939 replies to this topic

[ghand]

 

Ah, good. I thought this subject had died and ...ermmm...gone to heaven.     

No I thought it had just died.  

  What you doing back on this thread Gordon. I thought you didn't believe in resurrection ?

Ha Ha. Actually I am going to take a leaf out of your book and try to resurrect my liver and kidneys for a few days How are you and your god getting on?

[Zuber]

All good on my side...

[mbes2]

Im starting to believe 

 

[TFD]

The largest problem with this world and religion is that a lot of people dont do or dont understand what is written in the Books and how to deal with this in daily life.

Religion from the books and how it is displayed in this world by men are two seperate things allthough many non-believers see the bad deeds of mankind as proof that religion is bad.

 

Very simple example: One of the ten commandment is: You Shall Not Kill.

 

Now if everybody who claimes to be religious lives by this command there would be no war anymore right? Right.

So the book itself is not bad at all only tremendously dangeres for people who dont have the know-how to read it or understand it. If you combine this with the fact that the majority of the people in this world are not really Einsteins..... well you got it I think. Put a bad shepperd in front of the herd of sheeps and they all start a cruissade to slaughter +100.000 muslims or, 1000 years later, fly an airplane into the Twin Towers and yell JIHAAAAAD.....

 

To make things clear, I believe in a God or creator of everything around us and I think the Bible is a book with some good historylessons. The church however is something I stay away from as far as possible. Moneywise they have enough to feed the whole African continent.

[Zoobeef]

Didnt they find the first page of the bible on that documentary called red dwarf?

[turbobob]

 

 

Ah, good. I thought this subject had died and ...ermmm...gone to heaven.     

No I thought it had just died.

 

 

What you doing back on this thread Gordon. I thought you didn't believe in resurrection ?

 

GORDONS ALIVE!

[casino]

GOD'S ALIVE AS WELL ! 

[ghand]

GOD'S ALIVE AS WELL ! 

Which one?

[oblomov]

The problem for those who don't believe in God is a failure of understanding of the nature of religious belief. They have arrived at their belief in their lack of belief of the existence of God without having made any real intellectual effort, otherwise as I pointed out earlier they would be agnostic rather than atheist.

 

Religious belief is not at all about belief, it's about experience. The declaration of belief in God is secondary to the primary experience in a person's life of the existence of God, a God, the God, monotheistic deity, whatever. The religious experience seems to vary greatly, but from that experience comes a secondary result which is a declaration of belief in the existence of God.

 

If you're a non believer, religious experience is alien to you and therefore not understood as being an experience rather than a belief. If you stick to a superficial empirical pseudo scientific method of argument it's easy/convenient to knock/dismiss those who believe in God.  Life is full of experiences for which there is no empirical evidence, if you just have the nous to look for them, and wonder, but as I always say, everyone is responsible for their own ignorance.

 

Even Einstein came to the conclusion that there is an intelligence of infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little we can understand of reality.

Any non believers here who think they're brighter than Einstein, anyone?

 

Edited by oblomov, 04 January 2014 - 08:28 PM.

[RabnaKS]

The problem for those who don't believe in God is a failure of understanding of the nature of religious belief. They have arrived at their belief in their lack of belief of the existence of God without having made any real intellectual effort, otherwise as I pointed out earlier they would be agnostic rather than atheist.

 

Religious belief is not at all about belief, it's about experience. The declaration of belief in God is secondary to the primary experience in a person's life of the existence of God, a God, the God, monotheistic deity, whatever. The religious experience seems to vary greatly, but from that experience comes a secondary result which is a declaration of belief in the existence of God.

 

If you're a non believer, religious experience is alien to you and therefore not understood as being an experience rather than a belief. If you stick to a superficial empirical pseudo scientific method of argument it's easy/convenient to knock/dismiss those who believe in God.  Life is full of experiences for which there is no empirical evidence, if you just have the nous to look for them, and wonder, but as I always say, everyone is responsible for their own ignorance.

 

Even Einstein came to the conclusion that there is an intelligence of infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little we can understand of reality.

Any non believers here who think they're brighter than Einstein, anyone?

 

Even Einstein got things wrong, even though he was a genius? Parts of what you say is gobbledy gook! I swear I saw & heard a ghost when I was a kid but as I've got older I have come up with other reasons what made me believe I saw something & I'm less likely to believe in ghosts & it's the same with my belief of a God. Even though my early years were supposed to be religious, going to RC church regular being Confirmed & other members of the family leaving what is generally perceived as the regular denominations & joined a Happy Clappy troupe who give her the belief she needs out of religion & talks like the usual contrary clap trap about true gods! Religion has had it's day, there are laws & courts to deal with the things the church used to use to keep the population in it's place! On a point where people usually turn to religion, the Father in Law died last year & we found a chap who was obviously religious but knew exactly how to deal with the in-Laws without mentioning the usual religious phrases.  Which proves to me you live life without religion being pushed & my in-Laws have more humanity in them than a lot of the religious folk I know in person or from a distance.  Obviously TV's sh!t, otherwise I wouldn't have spent so much time putting my personal opinion commenting on this thread when I thought it'd been closed & deserves to be LOCKED! Bless you

[turbobob]

Why does it deserved to be locked? As an observer of this thread, I have seen intelligent and well thought arguments. There has been no bitching or other trivial or irrelevant posts really. 

[RabnaKS]

Why does it deserved to be locked? As an observer of this thread, I have seen intelligent and well thought arguments. There has been no bitching or other trivial or irrelevant posts really. 

It was a tongue in cheek & flippant, I still haven't got over a thread being locked when there was no abuse & it was in the Off-Topic. I have to move on & let it go!  

[ghand]

Locked WTF. This thread should go on till the END then one day I can say "see I told you I was right ". Some very interesting views, some completely mad in my view but each to their own.

[slindborg]

The problem for those who don't believe in God is a failure of understanding of the nature of religious belief. They have arrived at their belief in their lack of belief of the existence of God without having made any real intellectual effort, otherwise as I pointed out earlier they would be agnostic rather than atheist.   Religious belief is not at all about belief, it's about experience. The declaration of belief in God is secondary to the primary experience in a person's life of the existence of God, a God, the God, monotheistic deity, whatever. The religious experience seems to vary greatly, but from that experience comes a secondary result which is a declaration of belief in the existence of God.   If you're a non believer, religious experience is alien to you and therefore not understood as being an experience rather than a belief. If you stick to a superficial empirical pseudo scientific method of argument it's easy/convenient to knock/dismiss those who believe in God.  Life is full of experiences for which there is no empirical evidence, if you just have the nous to look for them, and wonder, but as I always say, everyone is responsible for their own ignorance.   Even Einstein came to the conclusion that there is an intelligence of infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little we can understand of reality. Any non believers here who think they're brighter than Einstein, anyone?  

So its a bit like saying you enjoy the process of getting pissed but the end result of being pissed is a bonus/revelation.... Cool. Or was that too empirical?

[ghand]

The problem for those who don't believe in God is a failure of understanding of the nature of religious belief. They have arrived at their belief in their lack of belief of the existence of God without having made any real intellectual effort, otherwise as I pointed out earlier they would be agnostic rather than atheist.   Religious belief is not at all about belief, it's about experience. The declaration of belief in God is secondary to the primary experience in a person's life of the existence of God, a God, the God, monotheistic deity, whatever. The religious experience seems to vary greatly, but from that experience comes a secondary result which is a declaration of belief in the existence of God.   If you're a non believer, religious experience is alien to you and therefore not understood as being an experience rather than a belief. If you stick to a superficial empirical pseudo scientific method of argument it's easy/convenient to knock/dismiss those who believe in God.  Life is full of experiences for which there is no empirical evidence, if you just have the nous to look for them, and wonder, but as I always say, everyone is responsible for their own ignorance.   Even Einstein came to the conclusion that there is an intelligence of infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little we can understand of reality. Any non believers here who think they're brighter than Einstein, anyone?  

Interesting but I will never have a religious experience because I don't want one not because of my lack of intellectual effort I just think the whole thing is not for me. If it works for some that's fine for them. It does not prove a thing either way because you have some religious experience. The things I have seen in this world just heavily reinforce the fact I don't want to know any god even if you could prove to me one exists. Things have moved on a lot since old Albert, we know a zillion things he would think was magic and in a few thousand years we will know all about god or no god for sure.

[ghand]

Why does it deserved to be locked? As an observer of this thread, I have seen intelligent and well thought arguments. There has been no bitching or other trivial or irrelevant posts really. 

It was a tongue in cheek & flippant, I still haven't got over a thread being locked when there was no abuse & it was in the Off-Topic. I have to move on & let it go!  

Ha ha , thought you had joined the dark side for a moment

[casino]

I keep warning you Mr Hand.

 

St Paul was on his merry way persecuting Christians ____as a sort of religious experience? _____when God said enough and then struck him blind. 

You think being struck blind was more exciting than putting Christians to the sword? Of course not. Paul was having a right Lark rounding up Christians and rocking them off their mortal coils.

 

So you see, sometimes you dont have any choice in religious experiences. 

 

 

[ghand]

I keep warning you Mr Hand.   St Paul was on his merry way persecuting Christians ____as a sort of religious experience? _____when God said enough and then struck him blind.  You think being struck blind was more exciting than putting Christians to the sword? Of course not. Paul was having a right Lark rounding up Christians and rocking them off their mortal coils.   So you see, sometimes you dont have any choice in religious experiences.     

I keep listening Mr Casino . 😊 No he just got cataracts, simple operation nowadays 😃. a religious experience is just in your head and can't be proved so we are back to square one I hope we do have a god or we have had millions of wasted lives but as you well know by now he is not for me and never will be. I will stick with science and aliens at least we have plenty proof of both. .

Edited by ghand, 05 January 2014 - 03:38 PM.

[oblomov]

 

So its a bit like saying you enjoy the process of getting pissed but the end result of being pissed is a bonus/revelation.... Cool. Or was that too empirical?

 

 

It's not too empirical, rather, it isn't empirical at all, but on the plus side it does allow you to use the word 'pissed' twice in one sentence.

 

[alexb]

The problem for those who don't believe in God is a failure of understanding of the nature of religious belief. They have arrived at their belief in their lack of belief of the existence of God without having made any real intellectual effort, otherwise as I pointed out earlier they would be agnostic rather than atheist.

 

Religious belief is not at all about belief, it's about experience. The declaration of belief in God is secondary to the primary experience in a person's life of the existence of God, a God, the God, monotheistic deity, whatever. The religious experience seems to vary greatly, but from that experience comes a secondary result which is a declaration of belief in the existence of God.

 

If you're a non believer, religious experience is alien to you and therefore not understood as being an experience rather than a belief. If you stick to a superficial empirical pseudo scientific method of argument it's easy/convenient to knock/dismiss those who believe in God.  Life is full of experiences for which there is no empirical evidence, if you just have the nous to look for them, and wonder, but as I always say, everyone is responsible for their own ignorance.

 

Even Einstein came to the conclusion that there is an intelligence of infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little we can understand of reality.

Any non believers here who think they're brighter than Einstein, anyone?

 

'... agnosticism is the view that human reason is incapable of rationally justifying the belief that deities do, or do not, exist.' (quote from William Rowe, philosopher). Both theist and atheist believe and you can be either AND be agnostic. It's not mutually exclusive. And as you point out, the belief in God can be based on experience. The belief that there is no God can just as well be based on experience. Some of the remarks made in this thread for sure point in that direction.

 

As to Einstein's views on religion, I assume you refer to this quote: '... My religiosity consists in a humble admiration of the infinitely superior spirit that reveals itself in the little that we, with our weak and transitory understanding, can comprehend of reality ...'. That's true for everybody trying to understand reality a bit. The deeper you dig, the more you understand what you don't understand and what you probably can never understand. That can lead to religious beliefs, or not. Stephen Hawking tends to go into the opposite direction (from Einstein) for example. He's also pretty bright