Do you believe in God and why

[Sunmaster]

20 minutes ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

It's fair not to judge believers as good or bad based on that belief. It is not fair to castigate believers because of that belief. I think it is fair to note that believers have gone to an extreme - that being belief. They could say I think, hope, long for, have a feeling of, a god. But a believer says I know 100 per cent there is a god. Conversation over. 

The same goes for those atheists who flat out declare "There is no God/Higher Power", based solely on their opinion, which in turn is based on very limited information. They like to mask their opinion in a shroud of fancy scientific jargon as if it were the ultimate truth, when in fact the correct statement should simply be "I don't believe."
The difference is that with the first statement, there can't be any exchange of ideas, the opinion is absolute and can't be challenged. There's no need to explore further or question yourself.
The second statement on the other hand is intellectually honest. It doesn't try to categorize the object one way or another, but simply tells of the stance of the observer towards the object.

Of course, this too goes for those believers who unshakeably stand behind their radical beliefs without ever questioning them.
 

Edited May 18, 2021 by Sunmaster

[VincentRJ]

3 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

That's very true,  you should try to remember that when you go on mocking the "believers" as a whole ????

Any perceived mocking from me is very trivial compared with the claims of certain believers who tell of the horrible, dire consequences that non-believers will experience as a result of their atheism.

 

Also, I don't mock believers as a whole. Albert Einstein, for example, believed in a type of abstract Intelligent Designer which did not interfere in human affairs. He believed that his scientific work was a process of understanding the fundamental rules, or Laws of Physics, which his 'imagined' Intelligent Designer used during the creation and development of the universe.

[robblok]

4 hours ago, mauGR1 said:

That's very true,  you should try to remember that when you go on mocking the "believers" as a whole ????

Why not mock them ? I mean they believe in some invisible entity with no proof at all. If i say that i see a dog floating in the sky that talks with me im sure to be locked up in a padded room. What is the difference ? Believing in something without a shred of evidence is just not really bright. 

 

I think there is more chance for aliens to exist then for god. (and that is a fact scientifically speaking) 

 

I never understood how people could fall for religion. Though I admit at times i wish i was stupid and believed that after this there was a better life and all my loved ones were there instead of believing that once you die its done. But just because its more comfortable to believe something does not make it true if there is no evidence.

 

For me all religions are equally strange, the Thai superstition is not any stranger then Christianity or what the Jews Muslims or whatever are thinking. Im always amazed how religious people judge other religions while their own religion has as much proof as any other (none). Just because there are many that believe the same thing does not make it anymore true. 

[mauGR1]

15 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Any perceived mocking from me is very trivial compared with the claims of certain believers who tell of the horrible, dire consequences that non-believers will experience as a result of their atheism.

 

Also, I don't mock believers as a whole. Albert Einstein, for example, believed in a type of abstract Intelligent Designer which did not interfere in human affairs. He believed that his scientific work was a process of understanding the fundamental rules, or Laws of Physics, which his 'imagined' Intelligent Designer used during the creation and development of the universe.

That's fair enough, i also think that there must be some nice people here and there among materialists... ????

..And before someone tells me that I'm generalizing,  of course I do.

[mauGR1]

2 minutes ago, robblok said:

Why not mock them ? I mean they believe in some invisible entity with no proof at all. If i say that i see a dog floating in the sky that talks with me im sure to be locked up in a padded room. What is the difference ? Believing in something without a shred of evidence is just not really bright. 

 

I think there is more chance for aliens to exist then for god. (and that is a fact scientifically speaking) 

 

I never understood how people could fall for religion. Though I admit at times i wish i was stupid and believed that after this there was a better life and all my loved ones were there instead of believing that once you die its done. But just because its more comfortable to believe something does not make it true if there is no evidence.

 

For me all religions are equally strange, the Thai superstition is not any stranger then Christianity or what the Jews Muslims or whatever are thinking. Im always amazed how religious people judge other religions while their own religion has as much proof as any other (none). Just because there are many that believe the same thing does not make it anymore true. 

Uhm, it's obvious that you're not really following this thread, and I cannot blame you,  but there are not religious fanatics here at the moment.

Also, I would not recommend anyone to be superstitious,  but I'm convinced there's a bit of superstition in anyone. 

[robblok]

9 minutes ago, mauGR1 said:

Uhm, it's obvious that you're not really following this thread, and I cannot blame you,  but there are not religious fanatics here at the moment.

Also, I would not recommend anyone to be superstitious,  but I'm convinced there's a bit of superstition in anyone. 

Yea its 393 pages so no I did not follow it. I don't mock people in the way that i go out of my way to make them look bad. But whenever people put religious stuff up I do make a remark. In general I just ignore religion as such unless it is promoted or impedes on my freedoms. 

 

I don't care much if a friend is a Christian or a Muslim usually just ignore religion but if they were to start to talk about how good it is then yea i mock them for promoting something they can't prove. But if they just keep their religion private and don't discuss it then I won't bring it up either.

 

Religion should not be pushed too much but as long as people keep their religion to themselves then I won't bring it up. Its a private thing. But if someone posts on a forum how good the teachings of xxx are and how they are true ect ect then yes I comment.

 

I particularly hate religious people who feel the need to ban euthanasie for others as their religion does not allow it. If their religion does not allow it they should not do it, but why decide about it for others. As long as religion does not impact me i don't have a  problem with it. 

[WhiteBuffaloATM]

Massive Issue .......my take, start with separation of Facts from Faith 

Facts sufficiently and increasingly prove “No God” Evolution

Faith (Examples) is Cultural (especially Jews & Muslims) & Disregarding Base Facts (All); for Comfort (Christians)/Survival (Islam)  / Business (Catholicism, Evangelism)...

Facts = Science = Geology, Archeology, History, Linguistics, Genetics etc. all corroborating each other.

Faith = No Base Facts, Manufactured Religious Institutions,, Priests, Story Telling, Superstitious Nonsense, Emotions,  Fear, My God ( from 4000) is Right, Complete Answer to Everything, Cults, Fanaticism,.....little proper corroboration, different versions, etc.......

 

Human “Beliefs” eroding substantially in civilized places (the West, East Asia) since widespread Enlightment & Education began scientifically explaining the Universe, some 500 years ago.

Uncivilized places showing no sign of such common enlightment .........in fact resistance hardening......

 

Interesting to see how long Islam would last if Death Penalty removed for renouncing it.

Interesting that rate of renouncing Islam when relocating to civilized places around 15%.

 

The late great C. Hitchens had ALL the best No God arguments (You Tube)

No pro-religion debater ever landed a single punch on the legendary Hitch..... zero base facts

[Sunmaster]

2 hours ago, robblok said:

For me all religions are equally strange, the Thai superstition is not any stranger then Christianity or what the Jews Muslims or whatever are thinking. Im always amazed how religious people judge other religions while their own religion has as much proof as any other (none). Just because there are many that believe the same thing does not make it anymore true. 

And I'm always amazed that people judge something they have no understanding of, (like you openly admit since you put all beliefs in one big pot) and then call those who believe "stupid".

Oh the irony...

[robblok]

Just now, Sunmaster said:

And I'm always amazed that people judge something they have no understanding of, (like you openly admit since you put all beliefs in one big pot) and then call those who believe "stupid".

Oh the irony...

But they are all the same, none can prove that their teachings are right. Can you explain to me why one belief without proof is different from an other belief without proof. I guess your religious and took offence to the fact that your believing in something that has not been proven to be true EVER. 

 

What is the difference between believing in a flying invisible dog and the god from Christianity or the Jews or Muslims ?

[Sunmaster]

Just now, robblok said:

But they are all the same, none can prove that their teachings are right. Can you explain to me why one belief without proof is different from an other belief without proof. I guess your religious and took offence to the fact that your believing in something that has not been proven to be true EVER. 

 

What is the difference between believing in a flying invisible dog and the god from Christianity or the Jews or Muslims ?

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not religious at all and don't follow any particular religion.
I did however study various religions, their history and core concepts.
Listing their differences would take far too long and I'm sure you can do your own research if you're interested.

What I do care much more about, and if you had followed the conversations here even a little bit you would know that already, is what all religions have in common. The search for your true identity, beyond what you can see and touch. Every religion has its own way of doing that, and every person within his particular religion will apply the teachings to the best of his or her capacity and understanding. 
Everyone is involved in a learning process, you and I included.

No mocking is necessary.

Mocking created division.

Mocking implies that you judge your limited understanding as being higher/better than the limited understanding of someone else.
Ultimately, they are all limited, and the sooner you can accept that, the sooner you can progress on your own path.
 

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Sunmaster said:

Sorry to disappoint you, but I'm not religious at all and don't follow any particular religion.
I did however study various religions, their history and core concepts.
Listing their differences would take far too long and I'm sure you can do your own research if you're interested.

What I do care much more about, and if you had followed the conversations here even a little bit you would know that already, is what all religions have in common. The search for your true identity, beyond what you can see and touch. Every religion has its own way of doing that, and every person within his particular religion will apply the teachings to the best of his or her capacity and understanding. 
Everyone is involved in a learning process, you and I included.

No mocking is necessary.

Mocking created division.

Mocking implies that you judge your limited understanding as being higher/better than the limited understanding of someone else.
Ultimately, they are all limited, and the sooner you can accept that, the sooner you can progress on your own path.
 

But they all have one thing in common, they are all unproven. Almost all believe in some higher being or stuff like that without any proof. How can anyone who is logical accept these things without proof. (yes they call it faith i call it a scam). In all those 1000 of years most religions exists there has never been proof.

 

Also most religions are used to control the masses and make money. Mocking someone has nothing to do with limited understanding at all. It has to do with people accepting things without proof. If i ask you to give me 1000$ and i promise you to pay it back. Only a few fools would do that as there is no proof I will pay it back. Why do religious people shut their brains down and take all those unproven things for true. I mock the strangeness of that.

[Sunmaster]

15 minutes ago, robblok said:

But they all have one thing in common, they are all unproven. Almost all believe in some higher being or stuff like that without any proof. How can anyone who is logical accept these things without proof. (yes they call it faith i call it a scam). In all those 1000 of years most religions exists there has never been proof.

 

Also most religions are used to control the masses and make money. Mocking someone has nothing to do with limited understanding at all. It has to do with people accepting things without proof. If i ask you to give me 1000$ and i promise you to pay it back. Only a few fools would do that as there is no proof I will pay it back. Why do religious people shut their brains down and take all those unproven things for true. I mock the strangeness of that.

I understand where you're coming from and what you're trying to say. 
The main problem I see, is that you see only the most superficial aspect of religion and base your understanding on that. 
However, what we call religion is just an attempt to rationalize and categorize something that is beyond words and categories. Some call it spirituality, some call it nature, some call it God. If one follows a religion without diving into its spiritual aspects (self-inquiry above all), then he would be better off being atheist.

You repeatedly say there is no proof for any of the religious ideas or teachings. I beg to differ.

First of all, we have to clarify what kind of proof you consider valid. Is it scientific proof? Or personal/ experiential proof?

The former can never be fulfilled (at least not with the tools currently at our disposal). The latter is there for anyone willing to find out, right here, right now. 

Edited May 18, 2021 by Sunmaster

[mauGR1]

26 minutes ago, Sunmaster said:

Everyone is involved in a learning process, you and I included.

No mocking is necessary.

Mocking created division.

Mocking implies that you judge your limited understanding as being higher/better than the limited understanding of someone else.
Ultimately, they are all limited, and the sooner you can accept that, the sooner you can progress on your own path.

Well, perhaps now I'm going to contradict myself,  but i would like to clear that a little mocking is fair in a discussion, I think the English call it "banter".

As an example, as  I'm rather painfully finding out, some people find correct to despise and mock totalitarianism if it has a "religion" label attached to it, but unfortunately totalitarianism can easily be disguised under any other label which the majority accepts as true.

In this case, a little mockery is fair imho ????

Again, nothing new under the sun.

[thaibeachlovers]

19 hours ago, Fat is a type of crazy said:

It's fair not to judge believers as good or bad based on that belief. It is not fair to castigate believers because of that belief. I think it is fair to note that believers have gone to an extreme - that being belief. They could say I think, hope, long for, have a feeling of, a god. But a believer says I know 100 per cent there is a god. Conversation over. 

Do you know 100% that "love" exists? Most do, but it's no more real or not real than God is, IMO.

[Scott]

Troll post reported and removed.  

 

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

But they all have one thing in common, they are all unproven. Almost all believe in some higher being or stuff like that without any proof. How can anyone who is logical accept these things without proof. (yes they call it faith i call it a scam). In all those 1000 of years most religions exists there has never been proof.

 

Also most religions are used to control the masses and make money. Mocking someone has nothing to do with limited understanding at all. It has to do with people accepting things without proof. If i ask you to give me 1000$ and i promise you to pay it back. Only a few fools would do that as there is no proof I will pay it back. Why do religious people shut their brains down and take all those unproven things for true. I mock the strangeness of that.

Romantic love is unproven, yet almost all believe in it without proof.

How can anyone believe in romantic love without proof?

In all those 1000 of years most believe that romantic love exists, but there has never been proof.

 

Also romantic love is used to manipulate the masses and make money. Gifts, jewels, rings, houses, cars etc are bought in the name of romantic love by the man for his beloved. Thousands of books and movies have been made about romantic love, to make money.

 

It has to do with people accepting things without proof. If i ask you to give me 1000$ and i promise you to pay it back. Only a few fools would do that as there is no proof I will pay it back.

LOL. A woman asks a man that is "in love" with her to buy her things and pay dowery ( sin sod etc ), and promises to continue to love the man till she dies. That makes fools of the man when she wants a divorce having got as much out of him as she can. Does anyone know a woman that paid back a man everything he spent on her because he believed that she loved him forever, but she didn't?

 

Why do men shut their brains down and take all those claims of undying love for true? I mock the strangeness of that.

 

[mauGR1]

3 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Why do men shut their brains down and take all those claims of undying love for true? I mock the strangeness of that.

Imho, that's part of the intelligent design for us to reproduce. 

Why a man would sacrifice his freedom and half of his life and resources, if he was not under that powerful illusion of finding the perfect woman.

Of course, I'm trying to express some very complicated concept in few words, but i hope you get what I mean.

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, robblok said:

But they are all the same, none can prove that their teachings are right. Can you explain to me why one belief without proof is different from an other belief without proof. I guess your religious and took offence to the fact that your believing in something that has not been proven to be true EVER. 

 

What is the difference between believing in a flying invisible dog and the god from Christianity or the Jews or Muslims ?

I don't know how many times it has been explained that the god from Christianity or the Jews or Muslims is not what some of us are discussing. Some of us believe in God, the Creator, Nature or  whatever we choose to call the divine spirit, but we are NOT religious. Yet some posters keep talking about religion. Do you not understand the difference between religion and faith?

 

However, keep beating a dead horse by all means if you wish to. In the end it's not up to me to educate others about faith and I don't intend to try and provide any "proof" as it's not up to me to convert others.

[thaibeachlovers]

17 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Any perceived mocking from me is very trivial compared with the claims of certain believers who tell of the horrible, dire consequences that non-believers will experience as a result of their atheism.

While there was a poster that did say such things, he hasn't been on here for a long time, so, which current posters are you referring to?

 

17 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Albert Einstein, for example, believed in a type of abstract Intelligent Designer which did not interfere in human affairs.

Which would make myself and Albert somewhat aligned in our faith.

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Another issue, which I didn't mention because I thought it was obvious,

 

Obvious to you perhaps.

That's not a very scientific way of talking about a subject in which you like to talk about science a lot, is it?

[thaibeachlovers]

22 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

When you describe someone as a 'bad person', that is usually a projection of your own interpretation of a few specific actions or behaviour traits of the so-called bad person that you are aware of.

Fair enough. I should have referred to "people that have done very bad things to me".

[thaibeachlovers]

On 5/18/2021 at 11:19 AM, sirineou said:

I am not making any value judgment or  take a position on this, I am simply offering it as a possible explanation. 

1"Nietzsche argued that there were two fundamental types of morality: "master morality" and "slave morality". Master morality values pride and power, while slave morality values kindness, empathy, and sympathy. Master morality judges actions as good or bad (, unlike slave morality, which judges by a scale of good or evil intentions  "

  If I understand that aspect of Nietzschean philosophy correctly , the "slave "has developed all sort of rationalizations to compensate for their inability to be "masters" for them living a good life is more important and the rewards will come after they are dead , when they will be judged. "Masters" are happy with that attitude , in fact they foster such attitude as a means of controlling the "slaves" 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master–slave_morality

 

 

I have no problem with aligning myself with the "slaves". I've never had any desire to become one of the "masters" as I despise many of the people that run this world.

Seems to me that to be a master, one is often an unlikable person that cares only about themselves.

[mauGR1]

4 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Seems to me that to be a master, one is often an unlikable person that cares only about themselves.

I wish it was always like that,  but the real problems start when some of those "masters " think that they have some right to decide what is good for the "slaves".. which is too often not good at all !

But, well, it is what it is, as they say ????

[Orinoco]

32 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I don't know how many times it has been explained that the god from Christianity or the Jews or Muslims is not what some of us are discussing. Some of us believe in God, the Creator, Nature or  whatever we choose to call the divine spirit, but we are NOT religious. Yet some posters keep talking about religion. Do you not understand the difference between religion and faith?

 

However, keep beating a dead horse by all means if you wish to. In the end it's not up to me to educate others about faith and I don't intend to try and provide any "proof" as it's not up to me to convert others.

and what a surprise posting.  LOL

[Phulublub]

https://www.theschooloflife.com/thebookoflife/baruch-spinoza/

– God is not a person who stands outside of nature

– There is no one to hear our prayers

– Or to create miracles

– Or to punish us for misdeeds

– There is no afterlife

– Man is not God’s chosen creature

– The Bible was only written by ordinary people

– God is not a craftsman or an architect. Nor is he a king or a military strategist who calls for believers to take up the Holy Sword. God does not see anything, nor does he expect anything. He does not judge. He does not even reward the virtuous person with a life after death. Every representation of God as a person is a projection of the imagination.

– Everything in the traditional liturgical calendar is pure superstition and mumbo-jumbo

 

To him, God would have said:

“Stop praying and giving yourselves blows on your chests, what I want you to do is to go out into the world to enjoy your life.

I want you to enjoy, you sing, have fun and enjoy everything I've done for you.

Stop going to those gloomy, dark, and cold temples that you built yourself and that you call my home.

My house is in the mountains, in the forests, the rivers, the lakes, the beaches. That's where I live and express all my love for you.

Stop blaming me for your miserable life; I never told you that you were a sinner.

Stop being so scared. I do not judge you, nor criticize you, nor ever is angry with you, nothing bothers me, nor do I devise punishment. I am pure love.

Stop asking me for forgiveness, there's nothing to forgive.

If I made you...I filled you with passions, limitations, pleasures, feelings, needs, inconsistencies...of free will. How can I blame you if you do or say something out of that which I put in you? How can I punish you for being as you are if I'm the one who made you?

Do you think I could create a place to burn all my children who misbehave, for the rest of eternity?

What kind of God can do that?

Forget about any kind of commandments, any kind of laws; those are wiles to manipulate you, to control you and only to create guilt in you. Respect your peers and don't do to others what you don't want for you. The only thing I ask is that you pay attention in your life, that your alert status is your guide. This life is the only thing there is, here and now, and the only thing you need.

I have made you absolutely free, there are no prizes or punishments, there are no sins or virtues, no one carries a marker, no one carries a record.

You are absolutely free to create in your life a heaven or hell.

I couldn't tell you if there's anything acer this life, but I can give you a tip.

Live as if there wasn't. As if this was your only chance to enjoy, to love, to exist.

So, if there is nothing, then you will have enjoyed the opportunity I gave you. And if there is, be sure that I will not ask you if you behaved well or not, I will ask you. Did you like it?... did you have fun?..What did you enjoy the most? What did you learn?

Stop believing in me; to believe is to assume, guess, imagine. I don't want you to believe in me, I want you to feel me when you kiss your beloved, when you play with your little girl, when you love your dog, when you bathe in the sea.

Stop praising me. What kind of egotistical God do you think I am? I'm bored of your praise, I'm fed up with thanks. Do you feel grateful?

Prove it by taking care of yourself, your health, your relationships, the world around you. Do you feel overwhelmed? Express your joy! That's the way to praise me.

The only thing sure is that you are here, that you are alive, that this world is full of wonders. What do you need more miracles for?

Why so many explanations? Don't look for me outside, you won't find me. Find me inside...there I'm beating in you.”

Baruch Spinoza

[robblok]

 

 

15 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

I understand where you're coming from and what you're trying to say. 
The main problem I see, is that you see only the most superficial aspect of religion and base your understanding on that. 
However, what we call religion is just an attempt to rationalize and categorize something that is beyond words and categories. Some call it spirituality, some call it nature, some call it God. If one follows a religion without diving into its spiritual aspects (self-inquiry above all), then he would be better off being atheist.

You repeatedly say there is no proof for any of the religious ideas or teachings. I beg to differ.

First of all, we have to clarify what kind of proof you consider valid. Is it scientific proof? Or personal/ experiential proof?

The former can never be fulfilled (at least not with the tools currently at our disposal). The latter is there for anyone willing to find out, right here, right now. 

 

Of course i talk about scientific proof that is the only proof that counts. The latter is subjective and not proof at all.

 

IMHO there are only things left undiscovered by science, you can almost explain everything in nature. I don't believe in a higher power without scientific proof. Before certain diseases were attributed to a higher power later we found out that it was bacteria that spread it. Some of the older religions attributed lightning to Thor and even the tides to some god. Now we know its the moon and gravity. I purely believe in science and given that almost all things previously attributed to some god or an other are now explained by science it just shows that there is no higher power.

 

I had a friend who was a creationist, started to go on how carbon dating was wrong and how the earth really was 6000 years or so old. In the end i just skipped the topic as its hard to reason with people who deny science.

 

Let me put it like this if there are gods they are really cruel:

 

“Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and you are confronted by God,” asked Gay Byrne, host of RTÉ One’s The Meaning of Life. “What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?”

“I’d say, Bone cancer in children? What’s that about?” answered the 57-year-old Brit. “How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault? It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil.”

 

[covidiot]

'If it turns out that there is a God...the worst that you can say about him is that basically he's an underachiever.' -- Woody Allen

Edited May 19, 2021 by covidiot

[robblok]

21 hours ago, Sunmaster said:

The same goes for those atheists who flat out declare "There is no God/Higher Power", based solely on their opinion, which in turn is based on very limited information. They like to mask their opinion in a shroud of fancy scientific jargon as if it were the ultimate truth, when in fact the correct statement should simply be "I don't believe."
The difference is that with the first statement, there can't be any exchange of ideas, the opinion is absolute and can't be challenged. There's no need to explore further or question yourself.
The second statement on the other hand is intellectually honest. It doesn't try to categorize the object one way or another, but simply tells of the stance of the observer towards the object.

Of course, this too goes for those believers who unshakeably stand behind their radical beliefs without ever questioning them.
 

Actually that is where you and i differ, atheist accept science and have been proven right all the time. So far countless things formerly attributed to a god have been explained by science. So facts and science counts an opinion without proof is just that an opinion. So until religious people can prove that there is a god they are all wrong. That how it goes in a discussion you back your opinion up with facts. But there are no facts to support a god whatever the religion calls it.

 

Of course I can be challenged, if you come up with scientific proof of a god ill review my opinion. Its that simple atheists are science reality based people. Religious people are faith (opinion based). In all things in life we only accept facts and things we can prove why should religion be any different.

 

I think your problem comes from the fact that you try to defend something that has no FACTS or Science to back it up. So you try to change the most fundamental base of debating to get your opinion validated. That is not how it works.

 

If you tell me white cars are cooler then black cars (science can explain that) and i foolishly say black cars are cooler and you come with the data of heat radiation I would change my opinion because i cannot deny these facts. Because these facts i can reproduce and check. 

 

Most atheists would change their opinion based on new facts, if there comes a day that science can prove there is a god id change my opinion. Its that simple. 

 

I have always changed my opinions based on new facts if they become available. That is how things work. Science is constantly challenging itself and evolving religion does not really do that. Ok bible went from old to new testament but that is an exception. Muslims for instance will only accept the koran for true and accept no changes.

 

I am not saying that religious people are bad or something like that. Some religious people could be much better then atheists.

 

But really do we need a bilbe or koran to tell us that killing someone is not good ? I mean logic would come to the same conclusion. 

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

But really do we need a bilbe or koran to tell us that killing someone is not good ? I mean logic would come to the same conclusion. 

Still on the religion thing, I see.

I don't know why I bother trying to explain that some of us are not talking about religion at all, as it doesn't seem to make any difference, and the anti religious post just keep on coming.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, robblok said:

“Suppose it’s all true, and you walk up to the pearly gates, and you are confronted by God,” asked Gay Byrne, host of RTÉ One’s The Meaning of Life. “What will Stephen Fry say to him, her, or it?”

“I’d say, Bone cancer in children? What’s that about?” answered the 57-year-old Brit. “How dare you? How dare you create a world to which there is such misery that is not our fault? It’s not right, it’s utterly, utterly evil.”

Fame must have gone to Fry's head to think that God, the creator of life the universe and everything would even pretend to be a human to talk to him, IMO.

As for cancer, it's more likely IMO that we created that by living unhealthy lives, polluting the atmosphere, polluting the oceans, living in toxic cities, and filling our lives with a constant barrage of hate from every news outlet. When kids are killing themselves because other kids are bullying them something has gone very wrong with humanity. The Christ taught us to forgive those that do us wrong and love our enemies as ourselves, to do the right thing and not cast the first stone, but it seems that humans have perverted that message to such an extent that many have turned against it and believe that religion is only evil. Yes, some humans are evil, but that doesn't mean that the Christ was wrong.