Jesus died, not such a big deal!

[Étienne d'Angleterre]

And nor is much of what we do and think a matter of choice, Len.  There are many things that we have to accept without recourse to reason.

So do you accept the existence of God without recourse to reason? If you don't why do we?

[ippy]

And that is why the cartoon is so poor.  If anything, its to save us from what we will do to ourselves if we don't believe in Him.  OK, if you don't believe that humanity is a pretty nasty piece of work, happily destroying each other and the world in which it lives, then you don't see the need for humanity to be saved from itself.  Those of us who see events unfolding on the news that illustrate man's inhumanity to man believe differently.

Regarding what God will do to us if we don't believe in Him - the Bible makes that clear: he'll leave us to the consequences of our own choices.  In fact, he doesn't actually need to do anything.  It is we who condemn ourselves to whatever our future holds.

This stuff of yours is all very well and good luck if that's what you have chosen to believe.

As for your glass half full or half empty, good and bad world, I notice the "live your life by religious rules lot" are queuing up to come up to live in our world where religion is going tats at a considerable rate of knots, because we are more into live and let live, all largely without religion of any kind being involved.

Having said that I would find not just your particular religious lot but all of them a lot more bearable if they were to get out of the lives of all of the very young children, teach the very young children how to think for themselves first and perhaps there might some time left for your or anyone else to promote your chosen dogma, after that.

Look at that Muslim in Glasgow killed for what, bloody stupid religious twisted reasoning; some of which would come to an end if we stop teaching religion to the very young.

ippy 

[ippy]

The cartoon that Shaker put up recently answers that. To save us from what he will do if we don't believe in him! 

Haven't seen that one Len, any chance of a link? Ta in advance.

ippy

[Shaker]

Rationalising fear is at the heart of many therapies including CBT. It's good for us.

Not coincidentally CBT was precisely and exactly what I had in mind when I wrote my post.

[Shaker]

It might be pure assertion, but then you can't prove that it isn't also truth (don't forget that assertion and truth aren't necessarily exclusive).

Bingo! Today's first negative proof fallacy.

[Shaker]

Oh dear.. there is a name for that logical blunder.

 ::)I wonder what it is.

Heh 

It's one very, very familiar indeed to us all when Hope's around, Stephen

[Leonard James]

Haven't seen that one Len, any chance of a link? Ta in advance.

ippy

I don't have it, but Shakes does.

[Shaker]

There you go ippy: https://goo.gl/XkXBLP

[bluehillside Retd.]

Hopester,

It might be pure assertion, but then you can't prove that it isn't also truth (don't forget that assertion and truth aren't necessarily exclusive).

Wow! Three weeks locked out of this mb only to return to find you're still peddling the negative proof fallacy. I think perhaps that it's time to reward you for your dogged persistence in the face of the such a crushing logical error: a small commemorative teapot inscribed "B. Russell" is on its way to you as we speak...enjoy!

[Shaker]

As well as the teapot perhaps we could club together and buy him this: http://goo.gl/ktySAK

[ippy]

Hopester,

Wow! Three weeks locked out of this mb only to return to find you're still peddling the negative proof fallacy. I think perhaps that it's time to reward you for your dogged persistence in the face of the such a crushing logical error: a small commemorative teapot inscribed "B. Russell" is on its way to you as we speak...enjoy!

We all know it's your keepers are on respite time at the mo, all that locked out rubbish.

ippy

[ippy]

There you go ippy: https://goo.gl/XkXBLP

Cheers Shakes, like it, bit deep innit.

ippy

[Gonnagle]

Dear ippy,

That is the problem, which pill you take before you enter the forum, the red pill or the blue pill.

Gonnagle.

[ippy]

Dear ippy,

That is the problem, which pill you take before you enter the forum, the red pill or the blue pill.

Gonnagle.

Which ever one my keepers give me Gonners, before they let me out of my jacket, the one that only fastens at the back.

ippy

[Dicky Underpants]

Dear ippy,

That is the problem, which pill you take before you enter the forum, the red pill or the blue pill.

Gonnagle.

If you're using a laptop, it would be unwise to take the blue bill - you might not be able to keep your computer steady on your thighs.

[ippy]

If you're using a laptop, it would be unwise to take the blue bill - you might not be able to keep your computer steady on your thighs.

Yes a friend of mine did tell me about those, a close friend.

ippy




 

[jeremyp]

OK, if you don't believe that humanity is a pretty nasty piece of work, happily destroying each other

Who do you know that happily destroys other people? I don't know anybody like that.

you don't see the need for humanity to be saved from itself.

The irony of a system in which the only way to save humans from destroying each other is to destroy Jesus seems to be lost on you.

[jeremyp]

If you fear or worry about something, do you think rationally about why the fear of worry exists?

Yes of course. You should try it sometime.

[Leonard James]

If you're using a laptop, it would be unwise to take the blue bill - you might not be able to keep your computer steady on your thighs.

Unless you are female, of course! 

[Brownie]

Why, because women are better at multitasking?

[Leonard James]

Why, because women are better at multitasking?

That's by far the sweeter interpretation. 

[floo]

My husband is terrible at multi-tasking, on the rare occasions he was expected to look after the kids as infants, I would come home to find he had done nothing else like wash up or other chores. He said he couldn't possibly be expected to do chores as well, as looking after the kids was a full time job, YE GODS!

[Hope]

I also note you did not answer the second part of my post about what the consequences are of unbelief, or indeed the issue of how a world created by an omniscient, omnipotent god could be any other way.

We've done that particular topic to death over the months Stephen, but I did touch on it in Reply #50 on: March 29, 2016, 10:53:37 AM.  Your response "What a nasty threat" simply highlights the fact that you don't understand God's love. 

Let me give you a very human example:

A year or so ago a young woman was murdered in a 'half-way' house in a place called Argoed in Caerphilly.  The man who did the deed had a history of drug-abuse, and a criminal record.  It was known that he had serious reactions to some of the drugs he abused, and had been offered "support to address his addiction after being released from prison, but had not been willing to take up that help"  (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-35920468)  Some have said that he ought to have been forced to accept such support, others have said that he had the human right to decline it.

Which is your view?

How does that translate into the religious debate that opened this?  Should God force us to make a particular choice, or does he show 'greater love' by allowing us to make our own choices?  In post #51, you go on to say "I don't believe in Him because I a never seen anything to convince me he exists."  There are millions around the world who have seen the same as you and come to the conclusion that he does exist.  Arguing, as you and others here do, that there isn't the evidence is therefore open to discussion (and is in part the reason for this forum in the first place) and not simply a cop out.  You have made a choice based on your own understanding.  Others have made very different choices based on an equivalent understanding.

[Stranger]

Should God force us to make a particular choice, or does he show 'greater love' by allowing us to make our own choices?

As I've pointed out before, the idea of us making 'free' choices from the point of view of an omnipotent, omniscient, creator, makes no sense at all.

There are millions around the world who have seen the same as you and come to the conclusion that he does exist.

If they all believed in the same god, it would be (slightly) more convincing. They don't.

You realize how many different gods have been invented (even if one or more is real, they can't all be)?
http://www.godchecker.com/

[ippy]

My husband is terrible at multi-tasking, on the rare occasions he was expected to look after the kids as infants, I would come home to find he had done nothing else like wash up or other chores. He said he couldn't possibly be expected to do chores as well, as looking after the kids was a full time job, YE GODS!

I really notice this difference when I'm reading and my wife says something to me, I'm switched into reading mode and don't hear a word she says until after about the fifth or sixth word she has said, then I have to switch into listening mode and have no idea what those first few words were that she said, I'm not deliberately not listening, that's how the male brain works, well this male brain.

I assume visa versa a woman would have been able to listen and read at the same time?

I also love BBC Radio 4 when on my own I can listen to it all day, I sort of switch off the bits I'm not interested in, and somehow when I hear a personal interest trip word I then switch on my hearing and listen, is this a male thing only it drives my wife mad to have Rad 4 on all day, it seems she is unable to switch off the bits she's not interested in.

ippy