Atheism

[maggiebee]

The belief that there was nothing and nothing happened to nothing and then nothing magically exploded for no reason, creating everything and then a bunch of everything magically rearranged itself for no reason whatsoever into self-replicating bits which then turned into dinosaurs.

Makes perfect sense.

[joko]

if you met a human being that displayed many of the behaviours and attitudes demonstrated by the various 'gods' available, you would intensely dislike him. you would not be his friend or employer etc and he would most likely end up being imprisoned.

arrogance, vengeance, anger, jealousy, spite, bullying, megalomania, condescending, barbaric, quick tempered, sexist, irrational, over-reactionary, contradictory, hypocritical, predjudiced, judgemental, murderous, demanding, cruel, self absorbed, self centred - even huffy ... the list goes on.

hardly someone deserving of the adulation of millions of people...

[maggiebee]

Read once that you should never argue about religion or politics. Sometimes we just have to agree to differ and I respect the views expressed on here. That being said, please respect my view that I believe in God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is not my crutch, he walks beside me.

[jomifl]

Maggiebee, The problem that atheists have with believers is that as well as believers not having any evidence for the existence of god they are unable to explain their 'relationship' with god. You said that god 'walks beside' you but apart from being a poetical phrase it says nothing other than that you believe in god. Have I missed something? do you see god walking beside you or is it an empty phrase or cliché?

[vetuste_ennemi]

I'll take that as a no, than.

[vetuste_ennemi]

I was addressing Lightbulb.

[naomi24]

Maggie, you say you strive for knowledge, but that can't be true because when ideas contrary to your own present themselves, it appears you make no effort to seriously consider them and even less to discuss them - you simply close your eyes and back away. Whilst the non-believers here have gone to some lengths to tell you why they think you are mistaken, you haven't reciprocated, you have asked no questions, you have offered no explanation and no counter-argument, and hence, your original criticism of atheism and of evolution hasn't even achieved an interesting debate. Even if other people disagree with me, I firmly believe in standing up for what I think is right, and I am happy to explain my reasons for thinking as I do - and to change my mind if my opponent convinces me he is right - and I admire those who have the courage to do the same - but sadly it seems the religious here don't possess that ability because they are always reluctant to enter into any discussion regarding the more unsavoury aspects of their faith. The truth blurs their rose-coloured glasses, and so they consistently deny it. What a pity. For a moment there I thought we had a meaty discussion in the offing - but it seems not.

[jomifl]

V-E :-)

[modeller]

maggiebee You have stood your ground or as you know .Timothy 1:18 puts it :
You have fought the good fight, but if you really want to get your message across you need to take up the challenges. It's no good just reaffirming your faith, that's pointless we know that from your first post. You have made many general remarks but have not ,so far ,backed any of them up with specific evidence of your God's existence . I'm sure many atheists would love to test out any experiment from the thousands you claim to know , to prove the existence of God. Why not accept the challenge and give us just ONE we can repeat as often as we wish to prove you are right.
That's what we do in science . In effect we try to prove ourselves wrong. When we come up with a theory we publish it and thousands of scientist put it to the test to see if it stands up and only then is it accepted as being the most likely . Even then scientists are willing to re-examine and up-date any theory in the light of new discoveries. I wish you luck but you shouldn't need it, if God is as you say is walking beside you. Just ask him for ONE experiment that we can put to the test. Now you must admit that's not much to ask .

[joko]

maggiebee - you ask people to respect your views and accept that you are entitled to have them ... yet you were the one who started with the insulting comments... this whole thread began with you posting a misguided, supercillious and sneering comment against atheists... and now because your extremely weak 'argument', such as it was, has been ripped to shreds and you cannot defend it with anything worthy of note you retreat into your safe little blinkered world and ask people to accept your beliefs...

another one who can dish it out but cannot take it...

[maggiebee]

Jojo, you seem to have come rather late to the debate. If you had bothered to read through the various comments you would have seen that I did not in fact post "a misguided, supercillious and sneering comment against atheists... " What I did was share an article that appeared in a local church magazine. At no point have I agreed or disagreed with this article, it was up for debate.

[LazyGun]

@Maggie - that last statement is rather disingenous isnt it? You post a screed that thinks it is cleverly attacking atheism. You post that as it is - no qualification, no additional commentary from you.

So we have to take said comments at face value and assume that they are represenative of what you think don't we? You cannot then disassociate yourself from the post by saying "at no point did i agree or disagree with the statement" - That's sophism worthy of the lowest of the low- MP's :)

You have posted here often Maggie, your answers regularly reaffirming your faith. It is no stretch for those of us who post here regularly to make the assumption that you made the original post because you agreed with its content.

[wildwood]

Maggiebee, I think you're quite courageous to take on the religious stance against the scientifically supported hypothesis on creation of the Universe. If your faith makes you happy then that if fine with me, even if in my opinion it is misguided.

[joko]

i have read all the comments and my 'lateness' is irrelevant.

i refer only to your op. that tells me all i need to know about you and your foolish comments.

as for your ridiculous denial, i echo what lazy gun said...

[lightbulb247]

lol jom, maybe i will, but later on. haha.

as i have said thats just my opinion. If you dont agree with it fine. What am i saying, of course you dont agree with it.

[keyplus90]

Naomi /////Keyplus. What 'reason' do you have to believe in something for which there is no evidence?/////

I have no evidence that my wife loves me but I believe she does. I am sure you have no evidence that your husband loves you either. Or if you do then what it is you call an evidence?

[jomifl]

Keyplus, why do you believe your wife loves you, do you believe that all women love you?

[naomi24]

Keyplus, I'm very sorry to hear you have no evidence that your wife loves you - that's sad - but we're not talking about your wife - we're talking about God - something that, unlike your wife, has provided no evidence whatsoever of its existence.

[keyplus90]

Did I expect a straight answer? Yes.

Did I know that straight answer will never come? Yes.

Is it known as "reasoning" according to the atheistic dictionary? Yes of course it does and aka arrogance.

[naomi24]

Keyplus, what are you talking about? That was a straight answer to a silly analogy. It's reasonable to believe your wife exists because you have evidence to confirm it - but there's nothing reasonable in believing God exists because you have no evidence for that whatsoever. Whether or not your wife loves you is a different matter entirely and no one's business but your own.

[jomifl]

Keyplus, why did you expect a straight answer when you 'knew' you wouldn't get one?