Searching for GOD...

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rose,

Disbelief usually consists of insulting the believer.

Words used such as, liar, delusional, mad, insane, common words used by Alan's detractors, and I think it is noteworthy that not once did Alan use these words against anyone.

Yes a round of applause for our Alan not for furthering the cause of Christianity but for his politeness, well done Alan, you are too Christianity what a wasps nest is to a picnic but you are a nice guy.

Gonnagle.

[floo]

Dear Rose,

Words used such as, liar, delusional, mad, insane, common words used by Alan's detractors, and I think it is noteworthy that not once did Alan use these words against anyone.

Yes a round of applause for our Alan not for furthering the cause of Christianity but for his politeness, well done Alan, you are too Christianity what a wasps nest is to a picnic but you are a nice guy.

Gonnagle.

I agree that Alan doesn't lose it with his detractors, and that is to his credit. However, it is hard not to respond when he states as fact something for which he hasn't any evidence, and is simply not credible.

[Leonard James]

I agree that Alan doesn't lose it with his detractors, and that is to his credit. However, it is hard not to respond when he states as fact something for which he hasn't any evidence, and is simply not credible.

Unfortunately, Roses, the "evidence" IS credible to him.

[SusanDoris]

But there is rudeness in AB's never hearing what those with rational views say. He simply puts up a barrier between sensible and logical questions and his own inflexible, dogmatic and, more importantly, totally un-evidenced religious views. he asserts and states but does not show any inclination to find even a compromise.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Susan,

But there is rudeness in AB's never hearing what those with rational views say. He simply puts up a barrier between sensible and logical questions and his own inflexible, dogmatic and, more importantly, totally un-evidenced religious views. he asserts and states but does not show any inclination to find even a compromise.

Oh aye! I was forgetting that bit, I could practically see the veins bulge in a Blue or Wigs post, Wigs should watch that, the man's no longer a spring chicken

Gonnagle.

[Leonard James]

Dear Susan,

Oh aye! I was forgetting that bit, I could practically see the veins bulge in a Blue or Wigs post, Wigs should watch that, the man's no longer a spring chicken

Gonnagle.

I can only repeat that for Alan, his belief is NOT without evidence.

[wigginhall]

Dear Susan,

Oh aye! I was forgetting that bit, I could practically see the veins bulge in a Blue or Wigs post, Wigs should watch that, the man's no longer a spring chicken

Gonnagle.

By gum, you are right, Gonners.  Gone are the days when I could run down the top of the cars in Kilburn High Rd, drink 8 pints of Guinness and kiss all the bar-maids.  And have time to discuss Wittgenstein.  Where has it all gone, Gonn?

[Shaker]

Disbelief is rarely expressed with reasoned logical argument

I don't think you've been paying attention.

[Shaker]

Disbelief, yes.

On the internet people don't tend to put forward logical and reasoned responses.


Disbelief usually consists of insulting the believer.

Is that because it's actually an insult, or merely because challenge to baseless but tenaciously held beliefs is perceived as such? Religious beliefs have had an invisible noli me tangere aura around them for a long time, such that it has long been considered at best bad form and at worst downright offensive merely to question or challenge them ... so offensive to some that murder is deemed to be the only appropriate recompense. (Remember The Satanic Verses?). That attitude is disappearing in the West, but it's a long time in going and there's still a substantial remnant of it to the effect that the chronically hypersensitive can still claim "offence" and "hurt feelings" when their religious beliefs are challenged in a way which is pretty well entirely absent with regard to political ideals, for example.

The American blogger Greta Christina wrote a good post about exactly this some time ago:

There is nothing about saying, "I am queer," that implies, "You are mistaken to be straight." But there is something about saying, "I am an atheist," that implies, "You are mistaken to believe in God." Coming out as queer is a subjective statement about what is true for you personally. Coming out as atheist is an assertion about what you think is objectively true about the external world. When we come out as atheists, we're not just saying what's true for us. We're saying what we think is true in the world. And by implication, we're saying that people who disagree with us are wrong. Even if we're not actively trying to persuade people out of religion - heck, even if we don't care whether people believe in religion - we're still saying that we think religion is wrong.

We need to cop to that.

We need to acknowledge that, for atheists, coming out is different than it is for queers. We need to acknowledge that, for atheists, even the gentlest, least-confrontational, "Don't believe in God? You are not alone" forms of coming out are, in fact, still confrontational. Not just because people don't want to hear it; not just because the conventional etiquette demands that we not say it. Because it is. Because we're telling people that they're wrong.

I think we need to accept that. And I think we need to take responsibility for it.

There are a lot of different ways for us to say it. We can say it in gentle, diplomatic, "You can be good without God" ways. We can say it in snarky, in-your-face, "You know it's a myth" ways. We can say it in bald, statement-of-fact, "There's probably no God" ways. There is room for both confrontationalism and diplomacy in this movement, and in fact the movement is stronger with both methods than it would be with just one or the other.

But I think we need to accept that this is always going to be a difficult topic. I think we need to accept that being honest about who we are and what we think is always going to ruffle some feathers. I think we need to accept that ruffling feathers is not the worst thing human beings can do to one another. It's not even in the Top Ten. And I think we need to accept that being out as atheists, and maintaining our integrity as out atheists, may always be seen - and feel - a little bit churlish.

Because it is.

That's just going to have to be okay with us.

http://goo.gl/g2jKHW

[Gonnagle]

Dear Wigs,

Sounds like it is all pissed up against a wall on Kilburn High Rd, eight pints of Guiness!! that's quaffing old chum, stuff of leg-ends, Viking Gods Quaff, usually in a pub called Valhalla, we don't have any Valhalla pubs anymore, I blame Witherspoons, godless pubs.

Gonnagle.

[ekim]

I just need a break.
I find it rewarding, but mentally exhausting.
I feel that I have learnt a lot from the inspired answers God has given me (but I suspect some of you will not agree on the source of the inspiration).

As Arnie would say,

I'll be back!

Just remember the beginning of the 4th Gospel, Alan, .... In the beginning was the Emergent Property and the Emergent Property was with God and the Emergent Property was God.  .... and you won't go wrong. 

[bluehillside Retd.]

Gonners,

Words used such as, liar, delusional, mad, insane, common words used by Alan's detractors, and I think it is noteworthy that not once did Alan use these words against anyone.

And nor did I use them against Alan - though I could happily have throttled him sometimes for his obduracy and obtuseness.

Yes a round of applause for our Alan not for furthering the cause of Christianity but for his politeness, well done Alan, you are too Christianity what a wasps nest is to a picnic but you are a nice guy.

I'm not so sure about that - I'm sure he thinks of himself as nice guy, but I find his behaviour to be a sort of passive-aggressive "I have no interest in anything you say so I'll just ignore it. I'm right and you're wrong and that's all there is to it..." approach that's very off-putting.

It also by the way makes him a lousy advocate for his "mission", at least when he tries it on a more thinking audience.     

[Leonard James]

But is something which is all in the mind evidence?

I think Alan considers the "evidence" of the Bible as stronger than the arguments against it.

[ippy]

Dear Rose,

Words used such as, liar, delusional, mad, insane, common words used by Alan's detractors, and I think it is noteworthy that not once did Alan use these words against anyone.

Yes a round of applause for our Alan not for furthering the cause of Christianity but for his politeness, well done Alan, you are too Christianity what a wasps nest is to a picnic but you are a nice guy.

Gonnagle.

Delusional isn't an insult, it's just a statement of fact, unless, of course he can prove otherwise and if he were to prove that he isn't delusional, after I had read and listened to the media going absolutely potty on all outlets, I hope I would be amongst the first to make my apologies.

Gonners realistically can you see him coming up with the proof any time soon, no, well delusional.

ippy   

[ippy]

No ippy, you are wrong.

He cannot tell the difference between a pillar box red sock and a obvious laurel green one.

It's not a matter of degrees.

It's not rubbish, he is just an extreme example and according to an optician quite possible.

I've had chance to discuss it, as my son has inherited a more normal and not so extreme version.

My father can see blues.

But he cannot distinguish between red and green at all. ( just varying shades of grey)

My son is more subtle and fails the colour blindness tests.

My father is extreme and unusual. He has often worn one red sock and one green sock and that's why he would ask ( while saying of course he knew, stubborn he is)

The trouble with you ippy, is you are inclined to dismiss everything you have no experience of. Which doesn't make me value your judgements on religion.

No optician ever told me I was talking rubbish when I took my son for eye tests and they asked if colour blindness ran in the family.

I guess, unlike you, they knew what they were talking about.

My father is actually that extremely colour blind. It's rare, but not unheard of.



My Mother and I have lived with it for years.

Apart from putting, "no ippy you're wrong", in your post to me, you have said much the same as I did in that former post of mine, the only difference is you have said much the same as I did using your own words.   

What is it? I get the impression that you don't like to think someone else other than you and yours is completely au fey with how colour blindness works.

I did actually say complete colour blindness is rare and used the word hues instead of shades, you seemed to have missed most of the things I mentioned?

Apart from my slight blue green blindness, no it's not in my family but that hasn't stopped me reading about how we receive and understand colour, I have been a keen photographer for a long time and it's a good thing to know as much as possible about light and how it works in general and I doubt if I'm the only photographer that has taken the bother to learn about how colour works.

I'm sorry that you have this problem in your family but that doesn't make you the only people that know anything about colour blindness.

ippy   

[Shaker]

I just need a break.
I find it rewarding, but mentally exhausting.
I feel that I have learnt a lot from the inspired answers God has given me (but I suspect some of you will not agree on the source of the inspiration).

As Arnie would say,

I'll be back!

That's great, and I hope you enjoy the rest, but do you actually believe that you'll have more success - well, not more success; any success at all - if only you leave it for a bit and come back to try again? Really?

I would remind you that a popular phrase often attributed to Albert Einstein (almost certainly erroneously, since you can also find it attributed to Mark Twain and even Benjamin Franklin) is that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Given the valedictory tone of that last post, Alan, are we to take it that you're signing off and moving on?

Given that Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism except Sriram
have departed this board and evidently the level, interesting portion of atheism too considering what the fates have left us with......would the departure of anyone else be anything special?

[Shaker]

Given that Judaism, Islam, Buddhism and Hinduism except Sriram have departed this board

Gabriella is Muslim.

and evidently the level, interesting portion of atheism too considering what the fates have left us with......would the departure of anyone else be anything special?

Yes. There are some stonkingly good posters here, highly intelligent folk who think clearly and write beautifully; the forum would be vastly the poorer if they were to leave.

[Rhiannon]

The implication that the atheists drive out the theists is a rather tedious one.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The implication that the atheists drive out the theists is a rather tedious one.

No, I've said they have driven away the level,interesting atheists as well........if you had bothered to read what I said.

[Gordon]

No, I've said they have driven away the level,interesting atheists as well........if you had bothered to read what I said.

Who?

[Rhiannon]

No, I've said they have driven away the level,interesting atheists as well........if you had bothered to read what I said.

No, what I said does not contradict that. You are still blaming atheists for driving out theists.

[Rhiannon]

Who?

Well, yes. As Shaker has said there are some extremely able and intelligent posters among the atheists here - and generally decent people to boot.

[Gonnagle]

Dear Rose and ippy,

I thought you might be interested in the little experiment in this programme on how the eye works, in reference to your discussion regarding colour blindness, for me, I am red and green colour blind, the image that remained was in black and white not red, white and blue.

The experiment is exactly 20 minutes into the programme, you also might be amused by the experiment 33 minutes into the programme, I was bloody amazed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kptcr/blink-a-horizon-guide-to-the-senses

Gonnagle.

[BeRational]

Dear Rose and ippy,

I thought you might be interested in the little experiment in this programme on how the eye works, in reference to your discussion regarding colour blindness, for me, I am red and green colour blind, the image that remained was in black and white not red, white and blue.

The experiment is exactly 20 minutes into the programme, you also might be amused by the experiment 33 minutes into the programme, I was bloody amazed

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01kptcr/blink-a-horizon-guide-to-the-senses

Gonnagle.

Interestingly I am also red green colour blind, but the image was in the proper colour