Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Back to forum list |
Back to The Lounge |
Jump to newest |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I believe in Spiritualism stuff and reincarnation. There may be a God of some kind x x When I was a small child I asked myself why out of all the years gone by am I alive now in the present, hence believing in reincarnation. X " Do you believe you’ve lived before? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Pastafarians, We believe we have been touched by his Noodly Appendage. R'amen" If the great spaghetti monster doesn’t exist, then why are the planets shaped like meatballs? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why?" You believe in lots of things without 'proof' if you actually examine yourself deeply. It's impossible to get through a month of adult life without making many assumptions about the world and how it works. Religious people admit that they take things on 'faith' but everyone has faith in something (i.e. beliefs not based on 'proof'). God is whatever you hold highest in your life, for some people that God is science, but there are many notable limits to what science can do (is / ought problem) so people who think they can be purely scientific with no assumptions are just not thinking deeply. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"All religious wars are about people arguing over who has the best imaginary friend. no religion for me thanks" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"This 'belief' thing always amuses me. There are actual facts that most people learn at a young age. They choose to ignore them and and have an imaginary freind in the sky to blame things on . Dear o dear " Does it really matter what people believe or dont believe? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I’m Catholic and go to weddings / funerals that’s about it. I agree Religion is a comfort blanket for people and it helps them get through life. Who are we to question some else’s beliefs. Gods post " Good post I meant haha | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"This 'belief' thing always amuses me. There are actual facts that most people learn at a young age. They choose to ignore them and and have an imaginary freind in the sky to blame things on . Dear o dear Does it really matter what people believe or dont believe?" Only if that belief affects others... religious fundamentalist terrorism and anti-women laws spring to mind | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Not in the slightest, i literally couldnt care less. however, people are killing people over this crap and have done for centuries. In a court of law, you swear by allmighty god that your telling the truth and they will beleive you! I just struggle to tolerate it anymore i really do " Bad people will do bad things... they like to hold up some sort of justification, but anything will generally do. The religion isnt to blame, most (If not all) religions preach against violence and for tolerance & forgiveness. Cal | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I was C of E then converted to catholicism many years ago and now sadly a non believer. But I never knock any one on Thier faith in fact I admire them in a lot of ways and wish that I still had it." Has anything in particular caused your belief to change? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"All religious wars are about people arguing over who has the best imaginary friend. no religion for me thanks" Not necessarily. Muslims and Christians happily fight "in house" just over the small print. I'm sure there are many others as well. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I was C of E then converted to catholicism many years ago and now sadly a non believer. But I never knock any one on Thier faith in fact I admire them in a lot of ways and wish that I still had it. Has anything in particular caused your belief to change?" Too much to post on a open thread | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I was C of E then converted to catholicism many years ago and now sadly a non believer. But I never knock any one on Thier faith in fact I admire them in a lot of ways and wish that I still had it. Has anything in particular caused your belief to change? Too much to post on a open thread" Was it the dinosaurs? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Bad people will do bad things... they like to hold up some sort of justification, but anything will generally do. The religion isnt to blame, most (If not all) religions preach against violence and for tolerance & forgiveness. Cal " Yes, this. I'm a practising Anglican but would never push my beliefs on anyone else. And I am disgusted by all the bigots and downright hateful people who misuse religion to attack others. Generally those who scream about "I'm allowed to hate because Jesus said..." have zero understanding of real Christianity. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion has always done more harm than good i find it to be dangerous on the one hand it is a moral guideline for peoples lives and in some cases makes them feel better about themselves. on the other hand causes more conflict than anything invented and has done since the begining of time." If we didn’t have different religions the same people would use some other excuses too do bad things. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Pastafarian mostly and I'm partial to the Jedi way of thinking." Like abstinence?... because we all know it went bad for Anakin | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why?" buttism and toeism | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is a comfort blanket to some and that is totally ok as long as it is not forced upon others. I think it was Ricky Gervais who said that people need an explanation for some of the uncomfortable events in life, famine, war, genocide or losing somebody etc. If it makes their life more tolerable then so be it. Let s face it, and I really do not mean this in a facetious way, we tell our children of the tooth fairy and angels etc... to make them understand some things they cannot rationalise at a young age." There's no bigger comfort blanket than the idea you can live a thoroughly immoral life with no punishment other than getting caught breaking laws | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Pastafarian mostly and I'm partial to the Jedi way of thinking. Like abstinence?... because we all know it went bad for Anakin" He had a choice. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why?" What would you consider as “proof” though especially in these Modern age as every that people would count as proof would always be debated and if science can’t explain it then it never happened I love science but science only tries to find natural causes to things but God is supernatural so science could never be able to “Prove” him But science and God don’t contradict another | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why?" Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? " No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Replace the words god/allah/yahweh with the word "nature" in any religious text and they make a lot more sense." Nooo it does not make sense | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. " Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"There is more proof of god then no god" Wheres your proof | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. " Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. " If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? " Actually the big bang didn't come from nothing.This is a common misconception. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. " Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"This 'belief' thing always amuses me. There are actual facts that most people learn at a young age. They choose to ignore them and and have an imaginary freind in the sky to blame things on . Dear o dear Does it really matter what people believe or dont believe? Only if that belief affects others... religious fundamentalist terrorism and anti-women laws spring to mind" Im not meaning radicals.. just ordinary everyday folk who believe in their religion.. who are we to judge anyone | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Can't believe the bible, Adam and eve both there naked and what do they do ? Go scrumping, as if lol" Also, Adam and Eve only had sons apparently..... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. " Dawkins is any evolutionary biologist and I would suggest you see what a cosmologist thinks. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. Dawkins is any evolutionary biologist and I would suggest you see what a cosmologist thinks." Richard Dawkins is the one painting himself and ultra rational, ultra scientific and taking nothing without proof! I'm not saying singularity or a multiverse is wrong, all I'm saying that people should cut the crap about proof and ghosts in the sky when they have some pretty whopping assumptions in their own ideas. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. Dawkins is any evolutionary biologist and I would suggest you see what a cosmologist thinks. Richard Dawkins is the one painting himself and ultra rational, ultra scientific and taking nothing without proof! I'm not saying singularity or a multiverse is wrong, all I'm saying that people should cut the crap about proof and ghosts in the sky when they have some pretty whopping assumptions in their own ideas. " If you looked into it nobody says the universe came from nothing.There is more than enough evidence of the inflationary model.The beginning was very small hot and dense.The universe as we know it could of erupted from within a universe that was infinite.We can't observe anything outside our universe or before our universe began.However saying god did it is not the same as the big bang theory and the inflationary model. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Replace the words god/allah/yahweh with the word "nature" in any religious text and they make a lot more sense. Nooo it does not make sense " In the beginning nature created the heaven and the earth. 2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the nature moved upon the face of the waters. 3 And nature said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4 And nature saw the light, that it was good: and nature divided the light from the darkness. 5 And nature called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. 6 And nature said, Let there be a firmament in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters. 7 And nature made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. 8 And nature called the firmament Heaven. And the evening and the morning were the second day. 9 And nature said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. 10 And nature called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and nature saw that it was good. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion doesn't cause problems. Not keeping it to yourself and ramming it down peoples throats does that x" Great statement! I kind of agree... bit like guns don 't kill, it is the people who misuse them. Not trying to divert from the thread btw. but thought this is a good good! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. Dawkins is any evolutionary biologist and I would suggest you see what a cosmologist thinks. Richard Dawkins is the one painting himself and ultra rational, ultra scientific and taking nothing without proof! I'm not saying singularity or a multiverse is wrong, all I'm saying that people should cut the crap about proof and ghosts in the sky when they have some pretty whopping assumptions in their own ideas. If you looked into it nobody says the universe came from nothing.There is more than enough evidence of the inflationary model.The beginning was very small hot and dense.The universe as we know it could of erupted from within a universe that was infinite.We can't observe anything outside our universe or before our universe began.However saying god did it is not the same as the big bang theory and the inflationary model. " Again, if you watch the debate you'll explicitly see Dawkins say the universe could be created from nothing. I'm attacking the idea that dawkins only believes things that are proven. You would acknowledge that dawkins believes in things that aren't proven. Religious people believe that God exists outside time and space so the idea that God could be proven, the way they want is silly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why? Could you offer proof for the big bang and explain how all that matter and energy was created out of nothing? No they couldn't. Richard Dawkins was given this question in an Australian debate and did his best to redefine the term 'nothing' in order to mainatin his beliefs. Which is a faith of sorts. Atheism is a faith and belief. It's the belief of nothing. Richard Dawkins believes, on faith, that something can be created from nothing. There's absolutely zero proof and not much evidence, it's pure faith. People demanding 'proof' of religion either aren't sincere or haven't thought it through properly. If has not been claimed that the universe was created from nothing. It is postulated that it was created from a singularity. Postulated is synonymous with faith. Anyone can go the YouTube and watch the debate with cardinal pell. Dawkins explicitly says something (i.e. the universe) can be created from nothing. Dawkins is any evolutionary biologist and I would suggest you see what a cosmologist thinks. Richard Dawkins is the one painting himself and ultra rational, ultra scientific and taking nothing without proof! I'm not saying singularity or a multiverse is wrong, all I'm saying that people should cut the crap about proof and ghosts in the sky when they have some pretty whopping assumptions in their own ideas. If you looked into it nobody says the universe came from nothing.There is more than enough evidence of the inflationary model.The beginning was very small hot and dense.The universe as we know it could of erupted from within a universe that was infinite.We can't observe anything outside our universe or before our universe began.However saying god did it is not the same as the big bang theory and the inflationary model. Again, if you watch the debate you'll explicitly see Dawkins say the universe could be created from nothing. I'm attacking the idea that dawkins only believes things that are proven. You would acknowledge that dawkins believes in things that aren't proven. Religious people believe that God exists outside time and space so the idea that God could be proven, the way they want is silly. " Ive not seen it but I would guess it's the god of gaps argument.Science says " We can't know what happened before time existed" Religious people push God into this gap. Basically the god of gaps response is irrelevant. . Much like Bertrand Russell's tea pot.If you know of him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" Again, if you watch the debate you'll explicitly see Dawkins say the universe could be created from nothing. I'm attacking the idea that dawkins only believes things that are proven. You would acknowledge that dawkins believes in things that aren't proven. Religious people believe that God exists outside time and space so the idea that God could be proven, the way they want is silly. Ive not seen it but I would guess it's the god of gaps argument.Science says " We can't know what happened before time existed" Religious people push God into this gap. Basically the god of gaps response is irrelevant. . Much like Bertrand Russell's tea pot.If you know of him. " The 'God of the gaps' is a clever term made up to frame the debate a certain way. People use it to try and pretend that religious people are ever retreating from literal interpretations of the bible. However, we have Catholic books dating from before 400AD of people debating whether God can be 'proven' (many people repeating the same questions on this thread that have been answered for over 1,600 years) and they were fully aware that the Gensis story was not to be taken literally in the scientific sense. Yes there are stupid fundamentalists, but they don't actually retreat! You have to be pretty stupid to believe that either the world is 8,000 years old or that the bible even says it was created in six 'days'. It's a horrible translation of hebrew. A day is the time period the earth rotates around the sun, how the fuck can you have a day before there is an earth!? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Isn't the big bang theory looking less likely, as science tests the evidence? That's the point of science. Don't take stuff on faith. Always question and test. Pastafarian myself " This is why science trumps religon time and time again.The guy who comes up with the big bang theory will gladly shake the hand of the guy who comes up with a superior theory and proves him wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Isn't the big bang theory looking less likely, as science tests the evidence? That's the point of science. Don't take stuff on faith. Always question and test. Pastafarian myself This is why science trumps religon time and time again.The guy who comes up with the big bang theory will gladly shake the hand of the guy who comes up with a superior theory and proves him wrong. " The idea that there's a conflict is nonsense (other than with fundamentalists), unless you can resolve the is-ought problem for science? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Isn't the big bang theory looking less likely, as science tests the evidence? That's the point of science. Don't take stuff on faith. Always question and test. Pastafarian myself This is why science trumps religon time and time again.The guy who comes up with the big bang theory will gladly shake the hand of the guy who comes up with a superior theory and proves him wrong. The idea that there's a conflict is nonsense (other than with fundamentalists), unless you can resolve the is-ought problem for science? " Of course there is conflict all religon is static dogma.Only when challenged by science does it move.To pretend otherwise is disingenuous. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I believe in Spiritualism stuff and reincarnation. There may be a God of some kind x x When I was a small child I asked myself why out of all the years gone by am I alive now in the present, hence believing in reincarnation. X Do you believe you’ve lived before?" Yes XXX | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Isn't the big bang theory looking less likely, as science tests the evidence? That's the point of science. Don't take stuff on faith. Always question and test. Pastafarian myself This is why science trumps religon time and time again.The guy who comes up with the big bang theory will gladly shake the hand of the guy who comes up with a superior theory and proves him wrong. The idea that there's a conflict is nonsense (other than with fundamentalists), unless you can resolve the is-ought problem for science? Of course there is conflict all religon is static dogma.Only when challenged by science does it move.To pretend otherwise is disingenuous." Again, is-ought problem. What ought doesn't need to change. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I find atheists tend to ram their views down others throats more than any religious person does." As evidenced on every fab thread on the subject | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I am a Christian but I don’t really follow it, I go to church at Christmas and that’s about it. I made a new years resolution in 2014 to go every possible Sunday and I started going, we were given a code thing to put at the top of our door that blessed the house and it was the worst fucking year of my life! My marriage ended and god knows what else. So ever since then I’ve been a bit dubious about religion etc. Geeky x" And are you happier now or when you were married? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I find atheists tend to ram their views down others throats more than any religious person does. As evidenced on every fab thread on the subject " Yep, and they tend to be pretty vicious in the way they do it too. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? " Would you like to live in a society with no social control? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? " No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"The Church says that the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round. For I have seen the shadow of the earth on the moon and I have more faith in the Shadow than in the Church. Ferdinand megallan knew who was talking shit 500 years ago. " Another myth. At the heart of a lot of athiests is the belief, implicit or otherwise, that most the people on earth before you were ignorant or stupid. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. " What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? " Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. " Of course you would .How about we keep science out of houses of worship if they keep religon out of schools.Its indoctrination. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Not in the slightest, i literally couldnt care less. however, people are killing people over this crap and have done for centuries. In a court of law, you swear by allmighty god that your telling the truth and they will beleive you! I just struggle to tolerate it anymore i really do Bad people will do bad things... they like to hold up some sort of justification, but anything will generally do. The religion isnt to blame, most (If not all) religions preach against violence and for tolerance & forgiveness. Cal " . That's a bit naive to be honest, there's directly expressed views on what's to be done about say homosexuality in most religious texts, the fact is most people choose not to act upon it however that's not too say it doesn't influence their prejudice about the matter they just aren't willing to kill gay people because it actually goes against they're human nature | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? " Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! " As someone with a Jewish family answering a question with a question is second nature... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! " I understand the origins of our legal / control system and I can’t ‘undo’ history. Without religion the same laws / societal rules may well have evolved based on the notion of equity and fairness. We will never know. So my answer is a society based on fairness and equity. But to have that you’d have to undo hundreds of years of history and that’s never going to happen, so it’s a moot question and you know it! Ok now I’ve answered, tell me which, in your opinion, is the ‘right’ religious doctrine. The one version of the truth. The one that doesn’t engender war and killing and use it’s beliefs and values as a justification? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! " . Theres nothing wrong with letting or giving people faith spirituality and values. We just need the balls to adjust those doctrines to suit 21st century views and morality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I believe that people don't have all the answers. " . You live and learn and die and forget it all, its a strange old world | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! I understand the origins of our legal / control system and I can’t ‘undo’ history. Without religion the same laws / societal rules may well have evolved based on the notion of equity and fairness. We will never know. So my answer is a society based on fairness and equity. But to have that you’d have to undo hundreds of years of history and that’s never going to happen, so it’s a moot question and you know it! Ok now I’ve answered, tell me which, in your opinion, is the ‘right’ religious doctrine. The one version of the truth. The one that doesn’t engender war and killing and use it’s beliefs and values as a justification? " Pushing together two bland words like fairness and equity does not answer the question I'm just looking for a coherent set of beliefs you can reference for morality. I get that you don't like the religious ones, that's fine, I'm just asking which you do like? Marxism is popular with athiests.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking" Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? " . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! I understand the origins of our legal / control system and I can’t ‘undo’ history. Without religion the same laws / societal rules may well have evolved based on the notion of equity and fairness. We will never know. So my answer is a society based on fairness and equity. But to have that you’d have to undo hundreds of years of history and that’s never going to happen, so it’s a moot question and you know it! Ok now I’ve answered, tell me which, in your opinion, is the ‘right’ religious doctrine. The one version of the truth. The one that doesn’t engender war and killing and use it’s beliefs and values as a justification? Pushing together two bland words like fairness and equity does not answer the question I'm just looking for a coherent set of beliefs you can reference for morality. I get that you don't like the religious ones, that's fine, I'm just asking which you do like? Marxism is popular with athiests...." You and your Marxist atheist nonsense is tiresome.I am sure you are aware of this hitchens quote. "Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time " So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests...." Is it? How did you conclude that? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! I understand the origins of our legal / control system and I can’t ‘undo’ history. Without religion the same laws / societal rules may well have evolved based on the notion of equity and fairness. We will never know. So my answer is a society based on fairness and equity. But to have that you’d have to undo hundreds of years of history and that’s never going to happen, so it’s a moot question and you know it! Ok now I’ve answered, tell me which, in your opinion, is the ‘right’ religious doctrine. The one version of the truth. The one that doesn’t engender war and killing and use it’s beliefs and values as a justification? Pushing together two bland words like fairness and equity does not answer the question I'm just looking for a coherent set of beliefs you can reference for morality. I get that you don't like the religious ones, that's fine, I'm just asking which you do like? Marxism is popular with athiests.... You and your Marxist atheist nonsense is tiresome.I am sure you are aware of this hitchens quote. "Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it." " No I've never heard that, i think it's absolute nonsense. But one would need to believe in such silliness to be coherent so he is that at least. It's also very much discredited by the field of psychology. I believe in a hobbesian view of nature. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion is an excellent form of social control isn’t it? Would you like to live in a society with no social control? No. But I’d definitely prefer to live in a society without religion. What value system would you use for matters of what ought to be? Let me ask you a question instead : which religious doctrine(s) would you use asthe basis for matters of what ought to be? Don't answer a question with a question. I don't believe you want to live in a society with no value system so since you don't like religious based value systems, it's reasonable to ask which you do like? There aren't many not based on religion! I understand the origins of our legal / control system and I can’t ‘undo’ history. Without religion the same laws / societal rules may well have evolved based on the notion of equity and fairness. We will never know. So my answer is a society based on fairness and equity. But to have that you’d have to undo hundreds of years of history and that’s never going to happen, so it’s a moot question and you know it! Ok now I’ve answered, tell me which, in your opinion, is the ‘right’ religious doctrine. The one version of the truth. The one that doesn’t engender war and killing and use it’s beliefs and values as a justification? Pushing together two bland words like fairness and equity does not answer the question I'm just looking for a coherent set of beliefs you can reference for morality. I get that you don't like the religious ones, that's fine, I'm just asking which you do like? Marxism is popular with athiests...." It’s easy to ask questions, less easy to answer them isn’t it? A set of morals and beliefs will evolve over time based on a number of cultural and environmental factors. And you’ve already said most modern belief systems have evolved using religious aspects too. So we can’t undo ‘where we are’ as every set of values you will be able to tie back to some religious origin. So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... " No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? " It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. " If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I am a Christian but I don’t really follow it, I go to church at Christmas and that’s about it. I made a new years resolution in 2014 to go every possible Sunday and I started going, we were given a code thing to put at the top of our door that blessed the house and it was the worst fucking year of my life! My marriage ended and god knows what else. So ever since then I’ve been a bit dubious about religion etc. Geeky x And are you happier now or when you were married?" Oh I am so much happier! I do believe in everything happens for a reason, if my marriage never ended I obviously wouldn’t be here now, the best I’ve ever felt. So maybe I was looking at it all wrong? Maybe that worst time of my life actually was the best thing looking back? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?" . Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago" They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly." The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. " . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience" Exactly. I've never understood why religious types think "atheists don't believe in absolute moral truths is such a killer point" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. " Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience" Ok so you don't believe in them, no problem. But anyone who understands logic can understand why they wouldn't need changing if they did exist. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. " Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Did God create Man or did Man create God to control other men? " That’s the thing every one just thinks god created only man. Man are only one of many things god created, plus they isn’t the people use the bible to disprove god, the bible proven to be filled with contradictions plus Christians don’t believe in a single god no matter how much they believe they do. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience Ok so you don't believe in them, no problem. But anyone who understands logic can understand why they wouldn't need changing if they did exist. " You've got me going now. Do you believe on divine command theory? That all moral truths come from God. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience Ok so you don't believe in them, no problem. But anyone who understands logic can understand why they wouldn't need changing if they did exist. You've got me going now. Do you believe on divine command theory? That all moral truths come from God. " It would be absurd to say god is necessary for morality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"That's the main difference between religion and science. Ones willing and wants to change its beliefs based on evidence and outcomes The other uses heresy to instill a sense of right and wrong thinking Do you believe in the existance of absolute truth? . Yes, I use Faradays law quite a bit and it works every time So why would moral statements of absolute truth need to change?. Because unlike motors morals change. What society considered ok only 30 years ago is no longer ok let alone thousands of years ago They don't if you believe in absolute truth! Sounds like you don't really believe in the concept of absolute truth. . A moral absolute truth is only absolute to you, motors don't care, Faradays law doesn't care, it just repeats itself over and over consistently regardless of your beliefs, therefore we can confirm it as an absolute truth. Your moral absolute truths are neither true or absolute but only exist in your conscience Ok so you don't believe in them, no problem. But anyone who understands logic can understand why they wouldn't need changing if they did exist. You've got me going now. Do you believe on divine command theory? That all moral truths come from God. It would be absurd to say god is necessary for morality. " Fundamentally we are social animals and to live together socially we need sets of rules. We call these rules morality and we posit a cosmic lawgiver to give force and authority to said rules. . As you say we can cut out the middle man and dispense with said cosmic being. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. " So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god"" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. " In my crystal ball I can see you being told that you don't know anything, and also that Marx has no merit because somebody read a book about Adam Smith... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" I love science but science only tries to find natural causes to things but God is supernatural so science could never be able to “Prove” him " This argument only works if God doesn't do anything that affects the natural world. For example, if he/she/it answers prayers in any more than a random pattern, we would be able to tell. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. " That's just a myth, as i said, they weren't taking genesis literally in 400AD so I'm not sure there was ever a time when mainstream Christianity held the idea that the world is 8,000 years old. It's much more likely it came out of people reading english translations since you'd never reach that conclusion in hebrew. Christianity is only meaningless now because you've already accepted so much of its morality. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"As a youth I would be believe inbthe Beer Gods. Why because I had some spiritual benevolence from said gods. My epiphany came on a random night in Rugby town. I had been out the night before on a birthday bender of stupid proportion. I went out that night seriously still sick and nursing soft drinks all night. Then this unexpected feeling came over me and a voice said to me it'll be ok. Instantly I felt ok and compelled to go to the bar and order my self 10 shots. I did, I d*unk them. I was back in my grove and mad for a good night out. I ordered another drink and before I d*unk it the lights in the club started to brighten and the slow song began. I had just got my buzz and the club was closen. I thought beer gods why have you forsaken tho? So i got a bag of chips feelung totally forsake by the gods i praise. With the prospect of a long expensive taxi ride home. But the gods had not forsaken me. They move in mysterios way. As i walked passed a park bench a girl (also eating chips) called me over. She was with a friend. We got talking and she out the blue said 'do you like Strongbow'? Of which I said yes. She said do you want to come back to mine for some, I said yes. I went back with her and her freind to her flat. We chatted and d*unk cider. She then went off and come back in a plain cotton nighty. She then said I'm off to bed. I was just about to get up and let my self out (simply content with cider and some company to go with my new found buzz) when she said you coming? I simply said yes (surprised) and followed her. Maybe I had been nieve to her true intent but my experiance was limited back then. Her freind slept on the couch. To top it all the sex was very good. So the evidence suggested to me if you hold the faith no matter how broken you are and find the strength to still praise the beer gods they'll look after you. They found me booze (when every where had closed), saved me from an expensive taxi ride, a nice warm bed to spend the night and the physical affection of a woman. So after that I believed. Their magic wall always present when I thought about. Like times I was so d*unk I could think but I would always wake up somewhere soft and warm in the morning. My only regret was not chancing my arm and asking if her friend wanted to join in with us as the guy she was calling to come round said he wasn't going to. She was a bit upset by being all alone while her mate got some." | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. That's just a myth, as i said, they weren't taking genesis literally in 400AD so I'm not sure there was ever a time when mainstream Christianity held the idea that the world is 8,000 years old. It's much more likely it came out of people reading english translations since you'd never reach that conclusion in hebrew. Christianity is only meaningless now because you've already accepted so much of its morality. " Sorry, but that's completely wrong. There were some theologians discussing whether the genesis account should be taken literally, but official church doctrine in all mainstream churches until the twentieth century was that it should. On the latter point pretty much all Christian philosophy is derivative of Platonism. The whole idea of Jesus as the second person of the trinity comes from Platos discussion of how an infinite being interacts with a finite world. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. " Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. That's just a myth, as i said, they weren't taking genesis literally in 400AD so I'm not sure there was ever a time when mainstream Christianity held the idea that the world is 8,000 years old. It's much more likely it came out of people reading english translations since you'd never reach that conclusion in hebrew. Christianity is only meaningless now because you've already accepted so much of its morality. Sorry, but that's completely wrong. There were some theologians discussing whether the genesis account should be taken literally, but official church doctrine in all mainstream churches until the twentieth century was that it should. On the latter point pretty much all Christian philosophy is derivative of Platonism. The whole idea of Jesus as the second person of the trinity comes from Platos discussion of how an infinite being interacts with a finite world. " Which Church? Not the Catholic or Orthodox Church and if you read the confessions of St Augustine then it's right there in black and white. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. " Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? " Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. That's just a myth, as i said, they weren't taking genesis literally in 400AD so I'm not sure there was ever a time when mainstream Christianity held the idea that the world is 8,000 years old. It's much more likely it came out of people reading english translations since you'd never reach that conclusion in hebrew. Christianity is only meaningless now because you've already accepted so much of its morality. Sorry, but that's completely wrong. There were some theologians discussing whether the genesis account should be taken literally, but official church doctrine in all mainstream churches until the twentieth century was that it should. On the latter point pretty much all Christian philosophy is derivative of Platonism. The whole idea of Jesus as the second person of the trinity comes from Platos discussion of how an infinite being interacts with a finite world. Which Church? Not the Catholic or Orthodox Church and if you read the confessions of St Augustine then it's right there in black and white. " Yes. Those churches. You're cherry picking. And it's not in the confessions, which I have read. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? " I am not saying it's not "real Marxism" at all. Marxism is what Marxists do, just as what Christianity is what Christians do. We are talking about the ideas of Marx as a person as disclosed in his writings, not the ideas of other people who called themselves Marxists. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly. The latest British social attitudes survey showed that less than 50% of the population believed in God and, whatever the theoretical status of the church of England (whose adherents according to the same survey make up only 10% of the population) the government is at pains to act in a purely neutral way as between the various religions and ethical systems knocking around. We don't seem to be quite murdering each other in the streets yet and as it happens I rather think theres theres a good correlation between the religiosity of a society and its murder rate. Yes it's about 27% believe religion is important in this country. So much for social control theory... Fortunately we have a value system built heavily on christian morals that actually most people like. So much so that many people have deluded themselves that no lying, stealing and killing is somehow natural for a tribal species. The fact that religion is nearly dead in this country doesn't change the historic role in shaping the country to what it has become. Of course Christianity has had a massive influence on British culture, but for most people now it is meaningless I read somewhere recently that while we can all think of many instances where scientific advances proved religion wrong causing religion to adjust (for example mainstream Christianity now accepts evolution after for 1800 years or so believing an earth a few thousand years old), there are no instances where religion has proven science wrong. That's just a myth, as i said, they weren't taking genesis literally in 400AD so I'm not sure there was ever a time when mainstream Christianity held the idea that the world is 8,000 years old. It's much more likely it came out of people reading english translations since you'd never reach that conclusion in hebrew. Christianity is only meaningless now because you've already accepted so much of its morality. Sorry, but that's completely wrong. There were some theologians discussing whether the genesis account should be taken literally, but official church doctrine in all mainstream churches until the twentieth century was that it should. On the latter point pretty much all Christian philosophy is derivative of Platonism. The whole idea of Jesus as the second person of the trinity comes from Platos discussion of how an infinite being interacts with a finite world. Which Church? Not the Catholic or Orthodox Church and if you read the confessions of St Augustine then it's right there in black and white. Yes. Those churches. You're cherry picking. And it's not in the confessions, which I have read. " It's just a fact that it is. He did not believe in a young earth or 6 days of creation. There's no way you read them and came to the conclusion that he believed either oof those. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? " Stalin (educated in a seminary in Georgia, by the way). Up to 1917, hundreds of millions of Russians have been told that the head of the state is a god. The Czar is above secular power, is the head of the Orthadox church. You shouldn't be in the dictatorship business if you can't take advantage of a well of credulity and servility like that - it's your golden opportunity. What does he do? Heresy trials, witch hunts, miraculous discoveries such as Lysenko's Biology, the worship of the leader from whom all blessings flow (Mao's china is similar). Find me a state or society that threw off theocracy and said: "We adopt the teachings of Lucretius, Democratus, Gallileo, Spinoza, Darwin, Russel, Jefferson and Paine - and we make that Scientific rationalism the basis of our teaching". Tell me when such a society fell into tyranny and ruin.... (Hitchens) | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? " Come on... It's drivel because you read a book about Adams.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? I am not saying it's not "real Marxism" at all. Marxism is what Marxists do, just as what Christianity is what Christians do. We are talking about the ideas of Marx as a person as disclosed in his writings, not the ideas of other people who called themselves Marxists. " So the marxist countries being athiest had nothing to do with marx writing that religion needed to be transcended and god had no place in their society | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? Come on... It's drivel because you read a book about Adams.... " Oh i remember, marx wasn't a communist in your world view was he!!! Maybe you could tell us who the real communists were? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? Come on... It's drivel because you read a book about Adams.... Oh i remember, marx wasn't a communist in your world view was he!!! Maybe you could tell us who the real communists were? " I think you remember incorrectly. I did make a point about state capitalism not being communism. Also; if you'd read Marx, you would know that Marxist communism has never existed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? Come on... It's drivel because you read a book about Adams.... Oh i remember, marx wasn't a communist in your world view was he!!! Maybe you could tell us who the real communists were? I think you remember incorrectly. I did make a point about state capitalism not being communism. Also; if you'd read Marx, you would know that Marxist communism has never existed. " So the Soviet union was capitalist because it had money or something? Sorry it's been a while and honestly there's a lot of mental gymnastics to get to your conclusion. But basically it's another version of "that wasn't real communism". Can you please confirm who the real marxist were? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Marxism is popular with athiests.... Is it? How did you conclude that? It's the broad brush he paints with creating sweeping statements that say little. If you read Marx then he prescribes athiesm. You cannot believe in God and be a marxist. You cannot be a marxist and believe in God. Not all athiests are marxists but no marxists believe in God. So atheism is popular with Marxists. Given how Marxism is so marginal in society (well other than with the right who scream it at anyone left of centre) I'm not sure how that proves Marxism is popular with athiests? Also I'm pretty sure that the whole Marxism thibg is more about believing that religion is a firm of control rather than a slightly simplistic "you cannot believe in god" Marx actually said he wasn't an atheist. He didn't believe in God, but he though atheism was a bourgeois cop out which one needed to transcend. His views on religion were almost more nuanced than many suggest. Basically he thought religion was a symptom of alienation, people find the real world unpleasant so project their desires and wishes onto an external entity. He certainly didn't believe that it was just evil capitalists imposing nonsense on credulous workers. Right wingers who bang on about Marxism have very rarely read him. Give me a break, he said religion was an illusion to be transcended and concept of God was meaningless in a society based on reason. The Soviet union (and Mao's China) was militantly athiest and promoted much of the bullshit the the poorly informed now swallow whole such as people who think a Palestinian jewish man called Jesus never lived. It's still inpossible to join the top ranks of the chinese communist party today if you are religious. Given that Marx died before the USSR and communist China existed, I am unclear how we can gather what his ideas were based on the actions of those regimes. Its kind of ironic that whilst you attack people for caricaturing Christianity you are quite happy to to do the same for Marx's ideas. Have you ever read any Marx? Yes i have, it's surprisingly well written and contains some good analysis that i agree with, it's his conclusions that are drivel. I see you repeating the "that wasn't real marxism arguement". I've asked you before where the real marxism was and never had an answer? Do i get to say that the spanish inquisition wasn't real Christianity because Jesus was dead then? Come on... It's drivel because you read a book about Adams.... Oh i remember, marx wasn't a communist in your world view was he!!! Maybe you could tell us who the real communists were? I think you remember incorrectly. I did make a point about state capitalism not being communism. Also; if you'd read Marx, you would know that Marxist communism has never existed. So the Soviet union was capitalist because it had money or something? Sorry it's been a while and honestly there's a lot of mental gymnastics to get to your conclusion. But basically it's another version of "that wasn't real communism". Can you please confirm who the real marxist were? " You know that state capitalism (either kind) does not equal Marxism. If you'd read Marx, you would know whether communism had ever existed. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I find atheists tend to ram their views down others throats more than any religious person does." Yup I always find this. They are also quick to ridicule. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I find atheists tend to ram their views down others throats more than any religious person does. Yup I always find this. They are also quick to ridicule. " Religion is riduculous, ergo.... | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I am a Christian but I don’t really follow it, I go to church at Christmas and that’s about it. I made a new years resolution in 2014 to go every possible Sunday and I started going, we were given a code thing to put at the top of our door that blessed the house and it was the worst fucking year of my life! My marriage ended and god knows what else. So ever since then I’ve been a bit dubious about religion etc. Geeky x" While it's comforting to think that you will earn 'points' with God if you do good things, Christianity doesn't work like that. The Christian God doesn't do magic like Houdini if you just pray the right way. The whole point that Christ was crucified and was resurrected is to acknowledge that people are sinners, they do evil things and make stupid decisions, that bad things happen to good people, and that people will ultimately die one way or another but their pain and suffering will end and they will live in peace in heaven. The "but I was a good Christian and still didn't get what I want and something bad happened to me so now I'm atheist" narrative is very common but completely misguided. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"All religious wars are about people arguing over who has the best imaginary friend. no religion for me thanks" No, it's always about power. People use religion as a cover to gain support for their cause. It's more powerful to say fight for your God than to say help me get power so I can control others. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
" So you’re asking me to come up with a totally new set of values that don’t have religious roots on an Internet Sex site forum. Had we not had thousands of years of religion then I might be able to reference a different value set that would have evolved anyway. All I know is that there’s a lot of suffering and pain that is done in the name of religion. From the Spanish Inquistion, Witch hunts and ducking stools, Holy Jihad, most wars have religious contexts / justifications etc. Ok I’ve played along now your turn. Answer my question ... No im not asking you to invent anything. Since you want religion out of society, then i assume you know what you want to replace it with. It doesn't sound like you've thought it through. From your comments it really doesn't sound like you know much about the separation of the church and state, we'd need to agree a lot of things like that first for you to interpret my answer honestly." I’ve been on a fun night out so this is the first chance I’ve had to log back on and see this. As expected you’ve ducked the question (yet again!) and instead come back with an incredibly patronising retort. The sort of thing that someone who’s not *quite* as smart as they think they are might do and frequently a sign that someone has no other come back! It’s the perpetual ask a question, but always duck away from an answer isn’t it - earlier on you has the temerity to say to me “don’t answer a question with a question” yet you’re unable to answer any questions I have since posed yet either come back with more questions or resort to patronising me. So on that basis, I’m out. But enjoy your pedestal my friend! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Hey everyone... I consider myself an Atheist, as I can’t believe in any sort of creation myth/theory without there being any proof. That being said, I actually find religion and people’s beliefs fascinating and I’m very tolerant of other beliefs, as long as they’re not forced on others. So... what religious beliefs do we have here on fab... and why?" Was a devout catholic till 10 years ago now I'm indifferent | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I believe in the process of natural evolution but planets the solar system infinity where does it all begin who knows certainly no human does or will ever " The Bible says it began with the "Word" it just so happens that word was "kaboom!". A Sheldon quote I couldn't resist. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I believe in the process of natural evolution but planets the solar system infinity where does it all begin who knows certainly no human does or will ever The Bible says it began with the "Word" it just so happens that word was "kaboom!". A Sheldon quote I couldn't resist. " oooooooo so you worship Sheldon a much worthier pass time I might add | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"We’re both pagan, which isn’t a religion at all, just means love the land and each other. Most religions, especially Christianity steel a lot for pagans. I can’t in this day and age believe people still believe in religion " It’s you pagans we have to thank for most of the good stuff at Christmas. Good effort! | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I'm more spiritual than strictly follow one religion. so I'm a combination of Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism. I am much more peaceful, content, because of it and it gives me a foundation to be a better person and support me through tough times. " Did you need the spiritual aspect to be a better person?... or do you find it helps focus on being better? | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"Religion ..story book of the dark ages but each to their own i guess just seems like brain washing just another cult " Nobody does brainwashing better than marxists | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
"I think it's likely that early humans who grew into larger tribes, within a somewhat dangerous world, found some leaders would help to control and comfort them with supernatural myths etc. We've just not moved on very far from that perspective in millennia, despite our other increased sophistication. I don't need to be a part of anything like that or need an afterlife and see no likelihood of there being any greater supernatural entity. " Yes people still cling to fantasy and myth today, like the fantasy that a perfect system of government can solve all the world's problems and we can live in a socialist utopia. | |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
| |||
(closed, thread got too big) |
Reply privately |
back to top |