Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Aug 25^th, 2016 at 8:41am:




My own escape from the constraints of having to live the rest of my life in a religious strait-jacket began at puberty when I discovered at Boarding School that the only True God lay in my left hand under the blankets with a torch and a page torn out of the latest girly magazine circulating amongst us boys. 

That's when I realised that Life's True Purpose was to spread ones seed as far and wide as the law will allow - and the Devil take the hindmost.  

issuevoter wrote on Aug 28^th, 2016 at 2:14pm:


Needless to say, absolutely everybody on Planet Earth is an agnostic in the sense of 'not knowing', or being 'without knowledge' of a Supreme Being who created the universe. No matter how much they may protest to the contrary, there are no exceptions to this. The Pope knows no more about the existence of a god than does a new-born babe.

Stephen Hawking knows no more about the existence of a god than does a piece of rock.

 

Lord Herbert wrote on Aug 28^th, 2016 at 2:28pm:


It is a conundrum. Because atheists, agnostics, and those who “believe” in God, are claiming they know what the other means. Given that concepts like the eternal, the infinite, state of grace, spirit, and enlightenment are all acknowledged as beyond the realm of human language, you have to ask yourself, WTF are they all talking about. I see the jaws flapping, and I hear a lot of noise, but that's about it. Let's not kid ourselves that we can read each others minds, especially on subjects having no words. A lot of people would read what I have written in this thread and not be able to make sense out of it. I would not blame them either. Unlike the cosmic know-alls, I don't expect people to interpret what I say in my terms, just plain English. A person can tell you they believe in God, but that does not mean they see what you see as God.

I often get these: “Yes, but what happens after the end of time.” Or “What created the Universe.” I usually say, “Don't ask me,” but what I am really thinking is, that question is not a complete idea. Making something and ending something are human concepts of phenomena within the Universe. If you wish to redefine the Universe, be my guest. Humans do come up with half-baked ideas all the time. Even science boffins do it, as the idea of multiple Universes shows. If we are going to discover aspects of reality that are outside what we know, they will still be part of the UNIVERSE. UNI in this case means The One, do the math. It cannot be divided into three halves or run parallel to another The One. It is The One, but only if you wish to believe it.

And while I am at it, can anyone explain why Yadda's pious old bastards didn't put any funny bits in ancient scripture? Some comic relief in the Bible would have gone a long way to making it more believable.

Three wise guys walk into a bar,
"Where'd you get the kid, Sister?"
"God gave him to me."

Its not funny anymore, but it was 2,016 years ago.

Yadda wrote on Aug 28^th, 2016 at 3:55pm:


I'm not entirely sure what you mean here, Yadda, but don't let me or anyone else dissuade you from your religious convictions.

For some people religion is an art form to be enjoyed and indulged in as a recreational relief from the tedium of real life, but then for others it's a tonic and a therapy that has real value in filling what might otherwise be a cruel void in ones life.

I would never try to denigrate someone for believing in a kind and merciful god.   

"There are no atheists in fox-holes" ~ and I'm fairly certain if I had been in one of the trenches at Passchendaele where my cousin was killed, I too would have been huddled down in a watery ditch, gibbering to God to save my sorry-arse.

Postmodern Trendoid III wrote on Aug 28^th, 2016 at 7:52am:




And yet your comment about rebellion wasn't ad hominem?

[quote


It is a conundrum. Because atheists, agnostics, and those who “believe” in God, are claiming they know what the other means. Given that concepts like the eternal, the infinite, state of grace, spirit, and enlightenment are all acknowledged as beyond the realm of human language, you have to ask yourself, WTF are they all talking about. I see the jaws flapping, and I hear a lot of noise, but that's about it. Let's not kid ourselves that we can read each others minds, especially on subjects having no words. A lot of people would read what I have written in this thread and not be able to make sense out of it. I would not blame them either. Unlike the cosmic know-alls, I don't expect people to interpret what I say in my terms, just plain English. A person can tell you they believe in God, but that does not mean they see what you see as God.

I often get these: “Yes, but what happens after the end of time.” Or “What created the Universe.” I usually say, “Don't ask me,” but what I am really thinking is, that question is not a complete idea. Making something and ending something are human concepts of phenomena within the Universe. If you wish to redefine the Universe, be my guest. Humans do come up with half-baked ideas all the time. Even science boffins do it, as the idea of multiple Universes shows. If we are going to discover aspects of reality that are outside what we know, they will still be part of the UNIVERSE. UNI in this case means The One, do the math. It cannot be divided into three halves or run parallel to another The One. It is The One, but only if you wish to believe it.

And while I am at it, can anyone explain why Yadda's pious old bastards didn't put any funny bits in ancient scripture? Some comic relief in the Bible would have gone a long way to making it more believable.

Three wise guys walk into a bar,
"Where'd you get the kid, Sister?"
"God gave him to me."

Its not funny anymore, but it was 2,016 years ago.
[/quote]


There's a piece of luck, haven't looked in here for 4 years and find a gem first off!
(Hope I haven't stuffed up that quoting thing, out of practice on this format.)

That post from Issuevoter is the most sensible comment about atheism I've seen in far too long.

I've trawled the Skeptic forums and given up as they're are riddled with people who think they are atheists because they can't define the difference between that and anti-theism.

I was born atheist I think, don't remember ever believing in gods as such, sussed Santa out at around 4 and grew up under the impression that all fairy tales were written solely for their entertainment value and that their characters were fictional. 

I heard about God and Jesus and Cinderella and Santa and that damned Boogeyman, the whole thing!   I had no idea that some were supposed to be 'real' !

Even knew about different religions, but they simply had no place in our family.

We weren't atheists, that thought never crossed our minds to my knowledge, we simply weren't interested in religion.  It wasn't of any concern either way. 

No one went to church on either side of the family except for weddings and funerals so religion played no part in our daily lives.  We didn't NEED religion. 

Oddly enough, none of us ever went to jail, we did charity work, we lived moral lives, and ethics was a highly respected system of rule making. We were nothing out of the ordinary,  the quintessential working family of 1950s suburbia.   We simply didn't need supernatural supervision to live useful and 'good' lives.

We didn't claim to be atheists, most of us probably weren't, the issue of our beliefs simply held no importance to us.  Religion rated about the same gravitas as a subject as the weather.
It was just something that other people got excited about. 
We found it a mildly amusing social thing that people did to be polite or something.  It wasn't life and death, not back then anyway. 

I get longwinded so I'll shorten this up.
To me atheists are simply people who don't need to complicate life with the supernatural.
Those who do have hang-ups with it are anti-theists, or theists depending on their for or against stance.
What most anti-theists seem to overlook is that to go into battle against something they profess not to believe in kind of defeats their purpose, and their argument.

Sure, fight the religion industry and the scammers who run it, by all means.  But fighting with it's victims is a bit harsh.

I have no problem with people who (passively) believe in gods,  or even pixies, if it comforts them then why would I object to that?

The operative word for me in these arguments is "need".  They need to believe in it, and I don't.  Why would I want to take something from them that I don't want??


I think I must have had a very lucky upbringing after hearing the arguments from the many who've been traumatised by crushing insights into the religions they'd built their own personal 'universes' around. 
Having no need of a supernatural hook to hang the wonders of the universe upon has a lot going for it.   'God' seems to have disappointed many, but the universe doesn't give a proverbial either way.  And that's just the way I like it.