Debates
22 Nov 04
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by Pawnokeyholethat reminds me of the fools in antiquity that had a Love Goddess that had no arms.
But God, if She exists, clearly lets lots of bad things happen. Why should She not also let those who believe in Her deploy invalid or unsound arguments?
You seen her statue havent you?
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by TexasCowboyWell, unlikely though it is, I actually agree with this statement. Although I am an atheist and think that the only potential for some sort of truth is through science. I am willing to concede that, for some, the issue of faith will always be an internal one. And it does not matter how many people attempt to convince you of one way or the other, you inevitably make the choice in your own mind.
Debates, on faith, fade into crap because this is a debate that can only be won within one's self.
I think it is sad that religion exists and that people need to believe at all in something like a god. I consider it a waste of thought and sometimes life. However, I do believe that everyone should have the right to choose what and how they think and the way in which they live their lives. Regardless of the arguement between science and religion, people should get on and universal tolerance would be a most pleasant thing 🙂
Geez... chilling out in my old age...
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by Starrmansounds like you're getting religion, lol
Well, unlikely though it is, I actually agree with this statement. Although I am an atheist and think that the only potential for some sort of truth is through science. I am willing to concede that, for some, the issue of faith will always be an internal one. And it does not matter how many people attempt to convince you of one way or the other, you inev ...[text shortened]... d universal tolerance would be a most pleasant thing 🙂
Geez... chilling out in my old age...
The biggest difference between an atheist and a believer is that even when the agree that something needs to be done ,, the atheist wants the governmant to do it and the believer expects it to be done out of faith, hope and charity.
Its kind of odd how quick Christians support wars though !
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by frogstompI'd rather most governments were left out of it nowadays 🙂 More likely to get done properly if we let a bunch of chimpanzees do it...oh no...wait.... 😛 🙂
sounds like you're getting religion, lol
The biggest difference between an atheist and a believer is that even when the agree that something needs to be done ,, the atheist wants the governmant to do it and the believer expects it to be done out of faith, hope and charity.
Its kind of odd how quick Christians support wars though !
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by TexasCowboyWell said Texas. And that pretty much sums up the whole problem of anyone discussing faith.
Threads like this always fill-up with agnostic bigots who lash out because they're scared to death, unsure, and searching. Then many of your so-called "believers" fight back because their faith and it's source are questioned which, naturally, puts them on defense.
Personally, I avoid defending my faith because there is no question a "non-believe ...[text shortened]... ates, on faith, fade into crap because this is a debate that can only be won within one's self.
It's personal and one of the most private aspects of a person's life. It's as personal as who we love and marry, where we live, which career we choose, how we spend our earnings, etc...
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by wibSame thing politics, but sometimes it's good to bang your head against a wall.
Well said Texas. And that pretty much sums up the whole problem of anyone discussing faith.
It's personal and one of the most private aspects of a person's life. It's as personal as who we love and marry, where we live, which career we choose, how we spend our earnings, etc...
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by frogstompEverything that you post is inflamitory and filled with narrow-minded prejeduce. Quit being so lazy... it won't take much digging to see that, since the beginning of history, men, both godly and godless, have found it necessary to go to war.
sounds like you're getting religion, lol
The biggest difference between an atheist and a believer is that even when the agree that something needs to be done ,, the atheist wants the governmant to do it and the believer expects it to be done out of faith, hope and charity.
Its kind of odd how quick Christians support wars though !
...also, You're so intelligent that you don't know that half of your post contradicts the other.
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by TexasCowboyI don't think war is 'necessary'. Unfortunately religion has been used to crusade for war too often and that is why they are inextricably tied.
Everything that you post is inflamitory and filled with narrow-minded prejeduce. Quit being so lazy... it won't take much digging to see that, since the beginning of history, men, both godly and godless, have found it necessary to go to war.
...also, You're so intelligent that you don't know that half of your post contradicts the other.
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by TexasCowboyNice to see another pot out there 😉
Everything that you post is inflamitory and filled with narrow-minded prejeduce. Quit being so lazy... it won't take much digging to see that, since the beginning of history, men, both godly and godless, have found it necessary to go to war.
...also, You're so intelligent that you don't know that half of your post contradicts the other.
Untill recently there weren't any godless people (relatively speaking) so I think you just shot yourself in the foot there...
MÅ¥HÅRM
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by StarrmanAbout the pot or about the foot? 🙂
What do you mean by this?
There were very few people who didn't believe/belong to one religion or another up untill a few centuries ago.
Ergo, texas is wrong, it's the godly who have found it necessary to go to war since the beginning of history.
The godless haven't had that long to prove themselves, however many of today's secular governments are exceedingly peace-loving, the few exceptions (e.g. US) can hardly be called secular when they follow the religous angle as much or more than their monarchial predecessors did...
MÅ¥HÅRM
23 Nov 04
Originally posted by TexasCowboy
Threads like this always fill-up with agnostic bigots who lash out because they're scared to death, unsure, and searching.
This strikes me as a substantial psychological hypothesis. Can you really tell that the criticisms of agnostics derive from insecurity rather than rational conviction? It strikes me that belief in God provides more psycholog ...[text shortened]... it. The round-versus-flat earth debate has been won even if the falt-earthers continue to disagree.