on perfectly fine with them. They come in every shape size and warm, luke warm, and red hot..lol.... and I don't particularly like to stereotype them, as much as I hate any type of 'stereotype'. I will say that the very fundamentalist ones who seem to be more drawn to Richards mission and want to 'set the children free' can be hard to listen to without doing :rolleyes: that.

AhSureTisGrand · 12-06-2011 9:14pm

philologos wrote: »

He is referring to those people who will be believers after Thomas. I reject the idea that the material is the only real thing in existence, it's lazy reasoning and very philosophically questionable.

And what was he saying about them? It seems to me Thomas wanted more than just anecdotal evidence, while Jesus was saying that the blessed ones were those who couldn't find better evidence yet believed anyway

philologos · 12-06-2011 9:24pm

^^ That they won't have the privilege of seeing him in the flesh. They will have to rely on other means to seek Him.

Freddie59 · 12-06-2011 9:56pm

Ellis Dee wrote: »

It is your interpretation that is, to use your own term, curious. I am not stating that I believe I know what Enda's - or for that matter Obama's - beliefs are. All I am pointing out is that both men are manifestly intelligent, both are clearly ambitious, and both clearly recognise that in their respective countries it is not politically wise to deny the existence of the sky fairy. Thus it is perfectly reasonable to leave open the possibility that neither actually believes in a god. In other words, I was contradicting an earlier poster who seemed to be saying that the fact, as the poster seems to regard it as, that men like them, in that poster's view, believe in a deity disprove's someone else's statement that no sane person could believe in a supreme being.:D

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

Freddie59 · 12-06-2011 9:57pm

RichieC wrote: »

The truth hurts.

:rolleyes:

MagicMarker · 12-06-2011 9:58pm

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

Are you? It's well known that declaring yourself an atheist in America is committing political suicide.

Freddie59 · 12-06-2011 9:58pm

Shenshen wrote: »

I just love that... to be a militant Christian/Muslim/Sikh/Hindu, you need to kill people. Preferably more than one.

To be a militant atheist, you just have to laugh at others....

Unless you're Hitler.

MagicMarker · 12-06-2011 10:03pm

Freddie59 wrote: »

Unless you're Hitler.

In which case you'd be a christian.

Freddie59 · 12-06-2011 10:04pm

MagicMarker wrote: »

Are you? It's well known that declaring yourself an atheist in America is committing political suicide.

How am I arrogant? Did I declare (without a person's consent) that I am close enough to them to declare their beliefs - or lack thereof?

FOGOFUNK · 12-06-2011 10:06pm

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

I must be, because I think the same, well maybe not Enda, but Obama I believe comes accross atheist/agnostic.

Cú Giobach · 12-06-2011 10:16pm

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men don't use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT naive?

Craebear · 12-06-2011 10:47pm

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

Freddie59 wrote: »

Unless you're Hitler.

Not sure if serious...

lmaopml · 12-06-2011 11:07pm

AhSureTisGrand wrote: »

So what's your interpretation of "blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed"? Seems to me Jesus was praising blind faith

Faith, doesn't necessarily mean 'blind' or losing all sense of reason and being someone who needs a 'crutch', a broken person.

If a person of faith dies they die like everybody else does, hey ho - people have faith in very many and varied things as they go through life, it could be described as 'blind' too in the strict natural sense of things...all things considered.

Jesus said a whole lot more than praising blind faith, but yes 'faith' is part and parcel. Inseperable actually.

pragmatic1 · 12-06-2011 11:28pm

philologos wrote: »

^^ So people who love each other don't hope the very best for each other in life?

I believe in evolution, and it's not about taking it as a metaphor it's that the passage in the Hebrew lends itself to being regarded as allegory. I think God created the world, and the scientific state of the world can help us find out more about how He made it. Not even the strongest "literalist" takes the Bible entirely literally as if one took Jesus' parables literally they would miss the point and think it as an agricultural handbook. I read the Bible in a way that is most faithful to how it is written, that means exploring genre, context etc. The Bible is a library of books, not just one so one has to take care in reading it.

If Jesus weren't a historical figure then I might be more inclined to see him as a mere metaphor

How does one distinguish between what to believe then. Is it a bit like a pick and mix Bible, pick the bits that fit you own views and forget about other stuff. Because if thats the way it is, its hypocracy. If I remember correctly, Jesus had some very choice words for hypocrites.

Mark200 · 12-06-2011 11:41pm

pragmatic1 wrote: »

How does one distinguish between what to believe then. Is it a bit like a pick and mix Bible, pick the bits that fit you own views and forget about other stuff. Because if thats the way it is, its hypocracy. If I remember correctly, Jesus had some very choice words for hypocrites.

But are those supposed to be taken literally or not? :pac:

With all the murders and confusion over peoples different interpretations of their respective books, you'd think this all-powerful all-knowing being would have bothered to clarify a few things.

RichieC · 13-06-2011 12:15am

philologos wrote: »

He is referring to those people who will be believers after Thomas. I reject the idea that the material is the only real thing in existence, it's lazy reasoning and very philosophically questionable.

The man that believes in a bearded man in sky telling us to be good and to hate gays is talking about lazy reasoning... jesus fking christ..

Ellis Dee · 13-06-2011 5:07am

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

You have actually no basis on which to evaluate whether or not I am arrogant, or how much so. You also have no right to judge me in that way. Doing so is, in fact, very presumptious of you and in itself verges on the arrogant.

Your interpretation is a distortion of what I wrote. Whether it is deliberate or not is something that I likewise cannot determine.

What I actually said is that the fact Kenny and Obama openly declare themselves to profess religion does not prove anything, least of all that they actually believe in that stuff. It is something that a politician must do in especially the USA and almost as much so in Ireland. That is the unfortunate reality. Politics is the art of the possible and it is quite conceivable that one or other of those men, or both, occasionally wonders whether all that stuff about the magic tree and the talking snake and the sky fairy and harps and haloes in the hereafter could possibly be anything more than a ridiculous tale, like that of the great flying spaghetti monster or the orcs and elves. But as pragmatists they are unlikely ever to voice those doubts and risk someone like Sarah Palinosaur or that aul Ni Mathuna wan stepping into their jobs.:rolleyes:

Mindme · 13-06-2011 6:05am

Disbelieving in a God in a religion dominated world does not come easy to those indoctrinated as children. We had to work extremely hard to escape the nonsense.

Thinking a lot usually does the trick. Better still reading books written by those considered highly intelligent in science and literature, is a great help.

later12 · 13-06-2011 6:15am

Mindme wrote: »

Disbelieving in a God in a religion dominated world does not come easy to those indoctrinated as children. We had to work extremely hard to escape the nonsense.

Extremely hard? Indoctrinated? Really?

This is where I think atheism goes too far. For most people, atheism was just an adolescent realisation based on the absence of any evidence supporting the relevant proposition.

There is nothing complicated about atheism, nor is it a particularly intelligent position, nor is it an academic way of life, nor is atheism hard work. It is a pretty basic observation. It really needs to be left at that.

If there is one thing that is as ridiculous as religious people advancing their beliefs as intellectually founded, it is atheists pretending that there is any intellectual depth to atheism. There is about as much intellectual depth to atheism as there is scepticism of the banshee. If you think it is particularly intellectual to disbelieve in God, your perception of intellectual muscle is probably not all that toned to begin with.

I suggest you find a real intellectual pursuit.

Mindme · 13-06-2011 6:20am

later10 wrote: »

Extremely hard? Indoctrinated? Really?

This is where I think atheism goes too far. For most people, atheism was just an adolescent realisation based on the absence of any evidence supporting the relevant proposition.

There is nothing complicated about atheism, nor is it a particularly intelligent position, nor is it an academic way of life, nor is atheism hard work. It is a pretty basic observation. It really needs to be left at that.

If there is one thing that is as ridiculous as religious people advancing their beliefs as intellectually founded, it is atheists pretending that there is any intellectual depth to atheism. There is about as much intellectual depth to atheism as there is scepticism of the banshee. If you think it is particularly intellectual to disbelieve in God, your perception of intellectual muscle is probably not all that toned to begin with.

I suggest you find a real intellectual pursuit.

I bow to your youth. :-)

Even the great Russian novelist Fyodor Dostoevsky struggled. Throughout his life.

philologos · 13-06-2011 7:49am

pragmatic1 wrote: »

How does one distinguish between what to believe then. Is it a bit like a pick and mix Bible, pick the bits that fit you own views and forget about other stuff. Because if thats the way it is, its hypocracy. If I remember correctly, Jesus had some very choice words for hypocrites.

It's not picking or mixing, it's reading things in the genre that they are written. One can tell this in many cases simply by where they fall in the Bible. The Torah (Genesis - Deuteronomy) is generally legalistic and concerns the law to the Hebrews, The Historical Books deal with the history of Israel from the time of Moses until the time when the the Israelites are brought back from captivity in Babylon. The Poetic Books from Job to Song of Solomon are philosophy / poetry about the common everyday relationships that people have with God and other people, The Prophets are containing prophesy about the judgement against the Israelites for turning away from God and later on about how they will be brought back to Israel after the time in captivity is over. The Gospels are accounts of Jesus' life. The Apostolic letters are about how Christians should live in the world and how Jesus' life, death and resurrection affects the Christian faith.

Simply put the Bible has a number of books that need to be read correctly in their own right. I believe in the Bible as a whole. The question is how is it believed. Is it believed as allegory in the case of Jesus' parables or much of the prophets. Is it believed as legalistic as the Sermon of the Mount or the Ten Commandments are? Is it written as history as Joshua crossing the Jordan at Gilgal is. Or is it advice and instruction to the Christian communities as Peter's letter to the Jewish-Christian diaspora in Asia Minor is?

That's simply sensible. That's not picking or choosing that's just reading things as they were intended to be read.

Freddie59 · 13-06-2011 7:56am

MagicMarker wrote: »

In which case you'd be a christian.

Of course you would...............:rolleyes:

Freddie59 · 13-06-2011 7:58am

FOGOFUNK wrote: »

I must be, because I think the same, well maybe not Enda, but Obama I believe comes accross atheist/agnostic.

Comes across as..........your opinion, might I even say belief? You, or anyone else, cannot speak for the man. It is what you want him to be - not what he actually is.

philologos · 13-06-2011 7:59am

RichieC wrote: »

The man that believes in a bearded man in sky telling us to be good and to hate gays is talking about lazy reasoning... jesus fking christ..

Funnily enough I don't believe that:
1) God is a bearded man in the sky
or
2) He hates homosexuals.

This thread is becoming absolutely ridiculous in that it is becoming more a caricature of Christian belief than dealing with the reality. If you want to talk to yourself go ahead I guess. You're welcome to come to your own conclusions, but I'm going to believe and stick by mine because ultimately I believe that God is right and true. That might make me evil, sick, disgusting or any other hyperbolic nonsense that any of ye can come up with. I guess I only know what God has done for me and I'm going to continue to give thanks to Him by living for Him and speaking for Him while I'm still here. I don't really care what opinions you happen to hold of me.

Freddie59 · 13-06-2011 8:01am

Ellis Dee wrote: »

What I actually said is that the fact Kenny and Obama openly declare themselves to profess religion does not prove anything,

So the fact that you declare that you are not arrogant in your assumption does not necessarily prove anything either?

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Politics is the art of the possible and it is quite conceivable that one or other of those men, or both, occasionally wonders whether all that stuff about the magic tree and the talking snake and the sky fairy and harps and haloes in the hereafter could possibly be anything more than a ridiculous tale, like that of the great flying spaghetti monster or the orcs and elves. But as pragmatists they are unlikely ever to voice those doubts and risk someone like Sarah Palinosaur or that aul Ni Mathuna wan stepping into their jobs.:rolleyes:

Again with the insults directed at our Creator and those who love and honour Him. As I said before, if you have to resort to those kind of petty insults your argument loses all credence.

Freddie59 · 13-06-2011 8:05am

Mindme wrote: »

Disbelieving in a God in a religion dominated world does not come easy to those indoctrinated as children. We had to work extremely hard to escape the nonsense.

Thinking a lot usually does the trick. Better still reading books written by those considered highly intelligent in science and literature, is a great help.

The key words. By whom? Their peers? With whom they share the same values?

Freddie59 · 13-06-2011 8:05am

philologos wrote: »

Funnily enough I don't believe that:
1) God is a bearded man in the sky
or
2) He hates homosexuals.

This thread is becoming absolutely ridiculous in that it is becoming more a caricature of Christian belief than dealing with the reality. If you want to talk to yourself go ahead I guess. You're welcome to come to your own conclusions, but I'm going to believe and stick by mine because ultimately I believe that God is right and true. That might make me evil, sick, disgusting or any other hyperbolic nonsense that any of ye can come up with. I guess I only know what God has done for me and I'm going to continue to give thanks to Him by living for Him and speaking for Him while I'm still here. I don't really care what opinions you happen to hold of me.

Amen to that.:)

mconigol · 13-06-2011 8:06am

Jesus after hours is gone to ****.

Scanlas The 2nd · 13-06-2011 8:06am

Freddie59 wrote: »

You are - for all intents and purposes - stating that these men use God to get votes. Are you actually THAT arrogant?

Can you please explain how you came to the conclusion that they are arrogant as a result of thinking people use God to get votes. People think what they think, how does that make them arrogant?

Is it arrogant to think the idea of God is ridiculous?

If you think something is ridiculous and people are deluded about something it doesn't mean you must be arrogant.

philologos · 13-06-2011 8:08am

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Is it arrogant to think the idea of God is ridiculous?

Not really. It's just unfortunate as far as I would see it. I would argue for the freedom of all people to come to their own conclusions but simultaneously I hope that they would believe and trust in their Creator who has their best interests at heart.

The only thing this thread is to me is wholly depressing, but it is a reality that I really must become more and more familiar with.

Osgoodisgood · 13-06-2011 8:21am

Asry wrote: »

...And people like you try to make people and children believe lies as well. We'll never know who's right or wrong. Those people teaching others about the love of Christ and the promise of eternal salvation were trying to help them in their own way. Can't please everyone.

What lies does an education free of religious content teach?
Teach religion at Sunday School for those that want it.

Ellis Dee · 13-06-2011 8:25am

Freddie59 wrote: »

So the fact that you declare that you are not arrogant in your assumption does not necessarily prove anything either?

Quite correct. Of course, I am not trying to prove anything, but instead challenging those who believe in the sky fairy to furnish proof that I know will not and could never be produced. :rolleyes:

Freddie59 wrote: »

Again with the insults directed at our Creator and those who love and honour Him. As I said before, if you have to resort to those kind of petty insults your argument loses all credence.

I can not and could not direct insults at something that does not exist. As for those who do exist and who choose to take offence, that surely is their problem and not mine or anyone else's.:D

dvpower · 13-06-2011 8:28am

philologos wrote: »

This thread is becoming absolutely ridiculous in that it is becoming more a caricature of Christian belief than dealing with the reality. If you want to talk to yourself go ahead I guess. You're welcome to come to your own conclusions, but I'm going to believe and stick by mine because ultimately I believe that God is right and true. That might make me evil, sick, disgusting or any other hyperbolic nonsense that any of ye can come up with. I guess I only know what God has done for me and I'm going to continue to give thanks to Him by living for Him and speaking for Him while I'm still here. I don't really care what opinions you happen to hold of me.

Your belief that it is just for people who choose not to believe in God to be punished for an eternity in hell is evil, sick and disgusting. That isn't hyperbole or nonsense - it is what you have clearly and unashamedly stated you believe.

When atheists go too far

Comments