15 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I'll be done with you with this reply, as you keep missing the points made, and think it's gibberish because you don't agree with it.

You still keep missing that I said this isn't about religions per se but belief in God. I chose Christianity. You chose atheism. Religions practiced the wrong way have killed millions, and some religions are plain false. That's where your own beliefs come in, which aren't anyone's business.

Thinking people are stupid or wrong because they believe and you don't is outright ignorance, and is why it isn't worth going any further with you.

You think it's poisoning the minds of children and we think it's the most important learning experience a human has. Teaching about God isn't harming anyone, as those who believe try to be good humans, following God's laws. What is the poison? Living as a believer can have you treating others well around you.

This doesn't mean all believers are decent people as some abuse that belief and twist their religions around to control or kill.

I think you aren't realizing how this world would be if everyone thought like you.

Atheism doesn't mean you're definitely going to treat others well. There is no fear of judgement there, and people might just do anything they please without thinking of the final consequences. Belief in God has millions showing restraint since the beginning of the knowledge about God. Assuming i haven't studied things and don't look to all possibilities is assuming.

You still don't get it. For any belief, what counts is supporting evidence. For religion, there is none. The moment you fired-up about "proof" is the moment you exposed your lack of understanding.

Religion is a disease, and you have been infected. Here is a cure:

https://bactra.org/Dawkins/viruses-of-the-mind.html

Meanwhile, the grown-ups are laughing at you.

5 minutes ago, jvs said:

So much wrong in this post, you are also damaged goods from your parents but you refuse to see it.

Why would non believers have no concept of what is right or wrong? I find this a very ignorant point of view and it is insulting to many people who do not believe in any God.

It sounds like you are so scared of being wrong you will do anything you can to "go to heaven"

You are also judging people,what does Jezus say about this?

You keep hiding behind what ever it is you are convinced of but you know for sure you are right and every body else is wrong.

The point of all of this is, there are so many different religions in the world and many of them all started of the same, virgin mother and all the rest but of course you already know this.

You are saying Faith tells you you are on the right track,i can guarantee you other people from other religions will say exactly the same.

Just a few more, can Jews go to heaven?

Can Muslims go to heaven?

and why or why not?

Actually it's you that's damaged goods, assuming about me and that your position is right and mine is wrong. You again cannot disprove anything I've said, so keep resorting to the same thing.

My parents were catholic and brought me to church, although they weren't very "religious". I went to Catholic school 8 years. I then went to public high school.

I knew all along that Catholicism has some things that were wrong or unnecessary, and when I met a Christian lady was born again into basic Christianity. Belief in Jesus and God, without praying to people or seeing how much money some religions work on. I'm not hiding behind anything. We aren't pawns or slaves but choose our paths. Putting me or others into your thinking isn't our thinking. If you're that easy to brainwash, don't assume others are also. Some people follow things blindly and many don't.

It again, for more times than I need to count, doesn't matter what anyone thinks as my business isn't theirs. It doesn't matter to me what others believe in as they aren't me. Yes, of course Jews can go to heaven. Jesus was a Jew, but Jews don't loo at Jesus as the Messiah but God as a monotheism. Jews also believe the messiah will bring world peace, and seeing Jesus was executed, this didn't happen. This doesn't mean Jesus won't come back as promised. Messianic Jews do believe in Jesus. Muslims believe in God and that to me is all it takes. That Jesus is a path towards God is a bonus.

If you were born to Buddhist parents you would be a Buddhist and not believe in God. So you just adopted the teachings given to you without question. Blind faith. No facts or science to support Jesus or God.

Just now, novanova said:

1 minute ago, novanova said:

You still don't get it. For any belief, what counts is supporting evidence. For religion, there is none. The moment you fired-up about "proof" is the moment you exposed your lack of understanding.

Religion is a disease, and you have been infected. Here is a cure:

https://bactra.org/Dawkins/viruses-of-the-mind.html

Meanwhile, the grown-ups are laughing at you.

Show evidence God doesn't exist or get off it, as you aren't helping your cause, and the only ones laughing at me are atheists. I feel sorry for them as they are in trouble, thinking this life is all there is, with no proof otherwise.

Comprehension isn't one of your good points, as I again said this isn't about any religion but our belief in God. That some choose a religion that preaches about Jesus and God is their agenda. I don't need anything besides Jesus and God.

Stop linking things I knew about as a preteen. Also things you likely know little about but like our other trolls here, link them trying to prove others wrong, without any knowledge on the subjects at hand. You aren't fooling the "grown ups" here. What I know about God is what you don't know, and that's on you.

By the way, there is a lot of supporting evidence for religions, so choose your lines more carefully, if that's possible. Remember, I'm the one into psychology, and not a dunce trying to fight his daddy in a teen-adult argument.

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Show evidence God doesn't exist or get off it, as you aren't helping your cause, and the only ones laughing at me are atheists. I feel sorry for them as they are in trouble, thinking this life is all there is, with no proof otherwise.

Provide proof heaven exists then. You can't. You got nothing.

On 9/18/2026 at 2:52 AM, spidermike007 said:

You seem to have to confused extremist and hateful Islamic doctrine with that of billions of peace loving Buddhists and Hindus. And it appears that you've never read any Buddhist or Hindu scripture which I highly recommend. It might help to lift your spirits and give you some inner life that you so desperately seem to need. Hinduism is an incredibly deep religion and does not teach about the ridiculous multiple virgin fantasy propagated by murderous and extremist Muslim clerics.

The idea of achieving realization through spiritual practice, meditation, inner reflection, beneficial work for humanity, and merit is the polar opposite of the spiritually bankrupt Muslim theory of virgins in exchange for martyrdom.

Next time I would encourage you to do a little bit of research before posting such vapid and ill informed nonsense. Especially if you live in a nation that is predominantly Buddhist, a faith that you obviously have no understanding of.

The same peace loving Hindus that have been fighting with Pakistan for 40 years? The same peace loving Buddhists fighting with Cambodia over temples? Same delusion, different killing zone.

12 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

It's okay, nobody can convince another person to believe in spirit or a higher order of things, just your very statement that it sounds gay demonstrates exactly where your consciousness is at.

Was just pointing out that Hindus are VERY into Cow <deleted> / Dung

2 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Provide proof heaven exists then. You can't. You got nothing.

High-commitment atheism clusters among people who are verbally fluent, moderately intelligent, and high in openness - exactly the profile that confuses “I can mock the village priest” with “I have solved metaphysics.”

Its over-represented among academics, journalists, coastal professionals and other midwits who have never had to build or defend a high-trust, high-fertility society.

The moment the cost of their worldview becomes visible (fertility collapse, loss of social cohesion, inability to restrain the worst human impulses without religious guardrails), they quietly import religious language about “dignity,” “rights,” and “the arc of history” while pretending the source is pure reason.

<deleted>

.

Edited Saturday at 06:42 AM2 days by Tourist2

6 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Show evidence God doesn't exist or get off it, as you aren't helping your cause, and the only ones laughing at me are atheists. I feel sorry for them as they are in trouble, thinking this life is all there is, with no proof otherwise.

Comprehension isn't one of your good points, as I again said this isn't about any religion but our belief in God. That some choose a religion that preaches about Jesus and God is their agenda. I don't need anything besides Jesus and God.

Stop linking things I knew about as a preteen. Also things you likely know little about but like our other trolls here, link them trying to prove others wrong, without any knowledge on the subjects at hand. You aren't fooling the "grown ups" here. What I know about God is what you don't know, and that's on you.

By the way, there is a lot of supporting evidence for religions, so choose your lines more carefully, if that's possible. Remember, I'm the one into psychology, and not a dunce trying to fight his daddy in a teen-adult argument.

There is no evidence of magic, by any name.

Prove that Zeus does not exist, now apply the same logic to your preferred diety.

4 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Was just pointing out that Hindus are VERY into Cow <deleted> / Dung

And the christians are into blood rituals. It is all a fraud.

1 hour ago, novanova said:

You believe what you believe and others will do the same.

You could not be more wrong. What is needed is "supporting evidence". Your harping on about "proof" shows how little you understand how the world changed after the Enlightenment, when religion was exposed for the fact-free hoax that it is.

Bertrand Russell:

"Assign to every belief the degree of certainty the evidence warrants"

"Faith: The name given to a belief for which there is no evidence"

The bible is silly nonsense written by silly old men.

Grow up - think for yourself, discard the gibberish you were told when you were small, and start to live in the real world.

Those who need support evidence will never believe in a higher power, nor will they ever have any faith in anything, or any sort of intelligence that exists beyond humans.

Faith is faith it's not something that can be scientifically proven. The existence of a higher power cannot be scientifically proven. I remember a Hindu sage that I read many years ago saying that the chances of this creation having come together in a totally evolutionary manner without any guiding intelligence behind it, is about the same chance of a tornado tearing through a junkyard and forming a fully created and totally operational 747.

I don't believe in the traditional God per se, but I do believe that there is a intelligent benevolent force that is guiding creation, and was responsible for the formation of things as we see it. Certainly not traditional religion just a spiritual belief.

We all believe what we want to believe, and there is absolutely nothing wrong with a belief system as long as it's not judgmental in nature.

3 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

High-commitment atheism clusters among people who are verbally fluent, moderately intelligent, and high in openness - exactly the profile that confuses “I can mock the village priest” with “I have solved metaphysics.”

Its over-represented among academics, journalists, and coastal professionals who have never had to build or defend a high-trust, high-fertility society.

The moment the cost of their worldview becomes visible (fertility collapse, loss of social cohesion, inability to restrain the worst human impulses without religious guardrails), they quietly import religious language about “dignity,” “rights,” and “the arc of history” while pretending the source is pure reason.

<deleted>.

It's also easy to explain why................... Intellectual and Philosophical Downfalls

• Secular Fundamentalism: High-commitment atheism can mirror the exact dogmatism it seeks to destroy. It often treats science and materialism as infallible, leaving no room for nuance, mystery, or philosophical humility.

• Hyper-Scientism: Proponents frequently fall into the trap of scientism—the belief that the hard sciences are the only valid path to truth. This dismisses arts, humanities, philosophy, and subjective human experience as worthless or secondary.

• An Oversimplified View of Religion: It tends to treat all religious texts and practices literally, ignoring thousands of years of rich allegorical, mystical, and cultural traditions. It often critiques the most extreme fundamentalists while ignoring moderate or progressive theology.

2. Social and Community Downfalls

• Loss of Built-in Community: Religion historically provides robust, intergenerational support systems, rituals for grief and celebration, and local safety nets. High-commitment atheism rarely succeeds in building lasting, emotionally resonant secular alternatives.

• Tribalism and Polarization: By framing the world as an aggressive binary—"the rational secularists" versus "the irrational believers"—it fosters deep social division and alienates potential allies in social justice or political causes.

• Cultural Blind Spots: It often fails to recognize that many cultural traditions, morals, and laws in Western society are deeply rooted in Judeo-Christian history. Rejecting the root entirely can lead to a sense of cultural disorientation..

1 minute ago, cjinchiangrai said:

There is no evidence of magic, by any name.

Prove that Zeus does not exist, now apply the same logic to your preferred diety.

Atheism is a low-resolution cope for people who want the moral capital of Christendom without the inconvenient parts of the package.

Why shouldn't someone just kill you?
You're old and don't contribute anything after all.
Why not just kill all the old <deleted> who've nothing to offer but sour takes?

2 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

There is no evidence of magic, by any name.

Prove that Zeus does not exist, now apply the same logic to your preferred diety.

Prove God doesn't exist or your and others arguments fall by the wayside. And read above.

3 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

High-commitment atheism clusters among people who are verbally fluent, moderately intelligent, and high in openness - exactly the profile that confuses “I can mock the village priest” with “I have solved metaphysics.”

Its over-represented among academics, journalists, and coastal professionals who have never had to build or defend a high-trust, high-fertility society.

The moment the cost of their worldview becomes visible (fertility collapse, loss of social cohesion, inability to restrain the worst human impulses without religious guardrails), they quietly import religious language about “dignity,” “rights,” and “the arc of history” while pretending the source is pure reason.

<deleted>.

I'm agnostic not atheist. Not 1 bible thumper in 2000 years has produced one bit of credible evidence but I'm open to ideas with proof.

Science made life better for humans a lot more so than religions. When the alleged Jesus was alive humans had <deleted> lives.

3 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

And the christians are into blood rituals. It is all a fraud.

A little outdated there............Biblical and Historical Background

• Old Testament Sacrifices: Early Hebrew scripture detailed extensive animal sacrifices (such as lambs and goats) where blood was manipulated on altars to signify atonement and the sacredness of life.

• The Crucifixion: In Christian belief, Jesus Christ serves as the ultimate, final sacrifice, replacing animal slaughter by shedding his blood on the cross to forgive human sin.

Core Rituals and Symbolism

• The Eucharist (Communion): Christians regularly partake in bread and wine representing the body and blood of Jesus.

• Symbolism vs. Literalism: Mainstream denominations view the Eucharist as a memorial or spiritual communion. Catholics and some Orthodox Christians teach Transubstantiation, where the elements sacramentally become Christ's actual flesh and blood, but explicitly reject the notion of physical cannibalism or magic.

• Historical Penance: Certain fringe or historical ascetic practices, such as self-flagellation by specific groups, involved drawing blood as a form of physical mortification, but these are not defining or required elements of mainstream Christian practice.

1 minute ago, spidermike007 said:

there is absolutely nothing wrong with a belief system as long as it's not judgmental in nature.

Being judgemental is the difference between life and death.

You stay away from the snake cos of your judgemental.
Most of your posts are lowkeyt judgemental - even going so far as to negatively judge people who use judgement.

Hindus eat dung - it's fair to judge them and you for promoting their dung inspired BS.

If you had decent judgement you'd know that not all gods are equal.

.

Edited Saturday at 06:52 AM2 days by Tourist2

2 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

I'm agnostic not atheist. Not 1 bible thumper in 2000 years has produced one bit of credible evidence but I'm open to ideas with proof.

Science made life better for humans a lot more so than religions. When the alleged Jesus was alive humans had <deleted> lives.

Every serious atheist eventually admits that without a transcendent source, morality reduces to preference, evolutionary programming, or power.

Then they continue to moralize as if their preferences are binding on everyone else.

This is not intellectual consistency; it is free-riding on a Christian moral inheritance they simultaneously despise.

Remove the Christian inheritance and you get the 20th century’s body count under explicitly atheist regimes, or the current soft nihilism that cannot even defend the existence of women as a biological category.

3 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Atheism is a low-resolution cope for people who want the moral capital of Christendom without the inconvenient parts of the package.

Why shouldn't someone just kill you?
You're old and don't contribute anything after all.
Why not just kill all the old <deleted> who've nothing to offer but sour takes?

Atheists use logic and reason to rule out god. Bible thumpers just rely on blind faith from childhood teachings. Science has proven all the bible stories wrong so the chance of God existing is less than 0.01%.

Yet we have religious holidays and no atheist holidays. Go figure.

1 minute ago, Tourist2 said:

Every serious atheist eventually admits that without a transcendent source, morality reduces to preference, evolutionary programming, or power.

Then they continue to moralize as if their preferences are binding on everyone else.

This is not intellectual consistency; it is free-riding on a Christian moral inheritance they simultaneously despise.

Remove the Christian inheritance and you get the 20th century’s body count under explicitly atheist regimes, or the current soft nihilism that cannot even defend the existence of women as a biological category.

So why are you in a Buddhist country? Move to Italy if you view Christian stuff as superior.

12 minutes ago, cjinchiangrai said:

The same peace loving Hindus that have been fighting with Pakistan for 40 years? The same peace loving Buddhists fighting with Cambodia over temples? Same delusion, different killing zone.

They actually weren't fighting over temples per se but land and offshore claims for energy. Thailand helped Cambodia when the Khmer Rouge went crazy and many stayed here in Thailand and were supposed to go back across the border, and the land has been a challenge since France was involved since 1904.

4 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Being judgemental is the difference between life and death.

You stay away from the snake cos of your judgemental.
Most of your posts are lowkeyt judgemental - even going so far as to negatively judge people who use judgement.

Hindus eat dung - it's fair to judge them and you for promoting their dung inspired BS.

If you had decent judgement you'd know that not all gods are equal.

.

Pretty funny. That one brought a smile to my face, that's for sure.

After 8 pages of this stuff, I only have two questions so far that I can't seem to answer:

1 - Who is winning the battle of the bickerers?

2 - Which God created Nana, Cowboy, and Soi 6?

6 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Every serious atheist eventually admits that without a transcendent source, morality reduces to preference, evolutionary programming, or power.

Then they continue to moralize as if their preferences are binding on everyone else.

This is not intellectual consistency; it is free-riding on a Christian moral inheritance they simultaneously despise.

Remove the Christian inheritance and you get the 20th century’s body count under explicitly atheist regimes, or the current soft nihilism that cannot even defend the existence of women as a biological category.

Surveys have shown that self-identified atheists are disproportionately male, which can skew the cultural dynamics of organized secular or skeptic groups.Some critics and sociologists note that a subset of atheist men lean heavily into an identity of pure rationality which can sometimes manifest as dismissing women's perspectives or emotional experiences as irrational.

14 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Atheists use logic and reason

This is a self-flattering stereotype, not an argument.

Plenty of serious theists (Aquinas, Leibniz, Plantinga, Swinburne, Craig, Pruss) deploy formal logic, probability theory, and modal metaphysics at a level most internet atheists never touch.

Meanwhile, large numbers of people become Christians as adults after examining evidence, and large numbers of atheists absorb their naturalism from the ambient culture of universities and media exactly the way they claim believers absorb religion.

Childhood transmission is not unique to theism; it is how every worldview propagates.

Treating it as a disqualifier only for the side you dislike is special pleading.

Logic and reason do not “rule out God.”

At best they rule out certain crude versions of God.

The major classical arguments remain live philosophical disputes.

Declaring them 'settled' because you find them unconvincing is not reason; it is assertion.

Anyway, no one cares what you think - make 100 posts on the thread if you want to - we've heard it all before. Go play in the lake if you like.

1 minute ago, Tourist2 said:

This is a self-flattering stereotype, not an argument.

Plenty of serious theists (Aquinas, Leibniz, Plantinga, Swinburne, Craig, Pruss) deploy formal logic, probability theory, and modal metaphysics at a level most internet atheists never touch.

Meanwhile, large numbers of people become Christians as adults after examining evidence, and large numbers of atheists absorb their naturalism from the ambient culture of universities and media exactly the way they claim believers absorb religion.

Childhood transmission is not unique to theism; it is how every worldview propagates.

Treating it as a disqualifier only for the side you dislike is special pleading.

Logic and reason do not “rule out God.”

At best they rule out certain crude versions of God.

The major classical arguments remain live philosophical disputes.

Declaring them 'settled' because you find them unconvincing is not reason; it is assertion.

Anyway, no one cares what you think - make 100 posts on the thread if you want to - we've heard it all before. Go play in the lake if you like.

Just post some facts on Moses, Jesus and God and somebody might take you seriously. Otherwise it is just stories from a book.

22 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Prove God doesn't exist or your and others arguments fall by the wayside. And read above.

F. me, you really are as thick as a brick. Try to understand the following simple English:

It is fact that "proving a negative" (ie, non-existence) has been discarded - valueless.

I wrote the following earlier. Make an effort to understand it:

============================

It's been many years since "prove a not" (in this case, prove that god does not exist) has been shown to be silly. Sound thinkers go for "prove so-and-so is the case", and if no one can, the matter either on stand-by awaiting more facts (say, quantum mechanics or dark matter) or put in the bin (say, astrology or reincarnation).

Here is why "prove there is no god" is silly.

"Prove that pink elephants exist"...the means by which that can done is simple - produce one for inspection.

"Prove that pink elephants do not exist" cannot be done - true believers will tell us that we need to look in caves, underwater, on a planet revolving around Alpha Centauri etc.

============================

I repeat, every time you waffle away about "proof", you expose your ignorance.

2 minutes ago, khaosokman said:

Just post some facts on Moses, Jesus and God and somebody might take you seriously. Otherwise it is just stories from a book.

The central Christian claims (a particular first-century man was raised from the dead, God is the ground of being, etc.) are historical and metaphysical.

Laboratory science is not the right tool for them any more than it is the right tool for determining whether Caesar crossed the Rubicon or whether moral facts exist.

You're only kept alive based on rules that have their basis in 'stories from a book'.
As an old git, you are almost perfectly useless, so it would be 'logical' to kill you but we don't mainly cos of rules and commandments 'from a book'.

8 minutes ago, Tourist2 said:

Childhood transmission is not unique to theism; it is how every worldview propagates.

Most scientific studies are conducted by adults with real world experiences.

These old religions were created over 1500 years by flat earthers who had no clue what protein or vitamin b was ie idiots.

1 minute ago, khaosokman said:

Most scientific studies are conducted by adults with real world experiences.

Laboratory science is not the right tool for them any more than it is the right tool for determining whether Caesar crossed the Rubicon, whether moral facts exist, or whether your mrs was a whore before she married you.