.
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week¦..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
Good Question.
Good Question.
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
Your presupposing that Atheists have one. As an Atheist I worship nothing. As far as I am concerned there is nothing there to worship. I happen to think its a strange question rather than a good one but then again it is from the Mail.
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
-
Oscar Namechange
- Posts: 31840
- Joined: Wed Jul 30, 2008 9:26 am
Good Question.
I may or may not be Interested In this.
At the going down of the sun and in the morning, we will remember them. R.L. Binyon
Good Question.
binbag;1337875 wrote: .
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week…..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
As a Secular Humanist (Atheist) I feel I was created by my parents and though I love them, I don't worship them.
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week…..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
As a Secular Humanist (Atheist) I feel I was created by my parents and though I love them, I don't worship them.
Good Question.
That’s what I presumed the answer would be Lon. The parents would be looked upon as the Atheist’s creator. Perhaps more so the father, as I’ve heard that some people look upon him as the maker, the mother being the carrier. I didn’t spot any replies, so I’m not sure about that.
I’ve heard a few females say they worship their parents. Whether they were Atheists or not I don’t know. I’ve also heard a few males say the worship/ed their fathers, but I’m inclined to think they probably meant they looked up to, and admired their fathers with warmth and great affection.
Sadly I wasn’t one of them, I had a very hard time with my parents when they were alive.
I thought it was an interesting question, something I’d never thought of before.
I’ve heard a few females say they worship their parents. Whether they were Atheists or not I don’t know. I’ve also heard a few males say the worship/ed their fathers, but I’m inclined to think they probably meant they looked up to, and admired their fathers with warmth and great affection.
Sadly I wasn’t one of them, I had a very hard time with my parents when they were alive.
I thought it was an interesting question, something I’d never thought of before.
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
I think a better question is whether Atheists worship themselves.
Good Question.
koan;1337915 wrote: I think a better question is whether Atheists worship themselves.Hmmm. koan, is one being serious, or is one in a devilish mood tonight? :sneaky: 
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
no, I'm serious.
I feel that atheists replace the function of God with themselves. They tend to believe they can accomplish their wishes and goals by inner will and that's pretty much the same thing, imo.
I feel that atheists replace the function of God with themselves. They tend to believe they can accomplish their wishes and goals by inner will and that's pretty much the same thing, imo.
Good Question.
koan;1337915 wrote: I think a better question is whether Atheists worship themselves.
I really doubt that Atheists worship themselves, but some might, same as some religious believing narcissistic self absorbing folk.
I really doubt that Atheists worship themselves, but some might, same as some religious believing narcissistic self absorbing folk.
Good Question.
It's hard to draw a colloquial conclusion... of the collective :p
It is a more interesting question though.
It is a more interesting question though.
Good Question.
Worship is a concept best left abandoned in the Middle Ages, whether of gods or men. As for parents, the healthiest response to them is sceptical questioning. I speak, admittedly, as a Christian rather than an atheist, albeit one who utterly rejects all notion of an omnipotent God. The other distracting obsolete words from Christian dogma are praise, thanksgiving and belief which are of interest only to the historian.
Nullius in verba ... ☎||||||||||| ... To Fate I sue, of other means bereft, the only refuge for the wretched left. ... Hold no regard for unsupported opinion.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
When flower power came along I stood for Human Rights, marched around for peace and freedom, had some nooky every night - we took it serious. [Fred Wedlock, "The Folker"]
Who has a spare two minutes to play in this month's FG Trivia game! ... My other OS is Slackware.
Good Question.
I know the context of "worship", when used, is always applied to any individual by default, so the real question is to why one chose their motive to begin with. To "worship" is to love and idolize. This means anytime one has an opinion they love and idolize that opinion which can only best be described as a belief due to the answer not being observed. This belief is then defined as the creation when applying it to a question that is inherently peculiar to every individual on a personal basis, hence why everyone not only has a religion but one they can truly call their own. When grouping these people that acclaim they're of the same religion by default upsets and ultimately insults others because it's a statement of superiority in all of it's indigenous "glory"
It's rude, self centered, egotistical, and does nothing but harbor hatred within hearts of people that willingly choose to alienate others purely for greed and fame
It's rude, self centered, egotistical, and does nothing but harbor hatred within hearts of people that willingly choose to alienate others purely for greed and fame
Good Question.
Kevin, sorry mate. I would love to know what it is you're trying to say but your post whistled through my head and didn't stop 'till got through the other side. I wafted my arms about trying to catch the odd word on the way through but I didn't understand a single word of it:wah:
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Good Question.
K.Snyder;1337948 wrote: I know the context of "worship", when used, is always applied to any individual by default, so the real question is to why one chose their motive to begin with. To "worship" is to love and idolize. This means anytime one has an opinion they love and idolize that opinion which can only best be described as a belief due to the answer not being observed. This belief is then defined as the creation when applying it to a question that is inherently peculiar to every individual on a personal basis, hence why everyone not only has a religion but one they can truly call their own. When grouping these people that acclaim they're of the same religion by default upsets and ultimately insults others because it's a statement of superiority in all of it's indigenous "glory"
It's rude, self centered, egotistical, and does nothing but harbor hatred within hearts of people that willingly choose to alienate others purely for greed and fameYes, but it's uniquly human. All concpts healthy and otherwise begin and end in the brain, but they are all myths.
It's rude, self centered, egotistical, and does nothing but harbor hatred within hearts of people that willingly choose to alienate others purely for greed and fameYes, but it's uniquly human. All concpts healthy and otherwise begin and end in the brain, but they are all myths.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
spot;1337931 wrote: Worship is a concept best left abandoned in the Middle Ages, whether of gods or men. As for parents, the healthiest response to them is sceptical questioning. I speak, admittedly, as a Christian rather than an atheist, albeit one who utterly rejects all notion of an omnipotent God. The other distracting obsolete words from Christian dogma are praise, thanksgiving and belief which are of interest only to the historian.I think you speak as both. Christian Atheism, anyone? Atheistiic Christianity? I dislike the use of 'atheist' as a noun, I try to only use the word as an adjective.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
binbag;1337875 wrote: .
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week¦..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
As a Christian currently seeking answers from the Bible, I find this interesting.
As 'worship' means adore, idlolize, honour according to my dictionary this is a thought provoking question.
When I practised Buddism for a few years we didn't worship Nicherin Daishonin and Shakamuni but revered them for their teachings.
I am trying to put myself in the position of being an atheist. I guess their creator(s) has to be their parents and as we know everyone has different relationship with their Mums and Dads. No real answer then from me as I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week¦..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
As a Christian currently seeking answers from the Bible, I find this interesting.
As 'worship' means adore, idlolize, honour according to my dictionary this is a thought provoking question.
When I practised Buddism for a few years we didn't worship Nicherin Daishonin and Shakamuni but revered them for their teachings.
I am trying to put myself in the position of being an atheist. I guess their creator(s) has to be their parents and as we know everyone has different relationship with their Mums and Dads. No real answer then from me as I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.
A smile is a window on your face to show your heart is home
Good Question.
Posted by Bez
I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.
Precisely
I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.
Precisely
"He has all the virtues I dislike and none of the vices I admire."
Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Good Question.
Bez;1337992 wrote: As a Christian currently seeking answers from the Bible, I find this interesting.
As 'worship' means adore, idlolize, honour according to my dictionary this is a thought provoking question.
When I practised Buddism for a few years we didn't worship Nicherin Daishonin and Shakamuni but revered them for their teachings.
I am trying to put myself in the position of being an atheist. I guess their creator(s) has to be their parents and as we know everyone has different relationship with their Mums and Dads. No real answer then from me as I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.You can't put yourself in the position of being atheist because atheism is nothing more than a response to Theism. Had belief in God never been invented, there would be no need of or reason for atheism. American religion has put us in a position where we all have to declare our belief in God, or not. Where the original question misses the mark entirely is the assumption or view that atheism is like a religion where all atheist people group themselves like churchgoers, which they don't, they merely agree on the answer to the question: Is there a living God? "NO!"
Its the nature of the child to worship the parents because its a matter of survival to do so, however, when we become adults and have children of our own we become the worshiped. The difference between an atheistic view as opposed to the view of theism is that although both make the transition of becoming the worshiped physically, the theist remains childlike emotionally thus needing one to continue worshiping whereas atheism permits one to move on emotionally regarding dependence. Is this a bad thing concerning the theist? I don't think so, but that's a subjective values question.
As 'worship' means adore, idlolize, honour according to my dictionary this is a thought provoking question.
When I practised Buddism for a few years we didn't worship Nicherin Daishonin and Shakamuni but revered them for their teachings.
I am trying to put myself in the position of being an atheist. I guess their creator(s) has to be their parents and as we know everyone has different relationship with their Mums and Dads. No real answer then from me as I've always related the word 'Worship' to religion and would only use the words adore, love and respect in relation to my biological creators.You can't put yourself in the position of being atheist because atheism is nothing more than a response to Theism. Had belief in God never been invented, there would be no need of or reason for atheism. American religion has put us in a position where we all have to declare our belief in God, or not. Where the original question misses the mark entirely is the assumption or view that atheism is like a religion where all atheist people group themselves like churchgoers, which they don't, they merely agree on the answer to the question: Is there a living God? "NO!"
Its the nature of the child to worship the parents because its a matter of survival to do so, however, when we become adults and have children of our own we become the worshiped. The difference between an atheistic view as opposed to the view of theism is that although both make the transition of becoming the worshiped physically, the theist remains childlike emotionally thus needing one to continue worshiping whereas atheism permits one to move on emotionally regarding dependence. Is this a bad thing concerning the theist? I don't think so, but that's a subjective values question.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
koan;1337922 wrote: no, I'm serious.
I feel that atheists replace the function of God with themselves. They tend to believe they can accomplish their wishes and goals by inner will and that's pretty much the same thing, imo.Is the funtion of a living God to help people accomplish wishes and goals? "Function" is a curious word here.
I feel that atheists replace the function of God with themselves. They tend to believe they can accomplish their wishes and goals by inner will and that's pretty much the same thing, imo.Is the funtion of a living God to help people accomplish wishes and goals? "Function" is a curious word here.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
Ahso!;1338012 wrote: Is the funtion of a living God to help people accomplish wishes and goals? "Function" is a curious word here.
Really? I think it's useful as a non religious word that can be shared between the groups in question.
Religious thought: My crops grew because God smiled down His blessings on me and my family.
Atheist thought: My crops grew well because I am a good farmer and planned efficiently.
If both farmers did well due to inventing, say, a watering technique, one would say God gave him the idea, the other would say he cleverly thought it up himself.
In the opening situation, God performs a function explaining cause and effect. In the second, the man credits himself for the cause and effect.
If God didn't manifest in a functional role credited to God there wouldn't be nearly as many theists.
Really? I think it's useful as a non religious word that can be shared between the groups in question.
Religious thought: My crops grew because God smiled down His blessings on me and my family.
Atheist thought: My crops grew well because I am a good farmer and planned efficiently.
If both farmers did well due to inventing, say, a watering technique, one would say God gave him the idea, the other would say he cleverly thought it up himself.
In the opening situation, God performs a function explaining cause and effect. In the second, the man credits himself for the cause and effect.
If God didn't manifest in a functional role credited to God there wouldn't be nearly as many theists.
Good Question.
koan;1338042 wrote: Really? I think it's useful as a non religious word that can be shared between the groups in question.
Religious thought: My crops grew because God smiled down His blessings on me and my family.
Atheist thought: My crops grew well because I am a good farmer and planned efficiently.
If both farmers did well due to inventing, say, a watering technique, one would say God gave him the idea, the other would say he cleverly thought it up himself.
In the opening situation, God performs a function explaining cause and effect. In the second, the man credits himself for the cause and effect.
If God didn't manifest in a functional role credited to God there wouldn't be nearly as many theists.I see. Its doubtful to me you'd find many devout Christians, Muslims or Jews agreeing with that concept, but its as valid as any. God, being a creation of the mind can be anything one wishes.
Religious thought: My crops grew because God smiled down His blessings on me and my family.
Atheist thought: My crops grew well because I am a good farmer and planned efficiently.
If both farmers did well due to inventing, say, a watering technique, one would say God gave him the idea, the other would say he cleverly thought it up himself.
In the opening situation, God performs a function explaining cause and effect. In the second, the man credits himself for the cause and effect.
If God didn't manifest in a functional role credited to God there wouldn't be nearly as many theists.I see. Its doubtful to me you'd find many devout Christians, Muslims or Jews agreeing with that concept, but its as valid as any. God, being a creation of the mind can be anything one wishes.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
Ahso!;1338085 wrote: I see. Its doubtful to me you'd find many devout Christians, Muslims or Jews agreeing with that concept, but its as valid as any. God, being a creation of the mind can be anything one wishes.Ahso, although its a bit deeper than that, I know what koan is trying to say, and she's correct, regarding "Religious" thinking.
When you mention "God being a creation of the mind", I would have to say that, from a Christian point of view, that is wrong.
However, if one does not believe in God, I understand what you are trying to say also.
All fascinating stuff, please see my next reply.
When you mention "God being a creation of the mind", I would have to say that, from a Christian point of view, that is wrong.
However, if one does not believe in God, I understand what you are trying to say also.
All fascinating stuff, please see my next reply.
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
You know; I’m really grateful to the member of the public who posed the initial question in the Mail.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bb
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bb
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
binbag;1338091 wrote: You know; I’m really grateful to the member of the public who posed the initial question in the Mail.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bbPlease first explain 'the big bang theory' as you understand it, bb.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bbPlease first explain 'the big bang theory' as you understand it, bb.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
binbag;1338089 wrote: Ahso, although its a bit deeper than that, I know what koan is trying to say, and she's correct, regarding "Religious" thinking.
When you mention "God being a creation of the mind", I would have to say that, from a Christian point of view, that is wrong.
However, if one does not believe in God, I understand what you are trying to say also.
All fascinating stuff, please see my next reply. :)So you'd agree God's function is to serve people? That's fine with me if its what you believe, but its contrary to what the Christian bible teaches AFAIK.
When you mention "God being a creation of the mind", I would have to say that, from a Christian point of view, that is wrong.
However, if one does not believe in God, I understand what you are trying to say also.
All fascinating stuff, please see my next reply. :)So you'd agree God's function is to serve people? That's fine with me if its what you believe, but its contrary to what the Christian bible teaches AFAIK.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
binbag;1337875 wrote: .
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week¦..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
It's a stupid question worthy of the Daily Mail. If you don't believe there is one you are hardly likely to worship one are you?
Atheism is not a religion it is an intellectual position taken by an individual as regards the existence or non existence of god.
posted by Koan
I think a better question is whether Atheists worship themselves.
No it isn't.
A better question might be why do you need to worship anything?
In the beginning, well I don't know the meaning of life the universe or anything or how I came to be here so something must have made me, I got to this place somehow and there must be a reason but I don't know what it is. ---I know let's call him/her GOD. The rest, as they say, is history. Mankind has been squabbling about who has the best fairy story ever since.
a·the·ist
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Can be confused: agnostic, atheist, deist, theist (see synonym note at this entry).
—Synonyms
Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine. Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity. A skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds
Does a dyslexic christian believe in dog?
.
A rather interesting question for the Atheists; from the Mail during this past week¦..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Do atheists’ worship their creator?
It's a stupid question worthy of the Daily Mail. If you don't believe there is one you are hardly likely to worship one are you?
Atheism is not a religion it is an intellectual position taken by an individual as regards the existence or non existence of god.
posted by Koan
I think a better question is whether Atheists worship themselves.
No it isn't.
A better question might be why do you need to worship anything?
In the beginning, well I don't know the meaning of life the universe or anything or how I came to be here so something must have made me, I got to this place somehow and there must be a reason but I don't know what it is. ---I know let's call him/her GOD. The rest, as they say, is history. Mankind has been squabbling about who has the best fairy story ever since.
a·the·ist
–noun
a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.
Can be confused: agnostic, atheist, deist, theist (see synonym note at this entry).
—Synonyms
Atheist, agnostic, infidel, skeptic refer to persons not inclined toward religious belief or a particular form of religious belief. An atheist is one who denies the existence of a deity or of divine beings. An agnostic is one who believes it impossible to know anything about God or about the creation of the universe and refrains from commitment to any religious doctrine. Infidel means an unbeliever, especially a nonbeliever in Islam or Christianity. A skeptic doubts and is critical of all accepted doctrines and creeds
Does a dyslexic christian believe in dog?
Good Question.
gmc;1338101 wrote: It's a stupid question worthy of the Daily Mail. Always read from Dear sirs to Yours truly. gmc.
If you go back a couple of posts before yours, you will note I mentioned "it was a member of the public who posed the question".
gmc;1338101 wrote: If you don't believe there is one you are hardly likely to worship one are you? Lon replied to that point in a reasonable and acceptable manner. Why not go back and read his comment and my reply to it, it may surprise you.
If you go back a couple of posts before yours, you will note I mentioned "it was a member of the public who posed the question".
gmc;1338101 wrote: If you don't believe there is one you are hardly likely to worship one are you? Lon replied to that point in a reasonable and acceptable manner. Why not go back and read his comment and my reply to it, it may surprise you.
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
Ahso!;1338085 wrote: I see. Its doubtful to me you'd find many devout Christians, Muslims or Jews agreeing with that concept, but its as valid as any. God, being a creation of the mind can be anything one wishes.
I'm not sure why devout religious people would take issue with me saying that they are grateful to God or Allah when they have good crops for the year or get a good idea.
Whether God is a creation of the mind any more so than thinking oneself clever still leaves that things happen and people, even atheists, like to find causes for events.
I'm not sure why devout religious people would take issue with me saying that they are grateful to God or Allah when they have good crops for the year or get a good idea.
Whether God is a creation of the mind any more so than thinking oneself clever still leaves that things happen and people, even atheists, like to find causes for events.
Good Question.
gmc;1338101 wrote: ...
A better question might be why do you need to worship anything?
In the beginning, well I don't know the meaning of life the universe or anything or how I came to be here so something must have made me, I got to this place somehow and there must be a reason but I don't know what it is. ---I know let's call him/her GOD. The rest, as they say, is history. Mankind has been squabbling about who has the best fairy story ever since.
you're getting hung up on the word "worship". I'm not concerned with creation stories here, nor whether there is anything after we die. I'm asking who gets the credit for when things go well in a person's life. You know, the every day kind of good or bad "luck".
A better question might be why do you need to worship anything?
In the beginning, well I don't know the meaning of life the universe or anything or how I came to be here so something must have made me, I got to this place somehow and there must be a reason but I don't know what it is. ---I know let's call him/her GOD. The rest, as they say, is history. Mankind has been squabbling about who has the best fairy story ever since.
you're getting hung up on the word "worship". I'm not concerned with creation stories here, nor whether there is anything after we die. I'm asking who gets the credit for when things go well in a person's life. You know, the every day kind of good or bad "luck".
Good Question.
Ahso!;1338094 wrote: Please first explain 'the big bang theory' as you understand it, bb.Well, let me just say I don’t accept the scientist’s “Big Bang Theory.
However, just for you Ahso;
Briefly, I can only tell you that according to articles I’ve read, scientists believe the "Big Bang" apparently started with a¦. big bang, funnily enough.
Thus, our universe came into existence caused by an explosion. A one off, a single, almighty, explosion sprung our universe into existence.
On the other hand, and again, I can only tell you what I’ve read; I noted in the past that a consensus of opinion among scientists shows many of them believe there was not an explosion; rather, there was an *expansion and that expansion is a continuous process.
I’ve also noted¦.
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang or their “Expansion theories.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon. :wah:
bb
However, just for you Ahso;
Briefly, I can only tell you that according to articles I’ve read, scientists believe the "Big Bang" apparently started with a¦. big bang, funnily enough.
Thus, our universe came into existence caused by an explosion. A one off, a single, almighty, explosion sprung our universe into existence.
On the other hand, and again, I can only tell you what I’ve read; I noted in the past that a consensus of opinion among scientists shows many of them believe there was not an explosion; rather, there was an *expansion and that expansion is a continuous process.
I’ve also noted¦.
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang or their “Expansion theories.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon. :wah:
bb
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
Personally, I prefer the term "not religious" to "atheist" since it's less confusing. I just have never found much use for religion (worship, etc). Most the concepts in religions just strike me as somewhere between absurd and creepy.
Worship, to me, just looks like a form of mental masturbation. Like anyone is perfect enough to warrant their creator's worship? Isn't that like patting ourselves on the back for being so awesome?
IMO most people don't really believe in God, they just like to pretend to. Since you can tell by their actions what they really have faith in. Some christians like to attack science, but when they get real sick, they hop in an ambulance, not a church bus.
Worship, to me, just looks like a form of mental masturbation. Like anyone is perfect enough to warrant their creator's worship? Isn't that like patting ourselves on the back for being so awesome?
IMO most people don't really believe in God, they just like to pretend to. Since you can tell by their actions what they really have faith in. Some christians like to attack science, but when they get real sick, they hop in an ambulance, not a church bus.
Good Question.
koan;1338115 wrote: you're getting hung up on the word "worship". I'm not concerned with creation stories here, nor whether there is anything after we die. I'm asking who gets the credit for when things go well in a person's life. You know, the every day kind of good or bad "luck".
IMHO----------Things go well or they go bad based on choices that are made---------a mate, a job, what we eat or drink, where we live, left turn, right turn etc. etc.
IMHO----------Things go well or they go bad based on choices that are made---------a mate, a job, what we eat or drink, where we live, left turn, right turn etc. etc.
Good Question.
binbag;1338091 wrote: You know; I’m really grateful to the member of the public who posed the initial question in the Mail.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bb
I'm not totally convinced and think the jury is still out in the scientific community re: this. However, this does not mean that I accept or believe in a alternative.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang”?
bb
I'm not totally convinced and think the jury is still out in the scientific community re: this. However, this does not mean that I accept or believe in a alternative.
-
littleCJelkton
- Posts: 1215
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:57 pm
Good Question.
Well if we are talking about proving things and disproving thing, and are going to going to believe explainations for things that have yet to be understood based not on the best logical attempt, but on any attempt to explain them so that we humans can understand them; then one could still make a case that Odin killed Ymir and made the world out of his body, or it Came about when Nu the chaotic water of nothingness receded to allow the first hill to get the first sunrise from Ra, and lets not Overlook the fact that in your quote you refer to God as he How about the Unisexual wicca God(dess) which created the earth.
Good Question.
Lon;1338124 wrote: IMHO----------Things go well or they go bad based on choices that are made---------a mate, a job, what we eat or drink, where we live, left turn, right turn etc. etc.
I agree with that....cause and affect....responsibility....consequences of taking a certain action.....responsibility !
I agree with that....cause and affect....responsibility....consequences of taking a certain action.....responsibility !
A smile is a window on your face to show your heart is home
Good Question.
binbag;1338112 wrote: Always read from Dear sirs to Yours truly. gmc.
If you go back a couple of posts before yours, you will note I mentioned "it was a member of the public who posed the question".
Lon replied to that point in a reasonable and acceptable manner. Why not go back and read his comment and my reply to it, it may surprise you.
I did read it binbag I had deduced it was a question on the letter page rather than a main article even without you stating it.
But if it makes you happy.
It's a stupid question worthy of the Daily Mail and it's readers.
I'm sorry you find my answer unreasonable but it's hard to say it's a stupid question in any other way and I wasn't aware you were so sensitive. You being scots I assumed you would be used to robust debate and have the sense not to take disagreement with a particular viewpoint as personal.
How about It's a silly question because If someone tells you they don't believe in a supreme being who created all things to then ask what they do worship is a bit silly.
Worship has several meanings depending on the context.
wor·ship
–noun
1.
reverent honor and homage paid to god or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2.
formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3.
adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4.
the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5.
(initial capital letter) British. a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. by Your, His, or Her).
–verb (used with object)
6.
to render religious reverence and homage to.
7.
to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).
–verb (used without object)
8.
to render religious reverence and homage, as to a deity.
9.
to attend services of divine worship.
10.
to feel an adoring reverence or regard.
Since the question was in a religious one it is the religious meaning of the word worship that is appropriate. Yes I too worship my parents but in the sense of honour and respect and also in a sense they did create me they are my creators. But you're playing with semantics.
Atheists don't worship anyone or anything because they don't believe in a supreme being who created all things. I gave a different answer from Lon because I have a different viewpoint from his. But not being religious we are unlikely to fall out over who has the right viewpoint and the correct set of atheistic attitudes and throw the toys put the pram because we don't agree on something.
posted by koan
you're getting hung up on the word "worship". I'm not concerned with creation stories here, nor whether there is anything after we die. I'm asking who gets the credit for when things go well in a person's life. You know, the every day kind of good or bad "luck".
I'm not hung up on the word worship but the OP was do atheists worship their creator?
Why do you need to have someone to give credit for when things go well in your life - the everyday good or bad luck? Why do you need to have something there? I wasn't being sarcastic it was a serious question.
A lot of religious people seem to be incapable of accepting that you don't need religion. They are desperate to find ways ton explain atheist as merely worshipping another religion, the wrong one of course.
A scientific theory is an explanation using the facts available to explain the world around us. I can look at the big bang theory or the theory of evolution and conclude that they are reasonable explanations based on the facts we have available to us. In other words I believe them to be true, however if more facts come in that mean the theory needs to be reconsidered in the light of new evidence there is no issue about it. In other words it is not an article of faith and if you don't agree put your case and people will listen.
The Nicene Creed, by contrast, is an article of faith that you must believe without question to be a proper christian. Disagreeing with it means you go to hell. Every religion has it's own articles of faith. Why does anyone believe in them? Why do you need to?
posted by binbag
I’ve also noted¦.
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang or their “Expansion theories.
That's because it is a THEORY
the·o·ry
/
noun,plural-ries.
1.
a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3.
Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4.
the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5.
a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6.
contemplation or speculation.
7.
[QUOTE]guess or conjecture.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
You can't prove something is not there. They don;t need to disprove it, deists claim there is a god - you prove it. But you can't can you? If you could there would be no need for religion to act as go between. The church has a vested interest in keeping proof of god quiet.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
It's one theory
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon.
No he didn't. Prove it if you can. It's the kind of sophistry the religious, especially of the fundamentalist kind, are coming out with.
If you go back a couple of posts before yours, you will note I mentioned "it was a member of the public who posed the question".
Lon replied to that point in a reasonable and acceptable manner. Why not go back and read his comment and my reply to it, it may surprise you.
I did read it binbag I had deduced it was a question on the letter page rather than a main article even without you stating it.
But if it makes you happy.
It's a stupid question worthy of the Daily Mail and it's readers.
I'm sorry you find my answer unreasonable but it's hard to say it's a stupid question in any other way and I wasn't aware you were so sensitive. You being scots I assumed you would be used to robust debate and have the sense not to take disagreement with a particular viewpoint as personal.
How about It's a silly question because If someone tells you they don't believe in a supreme being who created all things to then ask what they do worship is a bit silly.
Worship has several meanings depending on the context.
wor·ship
–noun
1.
reverent honor and homage paid to god or a sacred personage, or to any object regarded as sacred.
2.
formal or ceremonious rendering of such honor and homage: They attended worship this morning.
3.
adoring reverence or regard: excessive worship of business success.
4.
the object of adoring reverence or regard.
5.
(initial capital letter) British. a title of honor used in addressing or mentioning certain magistrates and others of high rank or station (usually prec. by Your, His, or Her).
–verb (used with object)
6.
to render religious reverence and homage to.
7.
to feel an adoring reverence or regard for (any person or thing).
–verb (used without object)
8.
to render religious reverence and homage, as to a deity.
9.
to attend services of divine worship.
10.
to feel an adoring reverence or regard.
Since the question was in a religious one it is the religious meaning of the word worship that is appropriate. Yes I too worship my parents but in the sense of honour and respect and also in a sense they did create me they are my creators. But you're playing with semantics.
Atheists don't worship anyone or anything because they don't believe in a supreme being who created all things. I gave a different answer from Lon because I have a different viewpoint from his. But not being religious we are unlikely to fall out over who has the right viewpoint and the correct set of atheistic attitudes and throw the toys put the pram because we don't agree on something.
posted by koan
you're getting hung up on the word "worship". I'm not concerned with creation stories here, nor whether there is anything after we die. I'm asking who gets the credit for when things go well in a person's life. You know, the every day kind of good or bad "luck".
I'm not hung up on the word worship but the OP was do atheists worship their creator?
Why do you need to have someone to give credit for when things go well in your life - the everyday good or bad luck? Why do you need to have something there? I wasn't being sarcastic it was a serious question.
A lot of religious people seem to be incapable of accepting that you don't need religion. They are desperate to find ways ton explain atheist as merely worshipping another religion, the wrong one of course.
A scientific theory is an explanation using the facts available to explain the world around us. I can look at the big bang theory or the theory of evolution and conclude that they are reasonable explanations based on the facts we have available to us. In other words I believe them to be true, however if more facts come in that mean the theory needs to be reconsidered in the light of new evidence there is no issue about it. In other words it is not an article of faith and if you don't agree put your case and people will listen.
The Nicene Creed, by contrast, is an article of faith that you must believe without question to be a proper christian. Disagreeing with it means you go to hell. Every religion has it's own articles of faith. Why does anyone believe in them? Why do you need to?
posted by binbag
I’ve also noted¦.
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang or their “Expansion theories.
That's because it is a THEORY
the·o·ry
/
noun,plural-ries.
1.
a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3.
Mathematics. a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4.
the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5.
a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6.
contemplation or speculation.
7.
[QUOTE]guess or conjecture.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
You can't prove something is not there. They don;t need to disprove it, deists claim there is a god - you prove it. But you can't can you? If you could there would be no need for religion to act as go between. The church has a vested interest in keeping proof of god quiet.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
It's one theory
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon.
No he didn't. Prove it if you can. It's the kind of sophistry the religious, especially of the fundamentalist kind, are coming out with.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Good Question.
binbag;1338091 wrote: You know; I’m really grateful to the member of the public who posed the initial question in the Mail.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
I thought the question was dumb because atheism represents what not to believe, so what is there to be committed to in the first place?
Everyone who is a naturalist, or a humanist, is by default an atheist. But a humanist is going to have a hard time finding common ground with right wing objectivists who disparage social values in favour of self interests. That's why those who organize around atheism rally around anti-theism.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang?
bb
Yes, but what does the Big Bang Theory have to do with it? The beginning of our universe has no relevance over believing in God or believing that universes can come into existence through natural processes. Stephen Hawking has caused a bit of a minor uproar for saying recently that we don't need to invoke God to explain how universes come into being. It's a point that's already been made by other physicists for a number of years, but Hawking's approval seems to give it added weight.
I mention it as I find some of your reply’s so interesting that it has my thoughts pondering another question for the Atheists.
I thought the question was dumb because atheism represents what not to believe, so what is there to be committed to in the first place?
Everyone who is a naturalist, or a humanist, is by default an atheist. But a humanist is going to have a hard time finding common ground with right wing objectivists who disparage social values in favour of self interests. That's why those who organize around atheism rally around anti-theism.
Some Atheists, though I’m not sure if all (do) believe and accept the Big Bang Theory.
Do you, if you are a committed Atheist, or even on the fringes of Atheism, believe in the “Big Bang?
bb
Yes, but what does the Big Bang Theory have to do with it? The beginning of our universe has no relevance over believing in God or believing that universes can come into existence through natural processes. Stephen Hawking has caused a bit of a minor uproar for saying recently that we don't need to invoke God to explain how universes come into being. It's a point that's already been made by other physicists for a number of years, but Hawking's approval seems to give it added weight.
-
recovering conservative
- Posts: 529
- Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2008 12:28 pm
Good Question.
A lot of religious people seem to be incapable of accepting that you don't need religion. They are desperate to find ways ton explain atheist as merely worshipping another religion, the wrong one of course.
People who passionately believe in God are not able to rationalize that there are people who do not believe something they consider so self-evident. That's why they interpret atheism as being angry with God, or someone who enjoys a life of sin too much to join their religion. At the root level, they can't conceive of not believing in their God.
People who passionately believe in God are not able to rationalize that there are people who do not believe something they consider so self-evident. That's why they interpret atheism as being angry with God, or someone who enjoys a life of sin too much to join their religion. At the root level, they can't conceive of not believing in their God.
Good Question.
binbag;1338117 wrote: Well, let me just say I don’t accept the scientist’s “Big Bang Theory”.
However, just for you Ahso;
Briefly, I can only tell you that according to articles I’ve read, scientists believe the "Big Bang" apparently started with a…. big bang, funnily enough.
Thus, our universe came into existence caused by an explosion. A one off, a single, almighty, explosion sprung our universe into existence.
On the other hand, and again, I can only tell you what I’ve read; I noted in the past that a consensus of opinion among scientists shows many of them believe there was not an explosion; rather, there was an *expansion and that expansion is a continuous process.
I’ve also noted….
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang” or their “Expansion” theories.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon. :wah:
bbWould you like to provide links to what you've read? That might be more helpful to us than how you've summarized in this post.
However, just for you Ahso;
Briefly, I can only tell you that according to articles I’ve read, scientists believe the "Big Bang" apparently started with a…. big bang, funnily enough.
Thus, our universe came into existence caused by an explosion. A one off, a single, almighty, explosion sprung our universe into existence.
On the other hand, and again, I can only tell you what I’ve read; I noted in the past that a consensus of opinion among scientists shows many of them believe there was not an explosion; rather, there was an *expansion and that expansion is a continuous process.
I’ve also noted….
1:
Scientists admit they cannot prove “The Big Bang” or their “Expansion” theories.
2:
They cannot disprove the existence of God.
*3:
Also, that expansion expanded, therefore, out of nowhere = my words. Hmmm.
* 4:
Mind you, God created the heaven and earth; so perhaps He caused an expansive explosion in the beginning, and the scientists decided to jump on the bandwagon. :wah:
bbWould you like to provide links to what you've read? That might be more helpful to us than how you've summarized in this post.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
Lon;1338124 wrote: IMHO----------Things go well or they go bad based on choices that are made---------a mate, a job, what we eat or drink, where we live, left turn, right turn etc. etc.That's true to a certain extent and congratulations to you, however, the post ignores other factors which are beyond ones control such as; 1) genetics, and; 2) how, where and under what circumstances one is born and raised. Also, it fails to acknowledge the fact that resources are limited. Do you believe there is enough money in circulation today that every American presently living could be billionaires if they all simply made the correct choices? Could you acknowledge that to the degree there is affluence, it need be measured against its opposite, thus the competitive spirit which is the driving force of the capitalistic philosophy that for there to be winners there must also be losers? Surely the numbers speak for themselves, don't they?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
-
littleCJelkton
- Posts: 1215
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:57 pm
Good Question.
littleCJelkton;1338127 wrote: Well if we are talking about proving things and disproving thing, and are going to going to believe explainations for things that have yet to be understood based not on the best logical attempt, but on any attempt to explain them so that we humans can understand them; then one could still make a case that Odin killed Ymir and made the world out of his body, or it Came about when Nu the chaotic water of nothingness receded to allow the first hill to get the first sunrise from Ra, and lets not Overlook the fact that in your quote you refer to God as he How about the Unisexual wicca God(dess) which created the earth.
I forgot about Gaia and Uranus, and one of my favorite;
Long ago, His Noodliness decided, in his great wisdom, to make stuff. His first task was easily the most difficult. On the first day, he made a mountain, trees and a "midgit" (sic). The midgit (sic) took the greatest time, as He had to create a small human, having never even created a human before. At the end of that day, it was so, at which point, He spent the next 3 days making everything else, including the first 3-day weekend, the Shroud of Napkin, and fake carbon atoms to fool scientists and geologists. He then rested on the 5th, 6th and 7th days.
I forgot about Gaia and Uranus, and one of my favorite;
Long ago, His Noodliness decided, in his great wisdom, to make stuff. His first task was easily the most difficult. On the first day, he made a mountain, trees and a "midgit" (sic). The midgit (sic) took the greatest time, as He had to create a small human, having never even created a human before. At the end of that day, it was so, at which point, He spent the next 3 days making everything else, including the first 3-day weekend, the Shroud of Napkin, and fake carbon atoms to fool scientists and geologists. He then rested on the 5th, 6th and 7th days.
Good Question.
Here you go, I'm sure this will appeal to many.
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
Good Question.
Any luck on those links yet, bb?
I have the impression you like to just throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks and what slides off.
I have the impression you like to just throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks and what slides off.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities,
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Voltaire
I have only one thing to do and that's
Be the wave that I am and then
Sink back into the ocean
Fiona Apple
Good Question.
Ahso!;1338275 wrote: Any luck on those links yet, bb?
I have the impression you like to just throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks and what slides off.Ahso, some personal thoughts have been posted in which are assumed to be, and attributed to corresponding to my way of thinking. It’s pointless me answering them as it would develop into a long drawn out affair, so I’m not going to. Though I have to admit I'm wondering if that action will be thought of as a cop out.
The questions I’ve to answer in this very interesting thread (yes, I still say it’s a fascinating and interesting subject) I will reply to, in time.
So I’ll have to ask you to forgive the *delay.
I’m enjoying reading and responding to the excellent questions.
I want to, and will reply with answers that, hopefully, will not be misconstrued and have me thought of as one of the “holier than thou brigade” or “the smug ones”, who have us all cringing, if I can, and when I can.
*I don’t know if that particular point will be thought of as a tactic allowing me more time to search for answers. If it’s of vital importance to those that think that way, well, it’s something they will need to decide for themselves.
So stick with it, I’m enjoying reading the views of members regarding the subject and have not attempted to mock those views. I may add the occasional bit of humour, but that’s simply to lighten the atmosphere.
The thread’s a bit of a debate, but it’s not the end of the world if I need time, between other things that take up my personal life, to answer, or if I insert a bit humour.
Ahso!;1338275 wrote: So you'd agree God's function is to serve people? That's fine with me if its what you believe, but its contrary to what the Christian bible teaches AFAIK.The Master, the head of the household, The Father, God, or whatever anyone refers to Him as, cannot be the servant.
That’s the quickest and simplest way of answering.
Ahso!;1338275 wrote: Would you like to provide links to what you've read? That might be more helpful to us than how you've summarized in this post.
No I can’t, however if you care to as I did in the past, and still do as a matter of fact, carry out a Google search on any given subject, you’re bound to come up with similar information.
bb
I have the impression you like to just throw stuff at the wall to see what sticks and what slides off.Ahso, some personal thoughts have been posted in which are assumed to be, and attributed to corresponding to my way of thinking. It’s pointless me answering them as it would develop into a long drawn out affair, so I’m not going to. Though I have to admit I'm wondering if that action will be thought of as a cop out.
The questions I’ve to answer in this very interesting thread (yes, I still say it’s a fascinating and interesting subject) I will reply to, in time.
So I’ll have to ask you to forgive the *delay.
I’m enjoying reading and responding to the excellent questions.
I want to, and will reply with answers that, hopefully, will not be misconstrued and have me thought of as one of the “holier than thou brigade” or “the smug ones”, who have us all cringing, if I can, and when I can.
*I don’t know if that particular point will be thought of as a tactic allowing me more time to search for answers. If it’s of vital importance to those that think that way, well, it’s something they will need to decide for themselves.
So stick with it, I’m enjoying reading the views of members regarding the subject and have not attempted to mock those views. I may add the occasional bit of humour, but that’s simply to lighten the atmosphere.
The thread’s a bit of a debate, but it’s not the end of the world if I need time, between other things that take up my personal life, to answer, or if I insert a bit humour.
Ahso!;1338275 wrote: So you'd agree God's function is to serve people? That's fine with me if its what you believe, but its contrary to what the Christian bible teaches AFAIK.The Master, the head of the household, The Father, God, or whatever anyone refers to Him as, cannot be the servant.
That’s the quickest and simplest way of answering.
Ahso!;1338275 wrote: Would you like to provide links to what you've read? That might be more helpful to us than how you've summarized in this post.
No I can’t, however if you care to as I did in the past, and still do as a matter of fact, carry out a Google search on any given subject, you’re bound to come up with similar information.
bb
[FONT=Arial]Just above the clouds
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
the sun is always shining.
[/FONT]
-
littleCJelkton
- Posts: 1215
- Joined: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:57 pm
Good Question.
binbag;1338271 wrote: Here you go, I'm sure this will appeal to many.
This is refering to God as what exactly the christian Lord, Brahma, Ra, Odin, Zues, Allah, Yahweh? Of course, Ghandi himself was a hindu but studied many religions and was really in search of values that transended any one religion and unified all religions together.
This is refering to God as what exactly the christian Lord, Brahma, Ra, Odin, Zues, Allah, Yahweh? Of course, Ghandi himself was a hindu but studied many religions and was really in search of values that transended any one religion and unified all religions together.
Good Question.
littleCJelkton;1338340 wrote: This is refering to God as what exactly the christian Lord, Brahma, Ra, Odin, Zues, Allah, Yahweh? Of course, Ghandi himself was a hindu but studied many religions and was really in search of values that transended any one religion and unified all religions together.
Surely that is the belief in one god? If there is only one god - as christians et al would have us believe - does it really matter if there are different names for him/her/it. Does it really matter if you worship in different ways? But if you all respected each others belief in god and were united in that faith and felt one with your fellow man what then any need for religion?
Never mind questions asked by daily mail readers what I would like to know is why do monotheists believe that only the god they worship is the right one when they also profess to believe there is only one in the first place? Why believe that their way of worshipping is the right and only one? To the extent that they are enjoined by their god to kill all those who are non believers and do not worship as they do. So muslim kills christian in the name of god - but it must be the same god so is he insane or is it his followers. The jews get it from everybody yet it is their fairy tales about creation and history that both religions are based on but somehow they get the blame for killing the son of god - except he was actually god if you follow the Nicene creed that is - but it's OK to burn as a heretic anyone that disagrees with that creed because you will surely go to heaven. (they don't burn heretics any more as even the godly thought it a bit extreme after a while).
If the jews killed god shouldn't you be wary of annoying them? Except god planned it so really it was a kind of suicide but you can't kill god. If you kill yourself you get straight to hell according to the church but muslims can do it so long as they take infidels with them, then they get to go straight to paradise. Is this making any sense yet?
OK religious people why do you believe all this crap? and if the above offends anybody don't come out with the crap that you should expect someone's religious belief. I can respect someone's right to belief what they want but you're wasting your time if you expect respect for the beliefs themselves. After centuries of religious warfare we were almost free of the yoke of bigotry and hatred that religion represents and encourages. It's not atheists you should be scared of it's the other nutters that believe in god and want to save your soul by bring you in to the same fold they are in.
Why do you believe in god when there is no real evidence as to his existence and what is put forward as being evidence would suggest he is at best a capricious, vindictive, vengeful and at worst he is insane. God moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform is a cop out, it means you haven't a clue and prefer not to think about it in case you come to the conclusion there really is a god and you believe in a fantasy that isn't real and when you look closely at it isn't very pleasant either.
When challenged all there is from the godly is a long silence---- and then usually demands that they be taken seriously.
Surely that is the belief in one god? If there is only one god - as christians et al would have us believe - does it really matter if there are different names for him/her/it. Does it really matter if you worship in different ways? But if you all respected each others belief in god and were united in that faith and felt one with your fellow man what then any need for religion?
Never mind questions asked by daily mail readers what I would like to know is why do monotheists believe that only the god they worship is the right one when they also profess to believe there is only one in the first place? Why believe that their way of worshipping is the right and only one? To the extent that they are enjoined by their god to kill all those who are non believers and do not worship as they do. So muslim kills christian in the name of god - but it must be the same god so is he insane or is it his followers. The jews get it from everybody yet it is their fairy tales about creation and history that both religions are based on but somehow they get the blame for killing the son of god - except he was actually god if you follow the Nicene creed that is - but it's OK to burn as a heretic anyone that disagrees with that creed because you will surely go to heaven. (they don't burn heretics any more as even the godly thought it a bit extreme after a while).
If the jews killed god shouldn't you be wary of annoying them? Except god planned it so really it was a kind of suicide but you can't kill god. If you kill yourself you get straight to hell according to the church but muslims can do it so long as they take infidels with them, then they get to go straight to paradise. Is this making any sense yet?
OK religious people why do you believe all this crap? and if the above offends anybody don't come out with the crap that you should expect someone's religious belief. I can respect someone's right to belief what they want but you're wasting your time if you expect respect for the beliefs themselves. After centuries of religious warfare we were almost free of the yoke of bigotry and hatred that religion represents and encourages. It's not atheists you should be scared of it's the other nutters that believe in god and want to save your soul by bring you in to the same fold they are in.
Why do you believe in god when there is no real evidence as to his existence and what is put forward as being evidence would suggest he is at best a capricious, vindictive, vengeful and at worst he is insane. God moves in mysterious ways his wonders to perform is a cop out, it means you haven't a clue and prefer not to think about it in case you come to the conclusion there really is a god and you believe in a fantasy that isn't real and when you look closely at it isn't very pleasant either.
When challenged all there is from the godly is a long silence---- and then usually demands that they be taken seriously.
Good Question.
Yeah verily I say unto thee-------------------It's all so much BULL---T
Good Question.
Lon;1338377 wrote: Yeah verily I say unto thee-------------------It's all so much BULL---T
Truly brother Lon I am inclined to agree with you but felt restraint was necessary to avoid giving offence and for fear that they would start an argument about who had the best pile and whether left foot first was better than right foot first and if the wearing of wellies was acceptable or not.
YouTube - Billy Connolly -The Crucifixion Part1 - see you Judas, Your getting oan ma tits
Truly brother Lon I am inclined to agree with you but felt restraint was necessary to avoid giving offence and for fear that they would start an argument about who had the best pile and whether left foot first was better than right foot first and if the wearing of wellies was acceptable or not.
YouTube - Billy Connolly -The Crucifixion Part1 - see you Judas, Your getting oan ma tits
Good Question.
Ahso!;1337979 wrote: Yes, but it's uniquly human. All concpts healthy and otherwise begin and end in the brain, but they are all myths.How are ancient religions considered a "myth" simply because no one practices them anymore? Or better still if one single person practiced
say the worship of Oden would that not be enough to accept it as a living religion that has yet to see an answer? If the answer is the indicator then what scientific proof do you have that rules out anything? America has existed for millions of years yet has only been discovered by people for the past 500? No, because people had been living on that land prior to late 15th century exploration. How is it those people hadn't existed along with America until 1000 AD, 1492 AD, or 1538 AD?
Human aspiration owes everything to thinking outside of what one sees so why should religion be singled out? Have you actually laid your eyes on your tibia? if you haven't then how do you know you have a tibia? Have you opened your thigh muscles with a scalpel to observe it? Was it painful if you had? You say you have a tibia just because others told you that you do without investigating for yourself so that you may know with 100% certainty otherwise?
say the worship of Oden would that not be enough to accept it as a living religion that has yet to see an answer? If the answer is the indicator then what scientific proof do you have that rules out anything? America has existed for millions of years yet has only been discovered by people for the past 500? No, because people had been living on that land prior to late 15th century exploration. How is it those people hadn't existed along with America until 1000 AD, 1492 AD, or 1538 AD? Human aspiration owes everything to thinking outside of what one sees so why should religion be singled out? Have you actually laid your eyes on your tibia? if you haven't then how do you know you have a tibia? Have you opened your thigh muscles with a scalpel to observe it? Was it painful if you had? You say you have a tibia just because others told you that you do without investigating for yourself so that you may know with 100% certainty otherwise?