Religion has stepped on science's turf?

[jeremyp]

So've I. I wasn't impressed. He should stick to zoology - he's no philosopher.

Neither are you. Nor me. And definitely not Vlad. And yet here we are debating the existence of God and other “philosophical” problems.

The God Delusion is not a book about philosophy. It tries to answer the question of why religion is bollocks and yet so many people are into it. You don’t have to be a philosopher to talk about that.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The God Delusion is not a book about philosophy. It tries to answer the question of why religion is bollocks

Funnily enough that must be the first time a statement like that has actually raised the intellectual tenor of a thread.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Neither are you. Nor me. And definitely not Vlad. And yet here we are debating the existence of God and other “philosophical” problems.

The God Delusion is not a book about philosophy. It tries to answer the question of why religion is bollocks and yet so many people are into it. You don’t have to be a philosopher to talk about that.

Wait a cotton picking moment there.
Can you call something you're  supposed to be agnostic about....bollocks?
I'm not sure you can.

[ProfessorDavey]

Wait a cotton picking moment there.
Can you call something you're  supposed to be agnostic about....bollocks?
I'm not sure you can.

As so often, I think you are getting a little confused Vlad.

I think you will find that many of us on these MB are agnostic and/or atheist on the issue of whether god or gods exists. We are not agnostic on whether religion exists - religion beyond any doubt does exist. It is therefore perfectly reasonable to be agnostic and/or atheist on existence of god but also to consider religion to be bollocks - particularly if that religion is predicated on the assumption of the existence of a god or gods.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

As so often, I think you are getting a little confused Vlad.

I think you will find that many of us on these MB are agnostic and/or atheist on the issue of whether god or gods exists. We are not agnostic on whether religion exists - religion beyond any doubt does exist. It is therefore perfectly reasonable to be agnostic and/or atheist on existence of god but also to consider religion to be bollocks - particularly if that religion is predicated on the assumption of the existence of a god or gods.

So any religion not predicated on the existence of God is not bollocks or not as bollocks. Therefore since the difference is the existence of Gods you are saying that the thing you are agnostic about is or is more bollocks.

[ProfessorDavey]

So any religion not predicated on the existence of God is not bollocks or not as bollocks.

So, that inference does not follow.

[jeremyp]

Wait a cotton picking moment there.
Can you call something you're  supposed to be agnostic about....bollocks?
I'm not sure you can.

I'm not agnostic about religion. It exists and is bollocks.

I am agnostic in the strictest sense about the existence of God, but I'm reasonably sure that there isn't one. And if there is a god, it definitely isn't one like the Christian god.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm not agnostic about religion. It exists and is bollocks.

Positive assertion, please demonstrate it.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

I'm not agnostic about religion. It exists and is bollocks.

I am agnostic in the strictest sense about the existence of God, but I'm reasonably sure that there isn't one.

That sounds like a hedge.

Your conception of God as someone who perfectly predicts the future from the beginning and leaves it at that is the deist God rather than the Christian God.

[jeremyp]

Positive assertion, please demonstrate it.

Are you now denying the existence of religion?

[Roses]

That sounds like a hedge.

Your conception of God as someone who perfectly predicts the future from the beginning and leaves it at that is the deist God rather than the Christian God.

What is it which defines the Christian god for you?

[jeremyp]

Your conception of God as someone who perfectly predicts the future from the beginning and leaves it at that is the deist God rather than the Christian God.

The reason we can be fairly certain that the Christian god does not exist is the insanity of its theology.

What kind of god beams down to Earth as a human, arranges to get itself executed to save humans from a punishment that it invented for a crime committed in a fictional story and then tricks itself by coming back to life again? Answer: a fictional one.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

The reason we can be fairly certain that the Christian god does not exist is the insanity of its theology.

What kind of god beams down to Earth as a human, arranges to get itself executed to save humans from a punishment that it invented for a crime committed in a fictional story and then tricks itself by coming back to life again? Answer: a fictional one.

Crimes are committed in fictional stories all the time but that does not mean there is not real crime.
It's obvious that crime has consequences and debases the perpetrator. If we are alienated against God and act that out in alienation against other humans and nature then God has to take on any damage incurred and CHRIST is that way.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

What is it which defines the Christian god for you?

God who is with us.

[jeremyp]

Crimes are committed in fictional stories all the time but that does not mean. There is not real crime.

That there is real crime does not mean that people need to be punished for fictional crimes.

It's obvious that crime has consequences and debases the perpetrator. If we are alienated against God and act that out in alienation against other humans and nature then God has to take on any damage incurred and CHRIST is that way.

Who made that rule up? Was it God or is God subject to a higher authority?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That there is real crime does not mean that people need to be punished for fictional crimes.
Who made that rule up? Was it God or is God subject to a higher authority?

No they need to punished for crime though.

He's God Jeremy....what higher authority could there be?

[Sebastian Toe]

He's God Jeremy....what higher authority could there be?

God's dad?
The one he hasn't revealed to you yet?

[jeremyp]

No they need to punished for crime though.

He's God Jeremy....what higher authority could there be?

So God made the rule. You're saying God made a rule that states God must be punished if he wants to forgive humans the crimes that some of their fictional ancestors committed.

Not only that, you are saying that it's perfectly fine for God to dodge the death sentence by resurrecting himself. Why, instead of all that nonsense, didn't he just forgive the humans?

You wonder why I question the existence of this god of yours that is plainly bonkers.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

God's dad?
The one he hasn't revealed to you yet?

God has no beginning Seb, you know, just like the universe.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So God made the rule. You're saying God made a rule that states God must be punished if he wants to forgive humans the crimes that some of their fictional ancestors committed.

Not only that, you are saying that it's perfectly fine for God to dodge the death sentence by resurrecting himself. Why, instead of all that nonsense, didn't he just forgive the humans?

You wonder why I question the existence of this god of yours that is plainly bonkers.

I'm not saying God just made a rule.Any fool can do that As I've said before God is the supreme example of what it is to be Good.

The NT says we will all be resurrected Jeremy.

[jeremyp]

I'm not saying God just made a rule.

So who did make the rule?

The NT says we will all be resurrected Jeremy.

No it doesn't. Unless, by "we" you mean Christians.

[Roses]

I'm not saying God just made a rule.Any fool can do that As I've said before God is the supreme example of what it is to be Good.

The NT says we will all be resurrected Jeremy.

You are joking.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

You are joking.

No I'm perfectly serious. I think you've confused the messages with the messengers

[Walt Zingmatilder]

So who did make the rule?
No it doesn't. Unless, by "we" you mean Christians.

Choose from the following

Talk of rule is being sarcastic
Talk of a rule is being simplistic

[Sebastian Toe]

God has no beginning Seb, you know, just like the universe.

....unless he has a Dad, who has no beginning.
A Dad who created the omniverse, then created God, then God created our universe.
Impossible or not?