Just supposing...........

[floo]

jeremy,
You think I am abusive? Well how about you list some of those abusive posts of mine and we will have a look at them in context. And after that I recommend you go out looking for a spine donor.

Name calling is abusive behavior and that is something some of you godless atheist do around here. Some Christians do that as well and of course the resident witch does it more than anybody else around here.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/education-news/it-starts-with-calling-names-but-can-end-in-despair-and-suicide-6261615.html

Pot and kettle JC, you are one of the worst name callers on this forum at present, since another member appears to have left the stage for the time being.

[Outrider]

Why is a belief in a creator God any more pernicious than a belief in evolution with no purpose or design behind it?

Evolution is a demonstrable phenomenon. The theory of evolution adequately explains the available evidence and has made a wealth of predictions that have been borne out by subsequent investigation.

God, by contrast, is a unevidenced claim.

I think 'pernicious' is a little pejorative, don't get me wrong, but it is a qualitatively different thing to show that evolution is a fact and that the theory of evolution explains it than to claim that gods are real and that we have any clue about what one might want of us.

O.

[Leonard James]

Why is a belief in a creator God any more pernicious than a belief in evolution with no purpose or design behind it?

Evolution is a demonstrable phenomenon. The theory of evolution adequately explains the available evidence and has made a wealth of predictions that have been borne out by subsequent investigation.

God, by contrast, is a unevidenced claim.

I think 'pernicious' is a little pejorative, don't get me wrong, but it is a qualitatively different thing to show that evolution is a fact and that the theory of evolution explains it than to claim that gods are real and that we have any clue about what one might want of us.

O.

Pernicious is the right word for a "god" that offers a gift for believing in it but a threat if you don't.

[Outrider]

Why is a belief in a creator God any more pernicious than a belief in evolution with no purpose or design behind it?

Evolution is a demonstrable phenomenon. The theory of evolution adequately explains the available evidence and has made a wealth of predictions that have been borne out by subsequent investigation.

God, by contrast, is a unevidenced claim.

I think 'pernicious' is a little pejorative, don't get me wrong, but it is a qualitatively different thing to show that evolution is a fact and that the theory of evolution explains it than to claim that gods are real and that we have any clue about what one might want of us.

O.

Pernicious is the right word for a "god" that offers a gift for believing in it but a threat if you don't.

Not all depictions of the Christian god are like that, though, Len, and if you lump all of them together you end up coming across like you're building straw-man arguments. You aren't, exactly, but you're not necessarily addressing the argument of the people you're talking to, either.

O.

[floo]

Why is a belief in a creator God any more pernicious than a belief in evolution with no purpose or design behind it?

Evolution is a demonstrable phenomenon. The theory of evolution adequately explains the available evidence and has made a wealth of predictions that have been borne out by subsequent investigation.

God, by contrast, is a unevidenced claim.

I think 'pernicious' is a little pejorative, don't get me wrong, but it is a qualitatively different thing to show that evolution is a fact and that the theory of evolution explains it than to claim that gods are real and that we have any clue about what one might want of us.

O.

Pernicious is the right word for a "god" that offers a gift for believing in it but a threat if you don't.

Too true!

[Leonard James]

Not all depictions of the Christian god are like that, though, Len, and if you lump all of them together you end up coming across like you're building straw-man arguments. You aren't, exactly, but you're not necessarily addressing the argument of the people you're talking to, either.

O.

If there are Christians who believe that their "God" treats everybody the same after earthly death, I was unaware of them, and apologise to them.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hope,

Why is a belief in a creator God any more pernicious than a belief in evolution with no purpose or design behind it?

For two reasons.

First, evolution can no more be "pernicious" than gravity can be pernicious. It's a natural process that occurs without the need for it to be directed towards a pre-determined outcome.

Second, because if as you suggest there really is a god at the wheel then presumably he's responsible for fluffy kittens alright, but also for the everyday occurrences of countless creatures torn apart by predators, ridden with painful diseases, dying slow and agonising deaths from starvation, excess cold or heat etc. A god who for example steered evolution towards the African worm Loa loa that bores through the human eye really would be pernicious don't you think?   

[Shaker]

Not all depictions of the Christian god are like that, though, Len, and if you lump all of them together you end up coming across like you're building straw-man arguments. You aren't, exactly, but you're not necessarily addressing the argument of the people you're talking to, either.

O.

If there are Christians who believe that their "God" treats everybody the same after earthly death, I was unaware of them, and apologise to them.

Hope appears to be one of them. He defends the view that the Christian version of the afterlife isn't better than earthly life, just "different." No paradise; no "gone to a better place"; according to him it's just "different."

[ippy]

Just catching up with the general flow of this thread and just thought I would add, why would there be any need to feel insulted by any one that cares or believes in unsupportd ideas such as  paganism, christian or any of the other religious beliefs, (however you might wish to title them).

ippy

[Rhiannon]

Not all depictions of the Christian god are like that, though, Len, and if you lump all of them together you end up coming across like you're building straw-man arguments. You aren't, exactly, but you're not necessarily addressing the argument of the people you're talking to, either.

O.

If there are Christians who believe that their "God" treats everybody the same after earthly death, I was unaware of them, and apologise to them.

I was one such, and so is my former parish priest. We were/are universalists which means a belief that God is so loving and merciful that all will be saved. Most universalists still believe in a process of judgement in which the person has to face up to any evil they have done to others.

[Rhiannon]

Just catching up with the general flow of this thread and just thought I would add, why would there be any need to feel insulted by any one that cares or believes in unsupportd ideas such as  paganism, christian or any of the other religious beliefs, (however you might wish to title them).

ippy

So because a person has a faith nothing else they might know or understand is of consequence?

[ippy]

Just catching up with the general flow of this thread and just thought I would add, why would there be any need to feel insulted by any one that cares or believes in unsupportd ideas such as  paganism, christian or any of the other religious beliefs, (however you might wish to title them).

ippy

So because a person has a faith nothing else they might know or understand is of consequence?

If an insult is tended within the area of an unsupported idea whatever that idea might be, I wouldn't see it as an insult and I don't.

ippy

[Leonard James]

Hope appears to be one of them. He defends the view that the Christian version of the afterlife isn't better than earthly life, just "different." No paradise; no "gone to a better place"; according to him it's just "different."

But Hope has never given me the impression that he thinks everybody gets to enjoy this "afterlife", whether they believe in his god, other gods, or none at all. 

[Hope]

But Hope has never given me the impression that he thinks everybody gets to enjoy this "afterlife", whether they believe in his god, other gods, or none at all. 

But Hope has always made it clear that he believes that everyone experiences the afterlife; in what manner, depends on the choices that we make during our life here on earth.

[Leonard James]

But Hope has never given me the impression that he thinks everybody gets to enjoy this "afterlife", whether they believe in his god, other gods, or none at all. 

But Hope has always made it clear that he believes that everyone experiences the afterlife; in what manner, depends on the choices that we make during our life here on earth.

Ah so that's what I said in the first place. So their choices made here on earth DO affect the 'quality' of the afterlife. Some get a better one than others, is that it?

[Hope]

Ah so that's what I said in the first place. So their choices made here on earth DO affect the 'quality' of the afterlife. Some get a better one than others, is that it?

It depends on what your choice is, ahead of one's life here on earth.  I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative  Otherwise, there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy at large.

[Outrider]

It depends on what your choice is, ahead of one's life here on earth.  I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative  Otherwise, there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy at large.

I don't see hypocrisy. I can understand the concept of heaven, the idea of a closeness to a god, without being entirely clear on exactly what that god is supposed to be. I can understand the idea that heaven is supposed to be a perfect afterlife for my spirit to reside in - that might not be your particular take on the idea, but it's the concept that most clearly comes through to me from Christianity.

I don't think there's enough evidence to support the claims that those ideas are real, but equally I don't think there's anything solid to disprove them.

I'm an atheist, but I don't see any hypocrisy in saying that if heaven's real I'd like to be there.

O.

[Leonard James]

It depends on what your choice is, ahead of one's life here on earth.  I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative

For the umpteenth time, Hope, nobody can CHOOSE to believe in "God" if their reason decides the evidence for it is unconvincing ... any more than you can choose NOT to believe it.

Otherwise, there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy at large.

No way! The hypocrisy is saying that a god can punish you for choosing not believing in it, when it is not a matter of choice!

[OH MY WORLD!]

Floo,
Shame on you! I didn't expect you to be so dishonest. Now produce my past posts where I have targeted somebody with my name calling. You can't do it, can you. I can't recall personally attacking somebody with name calling. You say I am one of the worst. You need to show me because right now, I believe you are not the honest person I thought you were. I don't go for friends lying about me, that's something I hold personally and unfortunately forever.

[Rhiannon]

But Hope has never given me the impression that he thinks everybody gets to enjoy this "afterlife", whether they believe in his god, other gods, or none at all. 

But Hope has always made it clear that he believes that everyone experiences the afterlife; in what manner, depends on the choices that we make during our life here on earth.

Ah so that's what I said in the first place. So their choices made here on earth DO affect the 'quality' of the afterlife. Some get a better one than others, is that it?

Only some Christians believe this, Len - see my post on universalism above. FWIW most Christians I know think it matters much more how you live your life than what you believe.

[floo]

Floo,
Shame on you! I didn't expect you to be so dishonest. Now produce my past posts where I have targeted somebody with my name calling. You can't do it, can you. I can't recall personally attacking somebody with name calling. You say I am one of the worst. You need to show me because right now, I believe you are not the honest person I thought you were. I don't go for friends lying about me, that's something I hold personally and unfortunately forever.

Go back and read your posts they aren't very pleasant.  Witch and godless atheists  are examples of name calling, imo!

[ippy]

Ah so that's what I said in the first place. So their choices made here on earth DO affect the 'quality' of the afterlife. Some get a better one than others, is that it?

It depends on what your choice is, ahead of one's life here on earth.  I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative  Otherwise, there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy at large.

So a lot of it depends on how many brownie points we acquire while we're alive and hear on earth?

ippy

[jakswan]

It depends on what your choice is, ahead of one's life here on earth.  I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative  Otherwise, there seems to be a sense of hypocrisy at large.

I don't accept the existence of a god due to lack of evidence.

Depends what this 'god' is like, if its the 'god' which burns people forever I'd like to chin the cunt, if its nicer then eternal life with it might be something I'd opt for.

[Shaker]

I assume that those who choose not to accept the existence of God whilst here on earth would not regard eternal life with that God as being 'better' than any alternative.

There are actually two assumptions at work here, the other one being that people can choose what they believe, which I know is absolutely and definitely not true in my case.

Why on earth do you lot keep on parrotting this twaddle when surely you must have been told innumerable times that it's plainly false?

[Leonard James]

There are actually two assumptions at work here, the other one being that people can choose what they believe, which I know is absolutely and definitely not true in my case.

Why on earth do you lot keep on parroting this twaddle when surely you must have been told innumerable times that it's plainly false?

A truth they will not accept because it brings down their whole house of cards.