If Planes Are Safe Then Why Do...
ChatterBank5 mins ago
What Do The Faithful Have That The Rest Of Us Don’T?
375 Answers
With no explanation, Goodlife is constantly telling the ‘poor’ atheists here that they have nothing – and today Khandro said exactly the same. I'm curious. Just what is it that these chaps think they have that the rest of us lack?
Answers
Grasscarp, your patent inability to offer anything pertinent to any discussion here isn’t a problem to me. It’s what I’ve come to expect from you.
Khandro, I disagree with Pixie. Since it fails to address the fundamental issues under discussion here, yours is not a good post. It’s yet another that attacks the messenger rather than the message. Atheists don’t claim divinity, and I think most of us have said ‘there is probably no God’, but why, when religion creates such misery in the world, should we, as human beings, meekly restrict our opinions to that simply because you and your cohorts baulk at criticism of a philosophy that controls, among other things, man’s precious intellect? You have to become accustomed to the fact – and it is a fact – that religion can no longer demand and receive the respect it once did – and that only achieved through the imposition of fear – so not really respect at all. Unlike most of the non-believers here who criticise the doctrine that religion promotes, and its adverse effects upon humanity and upon this world, you continually attack the messenger. Your use of such terms as ‘extremely vociferous’ emanates from a victim mentality floundering in the face of rationality, and is designed to portray anyone who disagrees with you in the worst possible light – nothing more.
//I think atheists should be asking themselves, what is it that we have? the answer might point to a rather bleak outlook, and an unsatisfactoriness in their existence.//
Another unqualified statement – just like the accusation that non-believers are ‘poor’. I realise that this is a long shot, but is there any chance of you explaining either – or better still, both?
Goodlife, another long shot, but can you tell me how, when reading your bible, you separate the truth from the symbolic? I know I’ve asked you before, but you’ve never told me.
Khandro, I disagree with Pixie. Since it fails to address the fundamental issues under discussion here, yours is not a good post. It’s yet another that attacks the messenger rather than the message. Atheists don’t claim divinity, and I think most of us have said ‘there is probably no God’, but why, when religion creates such misery in the world, should we, as human beings, meekly restrict our opinions to that simply because you and your cohorts baulk at criticism of a philosophy that controls, among other things, man’s precious intellect? You have to become accustomed to the fact – and it is a fact – that religion can no longer demand and receive the respect it once did – and that only achieved through the imposition of fear – so not really respect at all. Unlike most of the non-believers here who criticise the doctrine that religion promotes, and its adverse effects upon humanity and upon this world, you continually attack the messenger. Your use of such terms as ‘extremely vociferous’ emanates from a victim mentality floundering in the face of rationality, and is designed to portray anyone who disagrees with you in the worst possible light – nothing more.
//I think atheists should be asking themselves, what is it that we have? the answer might point to a rather bleak outlook, and an unsatisfactoriness in their existence.//
Another unqualified statement – just like the accusation that non-believers are ‘poor’. I realise that this is a long shot, but is there any chance of you explaining either – or better still, both?
Goodlife, another long shot, but can you tell me how, when reading your bible, you separate the truth from the symbolic? I know I’ve asked you before, but you’ve never told me.
n; //unsatisfactoriness in their existence//and;
//Another unqualified statement – just like the accusation that non-believers are ‘poor’. I realise that this is a long shot, but is there any chance of you explaining either – or better still, both? //
1) The Sanskrit word 'Duhkha' is usually translated in English Buddhist texts as 'suffering' though many scholars feel it is too strong a word and some have suggested 'unsatisfactoriness' is better though perhaps too weak, it is an attempt to describe a condition of discontent, and a feeling of a lack of meaning to existence.
2) I believe anyone lacking a spiritual aspect to their existence are the poorer for it.
Here I stand, I can do no other, God help me. Amen. (Martin Luther)
//Another unqualified statement – just like the accusation that non-believers are ‘poor’. I realise that this is a long shot, but is there any chance of you explaining either – or better still, both? //
1) The Sanskrit word 'Duhkha' is usually translated in English Buddhist texts as 'suffering' though many scholars feel it is too strong a word and some have suggested 'unsatisfactoriness' is better though perhaps too weak, it is an attempt to describe a condition of discontent, and a feeling of a lack of meaning to existence.
2) I believe anyone lacking a spiritual aspect to their existence are the poorer for it.
Here I stand, I can do no other, God help me. Amen. (Martin Luther)
Grasscarp, may I suggest you read your posts again?
Khandro, //I believe anyone lacking a spiritual aspect to their existence are the poorer for it.//
Why?
(Incidentally, non-believers don’t necessarily lack a spiritual aspect to their existence and spirituality does not necessarily equate to a belief in God. I’m surprised you’re not aware of that).
Khandro, //I believe anyone lacking a spiritual aspect to their existence are the poorer for it.//
Why?
(Incidentally, non-believers don’t necessarily lack a spiritual aspect to their existence and spirituality does not necessarily equate to a belief in God. I’m surprised you’re not aware of that).
On the contrary grasscarp I am more then content with my life without religion.We are just interested in why the religious think we must have religion to complete our happiness. I have a couple of religious friends who once said to me "you only think you're happy". I thought that a strange statement, it suggested I couldn't possibly be happy without religion. They don't seem to be very happy in spite of being religious, even that is contentious in their lives as they go to different churches.
Good post Vulcan. I dont personally worry what people do with their lives. Each of us follow such different paths and end up with or without religion based on what has happened to us. Maybe some people are so happy with their religion that they want to pass it on to others?
Naomi - I didnt describe you as poor so I cannot meet your demands.
Naomi - I didnt describe you as poor so I cannot meet your demands.
// Cant help wondering why anybody happy with their full and satisfying life as an atheist is trying to get followers of religion to describe to them what it is they are missing. Maybe you are not so content. //
It's just that we're over on the other table eating a hearty and nutritious meal, and we're fascinated to understand what it is you think is so wonderful about those plastic grapes you're chomping on.
It's just that we're over on the other table eating a hearty and nutritious meal, and we're fascinated to understand what it is you think is so wonderful about those plastic grapes you're chomping on.
