When Did You Forget God?

[Far Angst]

Bla, bla, bla,,,,

TROLL

The only thing worse than a troll... is an atheist troll.

Blaming religious institutions for your lack of spiritual wisdom is a sign of immaturity... and a cry for help, i think.

Not everyone will seek or find "GOD" in this life. It's called free will.

But after that ... Surprise Surprise!

RELIGIOUS NUT

The only thing worse than a religious nut is a vindictive religious nut.

The kind that gleefully expects to be in Heaven looking down to Hel! where all those atheists get their Surprise Surprise!

[Richb2004v2]

He is obviously saying that you believe in one god, but he chooses not to believe in all the gods that you do not believe in plus he does not believe in yours either. He has gone only one step further than you.

The statement induces the question ‘why do you not believe in all the other gods, including those of ancient times? Why do you believe in your god only?’

You may be considered an Atheist from the standpoint of an ancient sect who worships an obscure god long forgotten.

I am sure that you understood this. I didn’t quote this, although I agree with it, I am just trying to explain it.

[terry57]

im not saying that drugs and the rest are the way to go.

Thank goodness for that! Otherwise it's...

... for you, mate.

glad you got that sorted out camerata as i thought you had misread me for a minute.

but you know what im on about dont you.

[camerata]

I agree with Carl Sagan, up to a point. Sagan argued that science could prove that the laws of physics were responsible for the cosmos (although we'll never know why the laws of physics are exactly as they are). So he felt that while there could be a god out there somewhere, there clearly isn't an interventionist god who answers our prayers and protects those who do good - so what good is he?

But Sagan was satisfied with work, friends and family. That's OK if one is a brilliant scientist, visionary and famous author with a loving wife and family, but what about all those people without any particular talent or good fortune? What is there in life for them?

Sagan also thought that people are inherently good, and if children aren't taught any religion they will still grow up with a good moral compass. I really doubt this.

[pal78]

He is obviously saying that you believe in one god, but he chooses not to believe in all the gods that you do not believe in plus he does not believe in yours either. He has gone only one step further than you.

The statement induces the question ‘why do you not believe in all the other gods, including those of ancient times? Why do you believe in your god only?’

You may be considered an Atheist from the standpoint of an ancient sect who worships an obscure god long forgotten.

I am sure that you understood this. I didn’t quote this, although I agree with it, I am just trying to explain it.

I think I understand where he was trying to bring this one, and you have further clarified that for me. Thanks.

I still believe in God though, so I'm not an Atheist. Believing in one god is enough see to that. Doesn't matter what a old historian guy said once.

[michael804]

RELIGIOUS NUT

The only thing worse than a religious nut is a vindictive religious nut.

The kind that gleefully expects to be in Heaven looking down to Hel! where all those atheists get their Surprise Surprise!

Nut?

Yea, you can tell by my avatar that I'm a real holy roller.

LoL

You should be careful how you word your diatribe in print.

You may slip up and call someone a nut in person ... and that "nut" may split your "melon"

[Erwin1011]

Whether a individual wants to believe in a supreme being or submit him/herself to an organized religion, is that individual's undeniable right. However when that individual and or the religion she/he adheres to, starts to impose their believes upon somebody else, that will become an infringement of that other person's undeniable right and is therefore not acceptable. This is particularly true when this is happening from a position of social influence, whatever that position is.

[gburns57au]

Who is God anyway.....is he a different God to the one that the Muslims believe in ??

I once tried to work out (age 11) the time taken from Adam and Eve in the bible to the time of the birth of Jesus....however it was impossible as conveniently gaps are left in the time span....then I found out that remains of ancient animals and people were being found from millions of years ago....conclusion, the theory of evolution is more logical than the creation of the universe by a single entity...at that point in time....I decided that there was no God and the bible was a pretty good novel....

Over the years I worked out that some people turn to "God" in times of need to give them support and courage to get through things. But was God helping them or was it the Priest, Pastor or the Rabbi etc... that was helping them, probably the latter...Hey it cheaper than going to a Shrink I guess.

So to me there is no God...If I get hit by a truck crossing the road and die...was that Gods will, was it because I didnt believe....No..it was probably because I or the truck driver was careless, negligent or drunk. If I have a bad run in life will God help me out....no....some may turn to religion to help, I hope that I am strong enough in myself to sort out my problems.

And please people dont confuse Buddhism with God...Buddhists dont believe in God...they try follow the principles as set down by a living person many years ago in order to enhance their next chance at life and eventually reaching the perfect state.

I liked what an Anglican minister said at a funeral I attended for my mate....he said..."we are saying goodbye to Jims earthly remains, his spirit has already found another body to live in"...that sounds like reincarnation to me...what happened to Heaven and hel_l and God ??

[Ulysses G.]

Your statement would suggest that teaching anything that turns out to be considered to have no value in hindsight could be seen as a form of child abuse. In the case of religion there are over 5 billion people on the Earth who wouldn't agree with you.

I think that brainwashing a child to believe in religion should be considered a form of child abuse because it is difficult to stop being afraid of the cruel "God" that they threaten you with and of him sending you to "he11" to burn for eternity, but if you didn't "teach" children this when they were too young to use logic no one would ever believe any of this cr*p and the religions would all be out of business.

Edited December 30, 2006 by Ulysses G.

[Richb2004v2]

So are you saying that without religion or a god we will not be morally righteous enough to behave considerately?

Does this mean that if the constraint of religious were removed you would feel at free will to take on a libertine, self-indulgent lifestyle regardless of consequence to others, raping, stealing and murdering?

I do not think religion is responsible for keep our values in check.

I agree with Carl Sagan, up to a point. Sagan argued that science could prove that the laws of physics were responsible for the cosmos (although we'll never know why the laws of physics are exactly as they are). So he felt that while there could be a god out there somewhere, there clearly isn't an interventionist god who answers our prayers and protects those who do good - so what good is he?

But Sagan was satisfied with work, friends and family. That's OK if one is a brilliant scientist, visionary and famous author with a loving wife and family, but what about all those people without any particular talent or good fortune? What is there in life for them?

Sagan also thought that people are inherently good, and if children aren't taught any religion they will still grow up with a good moral compass. I really doubt this.

[pal78]

Your statement would suggest that teaching anything that turns out to be considered to have no value in hindsight could be seen as a form of child abuse. In the case of religion there are over 5 billion people on the Earth who wouldn't agree with you.

I think that brainwashing a child to believe in religion should be considered a form of child abuse because it is difficult to stop being afraid of the cruel "God" that they threaten you with and of him sending you to "he11" to burn for eternity, but if you didn't "teach" children this when they were too young to use logic no one would ever believe any of this cr*p and the religions would all be out of business.

If that is what was meant about teaching kids religion, then I would tend to agree with you, it does sound cruel. I don't have that concept of God being cruel, so I don't share this viewpoint.

[aaaaaa]

I think this whole thread and its debate is as uselless discussion as , say, arguing - is there a Sun. alright, sun can be immidietly perceived by one's senses. then something can be used in this comparison which can't be directly perceived - there are plenty of such things, like x-rays, or molecules, atoms, or microwaves or fantoms or whatever latest discovered by science smallest particles: the matter of belief !

and there are a lot of thing as concepts or ideas, laws, which are not even material (as made of any material elements, possible to perceive by senses or hi-tech gadgets). like, a lot of people are made to believe that Saddam has been executed or that Osama bin Laden is still alive and kicking US's butt or that there is a real democracy in this world....

the list can go on and on and on.

so, I am not trying neither arfuge for or against the point of God existence. I merely stress that such argument is silly in itself as much as arguign about all sorts of those other believes ! because beleif is belief - some sort of thinking about something being a true fact with very relative level of confidence!

so, I think it is not even worth participating in.....

and therefore I tend to agree with someone who's suggested here that it is a mere Trolling

Edited December 30, 2006 by aaaaaa

[Naam]

So your question was about hurt feelings? That our fellow readers are so sensitive (or so insecure) that we must say nothing that would make them wince?

But, getting back to my point, has anyone ever heard of a case where, with God's help, an amputee grew a new limb?

it was indeed about the feelings of fellow readers. religion is a sensitive matter and postings like yours might even be taken as an insult. if you are not aware of that fact you just prove that you lack experience in life.

your question about amputees growing new limbs with God's help is silly and has no logical basis. as silly as the hypothetical question "has anyone ever heard of a case where an agnostic or atheist amputee grew a new limb?"

[Ulysses G.]

Your statement would suggest that teaching anything that turns out to be considered to have no value in hindsight could be seen as a form of child abuse. In the case of religion there are over 5 billion people on the Earth who wouldn't agree with you.

I think that brainwashing a child to believe in religion should be considered a form of child abuse because it is difficult to stop being afraid of the cruel "God" that they threaten you with and of him sending you to "he11" to burn for eternity, but if you didn't "teach" children this when they were too young to use logic no one would ever believe any of this cr*p and the religions would all be out of business.

If that is what was meant about teaching kids religion, then I would tend to agree with you, it does sound cruel. I don't have that concept of God being cruel, so I don't share this viewpoint.

Christians say over and over that he is a God of LOVE, but if he would condemn you to a ETERNITY of pain and unhappiness for not believing that his son was Jesus or because you just happen to be born somewhere where you were taught something else (India or Thailand), how loving can that God be?

[camerata]

So are you saying that without religion or a god we will not be morally righteous enough to behave considerately?

Does this mean that if the constraint of religious were removed you would feel at free will to take on a libertine, self-indulgent lifestyle regardless of consequence to others, raping, stealing and murdering?

Look at how cruel and selfish many children are. What modifies their behaviour is fear of punishment from their parents. As adults, what modifies their behaviour is fear of punishment from the law in this life and retribution in the next. In the West, guilt - a byproduct of religion - plays a large part in this. In the East, shame takes the place of guilt, so people don't feel bad as long as they don't get caught.

Most people don't have the violent tendencies that would lead them to rape and murder, or they're afraid of the law. But belief in a religious or philosophical system is a powerful motivator for people not to lie, steal, cheat, be selfish, be unfaithful to the wife or whatever that the law might not catch them out on. How many libertines do you know who are religious? How many do you know who are atheists?

[terry57]

I think this whole thread and its debate is as uselless discussion as , say, arguing - is there a Sun. alright, sun can be immidietly perceived by one's senses. then something can be used in this comparison which can't be directly perceived - there are plenty of such things, like x-rays, or molecules, atoms, or microwaves or fantoms or whatever latest discovered by science smallest particles: the matter of belief !

and there are a lot of thing as concepts or ideas, laws, which are not even material (as made of any material elements, possible to perceive by senses or hi-tech gadgets). like, a lot of people are made to believe that Saddam has been executed or that Osama bin Laden is still alive and kicking US's butt or that there is a real democracy in this world....

the list can go on and on and on.

so, I am not trying neither arfuge for or against the point of God existence. I merely stress that such argument is silly in itself as much as arguign about all sorts of those other believes ! because beleif is belief - some sort of thinking about something being a true fact with very relative level of confidence!

so, I think it is not even worth participating in.....

and therefore I tend to agree with someone who's suggested here that it is a mere Trolling

well my friend,

that is the best reply i have heard on this whole thread because it is absolutely pointless to comment on the OP'S question.

us posters should be smart enough to know that to debate this question is useless as its a matter of, every person can believe in what they want and theres no right and wrong answer.

i salute you for having enough brains to put us all strait.

i challenge all posters to boycott this thread and move on to something worth debating.

cheers

[gburns57au]

Most people don't have the violent tendencies that would lead them to rape and murder, or they're afraid of the law. But belief in a religious or philosophical system is a powerful motivator for people not to lie, steal, cheat, be selfish, be unfaithful to the wife or whatever that the law might not catch them out on. How many libertines do you know who are religious? How many do you know who are atheists?

Then please explain to me how come so many Christian ministers and priests have been convicted of child molestation ???

[Grover]

So your question was about hurt But, getting back to my point, has anyone ever heard of a case where, with God's help, an amputee grew a new limb?

how about a tree ?

[Richb2004v2]

Most people I know would be considered religious. I know very few Atheists, but I know plenty of Libertines (of sorts).

So are you saying that without religion or a god we will not be morally righteous enough to behave considerately?

Does this mean that if the constraint of religious were removed you would feel at free will to take on a libertine, self-indulgent lifestyle regardless of consequence to others, raping, stealing and murdering?

Look at how cruel and selfish many children are. What modifies their behaviour is fear of punishment from their parents. As adults, what modifies their behaviour is fear of punishment from the law in this life and retribution in the next. In the West, guilt - a byproduct of religion - plays a large part in this. In the East, shame takes the place of guilt, so people don't feel bad as long as they don't get caught.

Most people don't have the violent tendencies that would lead them to rape and murder, or they're afraid of the law. But belief in a religious or philosophical system is a powerful motivator for people not to lie, steal, cheat, be selfish, be unfaithful to the wife or whatever that the law might not catch them out on. How many libertines do you know who are religious? How many do you know who are atheists?

[camerata]

Then please explain to me how come so many Christian ministers and priests have been convicted of child molestation ???

My guess is that these people are not religious and have strong pedophile tendencies. So they enter the priesthood to satisfy their craving and get away with it. It seems that until recently very few were actually convicted of anything.

My point wasn't that all religious people are good, but that more people would be bad if they weren't given a moral compass as children.

[Ulysses G.]

I think this whole thread and its debate is as uselless discussion as , say, arguing - is there a Sun. alright, sun can be immidietly perceived by one's senses. then something can be used in this comparison which can't be directly perceived - there are plenty of such things, like x-rays, or molecules, atoms, or microwaves or fantoms or whatever latest discovered by science smallest particles: the matter of belief !

and there are a lot of thing as concepts or ideas, laws, which are not even material (as made of any material elements, possible to perceive by senses or hi-tech gadgets). like, a lot of people are made to believe that Saddam has been executed or that Osama bin Laden is still alive and kicking US's butt or that there is a real democracy in this world....

the list can go on and on and on.

so, I am not trying neither arfuge for or against the point of God existence. I merely stress that such argument is silly in itself as much as arguign about all sorts of those other believes ! because beleif is belief - some sort of thinking about something being a true fact with very relative level of confidence!

so, I think it is not even worth participating in.....

and therefore I tend to agree with someone who's suggested here that it is a mere Trolling

well my friend,

that is the best reply i have heard on this whole thread because it is absolutely pointless to comment on the OP'S question.

us posters should be smart enough to know that to debate this question is useless as its a matter of, every person can believe in what they want and theres no right and wrong answer.

i salute you for having enough brains to put us all strait.

i challenge all posters to boycott this thread and move on to something worth debating.

cheers

Of course you are right Terry, but I predict that very few posters are going to use common sense, pay attention to you and stop posting here.

I know that I am not!

[gburns57au]

Then please explain to me how come so many Christian ministers and priests have been convicted of child molestation ???

My guess is that these people are not religious and have strong pedophile tendencies. So they enter the priesthood to satisfy their craving and get away with it. It seems that until recently very few were actually convicted of anything.

My point wasn't that all religious people are good, but that more people would be bad if they weren't given a moral compass as children.

Get off the grass.....

Some of these guys have been in the priesthood all their adults lives...they took advantage of their position to satisfy their own desires. I dont believe that people would join the priesthood on the basis of doing so just to be able to satisfy their own particular cravings.

The law has changed in many places now that enable people to bring complaint against these people who have abused them in the past and this includes more than just the Clergy but also Teachers and others in positions of trust.

Moral education is not the sole responsibilty of the clergy....Moral education in the first instance is taught by the parents.....little Johnny can go to church every week to be taught certain values....but if his parents are pot smoking swingers or whatever then he will see this behaviour as normal and will more than likely follow according to what he perceives as normal behaviour, But evry week he will still be good God fearing little Johnny in church.

Parents are responsible for their childs upbringing...not the Church or the state or anyone else. Unfortunately these days most parents try to shift that responsibilty to others.

[corkscrew]

I had a really terrible and traumatic experience some years ago. A good friend of my’n was killed. I almost died. At that moment as I faced the possibilities I thought of Thor, and cried out for Thor to help. I am still alive, and thank Thor daily.

Until you have faced death and continued to live, you can not say that god does not exist. God does exist and he carry’s a hammer. His name is Thor.

Those of use who have faced such hardship have a special allowance to claim that god exists. I’m sure that my friend that wasn’t saved would agree. If not then it’s probably because he didn’t cry out to Thor.

Perfect!!!!

Bloody ell corky ... have you been on the champers at the Oriental ..? Ive never seen you like this ...

However, as an answer, if you believe, and it works for you, then good, if you don't believe, and it works, then good also ...

His faux belief in Thor went on to prove the point made in this quote:

As the historian Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-71) once said: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

A disbelief in Thor is the same as a disbelief in Jesus.

[corkscrew]

Believers like to define he*l as a place where an infinite amount of pain is inflicted on the dam*ed for an infitite amount of time. And, these believers say that this is the place where non-believers will go when they die. So, this person who dies in sin will have more suffering than all the pain experienced by all the world's population since the beginning of time.

This is a loving God? I don't think so. If so God is the devil himself.

You speaking for all believers there corkscrew? I don't actually like to define hel_l at all.

But if I had to I think it would be more biblically accurate to look at hel_l as living in the absence of God. I would suggest that since you are already distancing yourself from God, you will not notice a big difference between this and hel_l.

God gives us freedom to live life. Freedom to choose and freedom to make mistakes. There is even provision in God's plan to pick up the pieces when we make those mistakes. But ultimately he doesn't force his will on us. Turning the problem on God is illogical. If you end up in hel_l you are responsible not God. I assure you God doesn't want anyone to perish, but he's not going to force you to do the right things. It is called freedom.

So, your concept of he*l doesn't involve pain? You just don't see God? Sort of like Earth Version 2.0?

Well since you claim to have never seen God, then I guess for you it might be like 1.0 all over again.

Without God of course there is pain. God promises to wipe away every tear. I believe in God and I believe what he says he will do. Think of it like this....

A 6-year-old child is told not to cycle his bike without his father holding on to help. The kid thinks he can do it on his own and falls off. He ends up with grazed knees and a bruised ego. His Dad feels the kids pain, and runs over to pick up his son and give him a hug. Some kids will choose to be angry at the father and refuse the support. How can the father wipe away your tears if you don't let him.

Maybe your life is full of contentment and purpose without God. Mine wasn't. We both have the freedom. This works for me, that works for you.

And, the father tosses his kid into a furnace because the child gets angry?

[corkscrew]

This quote might fit you:

I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.

"I believe in one fewer god than you do" - this means that I believe in one more god than you do.

Since atheists do not believe in the existence of God, and I believe in a God, you can not accurately contend that I am an atheist.

Who's quote is that anyway? It's poorly constructed.

As the historian Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-71) once said: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

I just wanted to know who said it. Having read it again, it still makes no sense for the same reasons I gave above. He clearly doesn't understand what the word "atheist" means.

He lived for 70 years and you remember him for being a fool:

"From the creation of the world, My invisible qualities, My eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly observed in what I made. As a result, people have no excuse. They knew Me but did not praise and thank me for being God. Instead, their thoughts were pointless, and their misguided minds were plunged into darkness. While claiming to be wise, they became fools." - God

Do you have a citation for the God quote?

[corkscrew]

He is obviously saying that you believe in one god, but he chooses not to believe in all the gods that you do not believe in plus he does not believe in yours either. He has gone only one step further than you.

The statement induces the question ‘why do you not believe in all the other gods, including those of ancient times? Why do you believe in your god only?’

You may be considered an Atheist from the standpoint of an ancient sect who worships an obscure god long forgotten.

I am sure that you understood this. I didn’t quote this, although I agree with it, I am just trying to explain it.

Yes....you explained it perfectly. Thank you...I mean it.

[corkscrew]

I agree with Carl Sagan, up to a point. Sagan argued that science could prove that the laws of physics were responsible for the cosmos (although we'll never know why the laws of physics are exactly as they are). So he felt that while there could be a god out there somewhere, there clearly isn't an interventionist god who answers our prayers and protects those who do good - so what good is he?

But Sagan was satisfied with work, friends and family. That's OK if one is a brilliant scientist, visionary and famous author with a loving wife and family, but what about all those people without any particular talent or good fortune? What is there in life for them?

Sagan also thought that people are inherently good, and if children aren't taught any religion they will still grow up with a good moral compass. I really doubt this.

A rough quote: Good people tend to do good things...bad people tend to do bad things...but, to get good people to do bad things, well that takes religion.

[pal78]

His faux belief in Thor went on to prove the point made in this quote:

As the historian Stephen Henry Roberts (1901-71) once said: "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

A disbelief in Thor is the same as a disbelief in Jesus.

how many times are we going to get this Stephen Henry Roberts quote? This is at least the third time. And it doesn't improve on rereading either.

[Little Black Duck]

I believe God made all the little creatures, plants ,trees and vegi gardens

He made the little animals like the wabbit, who steals the Farmers Carrots.

He complained to me that this new crop was a bit pithy..

I was chuckling cause I had just pithed on them...

Yes Jeezes loves me the Wabbit tells me so..

So now off to bed like good little boys and girls..

Edited December 30, 2006 by Little Black Duck

[pal78]

Do you have a citation for the God quote?

The Bible, Romans 1:20-22. Actually the whole book of Romans is a good read, but I thought that one suited your scholarly friend pretty well.