106404 Views
831 Comments

Treat other religions with respect

Published July 9th, 2010 by Bobby Henderson

When I first found this site, I was thoroughly amused.  I understand and even agree with your argument on the teaching of the Theory of Intelligent Design in public schools.  Your way of presenting this was very amusing, and wittily got your opinion expressed on the subject matter.

I sincerely wish I would’ve stopped scanning your website after reading your letter.
It was the attitude of the rest of the website that made me stop and feel terrible for the people who disagree with you.  From the video of the Flying Spaghetti Monster float performing a "religious action" on a random person to the tab specially designed for hate mail, I was instantly turned off to your concept of how you express your opinions.

Believing in something is one thing, but pounding others into the dust–pretty much BEGGING for the opportunity for someone to argue with you?  That’s something entirely different.  I know people must be begging for the hate mail that only screams at what a dumb religion yours is… just so that you can slam your argument into their faces. 

I think your message got lost a long time ago, Bobby.  It’s really sad… you had a good thing going, I think.  It’s really sad that your message of "don’t teach Intelligent Design in our schools" turned into "religion is pointless", which then turned into "everyone who believes in a religion is below me, and that gives me the right to completely disrespect everything they stand for".  It’s really sad that people join this group just so that they can slam onto other people.  Because really?  What are you hoping to accomplish at this point?

I may not agree with Christianity 100%, but I do believe "Do Unto Others" is a great philosophy to live by.  So is "Turn The Other Cheek".  Basically, treat other religions with respect… but if they don’t honor your viewpoints back?  Take the high road.  Maybe make a simple comment (like your letter) and be done with it.  By dragging it out like this, you’re making yourself look bad… and that’s all.

Thank you for your time,
-Alfred



831 Responses to “Treat other religions with respect”

1 14 15 16 17 18 24
  1. Theo says:

    “Treat other religions with respect”
    Really why? I don’t respect stupidity. I don’t respect people who use heroin either. I don’t respect people who beat their childeren. I don’t respect people who go out, only to pick up a fight and I surely don’t respect people who can’t keep their religious hobby indoors.

    • A. leeyass says:

      What about th values taught by religion? Where do you think we developed our societies morals and values came from? We have them because we live in a Christian based society. You shall not murder, you shall not steal, these are the values our society and laws are based on, they came from religion. If we did not have religion we would be in a society without any respect for other’s lives. Wishing for a world that has not known the touch of religion is wishing for a world steeped in anarchy, there will be no sense of community and mankind’s self serving nature would take hold.

      • Joel says:

        So?… Just because it HAS been beneficial does not mean we still need it. The countless empires throughout our history have contributed to humanities progress so do you want us to form an empire again?

        • Joel says:

          can i just say i’d delete my comment if i could

      • gordon_uk says:

        Morals pre date religion

      • Drained and Washed Clean says:

        “Morals” are a survival adaptation. Our prehistoric ancestors figured out that they needed each other to survive. Being nice to each other keeps our species alive while killing each other doesn’t. That is how our “moral” code came to be. The cave men figured it out way before your Bronze Age sheep herders.

      • Insightful Ape says:

        What a load of crap. In case you missed it, millions of people live in societies not following monotheistic religions like Japan and China. Millions more live in traditionally religious socieites but are abandoning religion in their droves, like France and the Netherlands. Neither group are descending into chaos. Of course there are others that are deeply religious but extremely corrupt and are indeed not far from total collapse, like El Salvador and Honduras. As Christopher Hitchens says, to believe the stability of society comes from the ten commandments, means you have to assume the Israelites though murder, adultery, and perjury were good things(!) until they got the “word” that those things are not cool any longer. And speaking of the ten commandments, why forget the one that says you should not covet your neighbor’s slave, or the one that says you shouldn’t work during the sabbath?
        The advocates of religious “values” seem to be highly selective in which ones they bring up.
        PS: If we got our values and laws from religion then how did we end up with the First Amendment? It is in direct conflict with the first commandment.

        • sam says:

          it is historicly possible that the ten commandments were given to his slaves by a slaver, EX: do not steal(from the other slaves), thou shallnot covet(the other slaves) wife, thou shall not kill(the other slaves), thou shalt not steal(from the other slaves), ect. it makes sense dosent it? if in fact it was a slaver would it not make sense to create a series of laws to keep order and prevent revolt? is it not well known that most isrialites were eygptian slaves, it says so right in the old testamet. so by that is it not possible?
          Note: i am not trying to convert or confuse you.

        • sam says:

          sorry about the spelling errors i was typing fast.

      • B. says:

        I live in one of the worlds most secular societies and I assure you that we are in no way immoral. Rather, crime is low and anarchy is limited to one hour every Sunday.

        Your argument is one often repeated by religious people and it still has no basis in reality. Morality is necessary for a society to thrive, as already mentioned that has to do with survival. A society that has strong laws about conduct will have greater chance of survival since working together is the key. The creation of early, organized religion was probably due to some folks realizing the power they could achieve if they kept the society together with rules that _could not be questioned_ (= came from God). Religion capitalized on morality. Religion did not create morality.

      • Brian says:

        This is an example of a false belief. To suggest that religion predates morals is ridiculous. Name your religion, and you find that the religion reflects the beliefs of that time. The Old Testament for example was written between between 1200 and 100 BC depending on who you ask. However, it simply reflected a set order that had long been established by other held beliefs and laws, such as, Hammurabi’s code dating all the way back to 1790 BC. To, say religion brings morals is as simplistic and inherently incorrect as saying morals bring religion. It is also ridiculous to say that without religion there would be no respect for life. We find in many countries today, particularly in western Europe, a resistance toward religion. I’m certain if you compared respect of life with that of the Middle East today you might quickly back-track in your argument. This is certainly not an Islamic trait, as for this “Christian based society” you are so proud of, perhaps you should brush up a bit on your history regarding the crusades, Salem witchcraft trials, the Colonial conquests, to name a few. It’s easy to make blank simplistic statements without facts to back them up. Luckily for you you have a great deal of people that enjoy the bliss found in ignorance. I would remind you however, that in more ways then we care to admit, we follow the trends of Western Europe. As Dylan says, “The times are a changing”.

      • Atsap Revol says:

        A. Leeyass,

        Two-thirds of the world’s population is not Christian and has no historical connection to the Christian church. Morality is NOT derived only from a Christian-based society. Some non-Christian societies are more moral than many Christian Societies.

        The old argument that our founding fathers were Christians, and that they intended the U.S. to be a Christian nation is bullshit. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin, and other key persons were not Christians, and in fact, had unkind things to say about Christianity. The U.S. constitution contains no mention of God or Jesus. The only Constitutional reference to religion is in the First Amendment, which promotes religious freedom and lack of a religious requirement to hold public office.

        I did not have a “religious upbringing,” so by your line of reasoning I should have spent my 77 years as a serial killer, thief, adulterer, rapist, and tax-evader. Having done none of those things, I think I have led a moral life, but not because of the fear of eternal damnation by failing to follow the instructions set forth in a book of myths.

        Always bear in mind, there are not just ten commandments in the OT. There are said to be 613. I haven’t counted them all, but my casual reading of the OT reveals many more than ten. Are you following even the basic ten, let alone the other 603? And why do you think there are ten? If evolution had provided us with four fingers on each hand, do you think there might be only eight basic commandments?

        But then you probably don’t accept the idea of evolution because Genesis clearly tells you how God created all life in six days. Don’t take the chance of corrupting your carefully held beliefs by reading the October 10, 2010 National Geographic article on fossil forms of mammals on the Australian continent.

        Or for that matter, consider the present fauna of Australia and rationalize how the marsupials selectively migrated there after the “Great Flood.” What people are capable of believing never ceases to amaze me.

        Atsap

      • Rev Toni Rigatoni says:

        A. leeyass, be assured morals do NOT come from religion, as stated elsewhere in this post, morals and values predate Christianity, and by many millennia, thus permitted the human race to achieve a high degree of cooperation that was instrumental in creating a society that could survive to evolve into the society in which we now find ourselves. Richard Dawkins has discussed the case against morals as an argument for religion in his book ‘The God Delusion’ far more eruditely than I could ever hope to and I implore you to read it too, I have read your bible and made my choices based on its content, please do me the courtesy of reading beyond the ‘buy-bull’ before making your judgements (If you have I apologise, but confess to some disbelief of any such claims).
        I have a number of beefs with religion and with the pious religious bigots that pervade this world, but the thing that makes my blood boil more than anything is being told I cannot be a good or moral person without god. I am a very good and a very moral person and I know and have known many ‘godless’ people who are the kindest, most loving and moral people you could ever wish to meet and none have ever needed god to frighten them into it! Read the old testament and tell me where, outside of the couple of the ten commandments you quote (or at least one of the versions of the commandments, of which there are a number) that advocates anything other than homicide, patricide, infanticide, hate, misogyny, intolerance and just about every other immoral thought or deed that can be brought to mind. Before you judge me and my kind, I urge you to compare my life of hard work, good honest work (in the acute/surgical area of a hospital in fact) to support my family whom I love more than life, and to engage with a number of charities, local, national and international, both financially and by donating my time and energy, to that of your god that spends most of his time it seems, in a jealous rage, smiting all that offend him and so too to your sanctimonious, self-righteous kind that berate all that goes against your outmoded superstitious beliefs!

        Far better the peaceful grace of anarchy (anarchy does not equate to lack of values or morals, only lack of government), than the unwanted intrusion of religion in politics and education and having religious bigots like Bush and Blair and myriad other minor decision makers making decisions that affect me and my grandchildren based on the same superstitions that drive you to judge people that do not share your dogma without ever having met them. The world will not collapse into disarray and immorality without god, quite the opposite in fact, we may well, without the stifling oppression of religious dogma, be closer to the utopia that your religion promises us, a life free of persecution and the opportunity to live without the fear of having a jumbo jet flown into us by a peace loving follower of god. Look into yourself; if it is god that is keeping you moral you are not moral at all, one’s morals are decided by oneself, otherwise you are no different to a prisoner kept from your true self by a prison cell, released from the ties of your religion you would be amoral if not immoral.

  2. Cammahon says:

    Im all for tolerating religion. But don’t ever expect me to value your opinion or take into consideration your thoughts in regards to anything. And those who do believe it are unreasonable for they do not use reason to make sense of the world around them. Even if everything christianity said was true, only fools could believe it.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Atheists seem to think they’re better than religious people – like religious people are those poor confused people who think that there’s actually a God, how ridiculous. This is the reason you completely dismiss anything someone religious says. You think that religion in general is just…illogical, kind of ridiculous even. I see your reasoning – gods and goddesses were made by ancients as a form of explaining things they didn’t understand. It’s just been carried on ever since, it’s all the same. There are so many Christian churches, and it just seems like it’s just a tradition that’s been carried on, changing and drifting further from reality. Well, the reason that there are so many Christian churches is because there actually was a Christ, causing Christianity. It’s kind of obvious if you think about it. God even allowed all these churches, and ancient gods and goddesses, to make religion seem kind of made up. He did it all on purpose. Why? He doesn’t want there to be any proof of his existence. That would be kind of “cheating.” He wants religion to seem ridiculous. He doesn’t want us to say, “If there’s no God, then why are all these people inspired?” He wants us to have faith in him, not proof of him. This may seem “stupid-sounding,” that God just did everything, but it’s perfectly valid. Now, I’d expect a more stuck-up atheist to be smiling to himself right now, thinking, “Ah, this poor, confused religious person, speaking of God’s imaginary plans. I figured this out long ago, figured out that religion is ridiculous.” Of course, you’ll be referring to the time when you first thought that it all seemed illogical. But you’ll accept your past confidence blindly, you won’t think back to that time and realize, in light of this new argument, “Hm. Maybe religion isn’t as ridiculous as I thought.” You’ll just think that your past logic was inrefutable, and that you don’t need to think about this. I urge you not to do this. Think – be willing to accept something even though it’s not exactly like you. Anyway, that’s all. By the way, I love your site. Of course, it’s a appeal to ridicule. It’s like saying, “2+2=4?? That’s ridiculous! That’s like saying 2+2=30,422,406.78!!!” Sure it’s LIKE that, but what does that prove? Nothing. It’s amusing though.

    • Jedi Knight says:

      Dear Anonymous,

      Right about now, there are around a million people worldwide, who have listed their religious affiliation as: “Jedi”. 30-40 years ago, a man named Lucas created the teachings of the Jedi, their creed, and passed the knowledge of The Force to us all. And of course, The Force is real, and the evil Sith Lords always lurk in the darkness, coveting to take over the Galaxy with their dark powers. I am sure you agree with all this – for to deny it, is to act like a closed-minded Atheist, isn’t it?

      Now, I see that you’re quite hung up on this “Crist” dude, and that “god” thingy; but man – that’s just some book. On the other hand, they’ve made half a dozen movies demonstrating the power of the force – so great indeed, that the destruction of an entire planet is insignificant next to it! You even get to see, with your own eyes, how advanced are the societies that have embraced The Force, and the Jedi as their guides. Isn’t that much more convincing than just reading about some guy who barely managed in an archaic slum of a land?

      I know that you have the wisdom to leave those false teachings behind, and embrace the glory of The Force, and the teachings of Lucas and the Jedi. Don’t let me down.

      And may The Force be with you.

    • Joel says:

      The problem with saying stuff like God made it seem like religon is ridiculous is that it proves nothing. We could say that the FSM manipulated Earth culture in order for the idea of pastafarianism to seem ridiculous. And since it seems more ridiculous than God to most people it would be a greater article of faith to believe in the FSM than it would be to believe in God. Just saying…

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Those who deny proven facts are ridiculous.

      Fact: The Earth never stopped for a day
      Fact: There is no proof of a global flood
      Fact: Evolution does exist
      Fact: The bible is full of contradictions
      Fact: 19 books in the new testament were forged
      Fact: The Jesus of the bible never existed.
      Fact: There is no such thing as free will if your god is everything you say it is
      Fact: Religion has been the #1 cause slowing down or stopping scientific progress.
      Fact: 1+1 can = 24
      Question: Are you able to think outside of the box and see other possibilities? I am thinking no.
      Fact: You are an atheist about 99.9% of the gods that have ever existed.
      Question: What makes yours any different?

      • Mr Cooper (all hail FSM) says:

        there is proof of global floods, numerous religions and cultures teach it, its inevatable and one occured after the dino killing metor hit.

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          My bad :)

        • Noodlity says:

          Not really. Religios teachings and folklore only account for *local* floods, which have not been shown to coincide on larger scales.

          As for the dino-killer, continental drift charts actually show the Earth as *less* flooded after that – for example, Canada and half the US were underwater for most of the dino-age. Later on, not so much. A heavy-duty meteorite strike would at most create a tsunami, should it hit the ocean. But dino-killer hit dry land, i think. Doesn’t add up.

        • Mr Cooper (all hail FSM) says:

          dino killer hit water, the parts that fell off hit land and caused fires thus blocking the atmosphere and causing the ice age and a giant tsunami

        • Keith says:

          The “Dino killer” (and I’m not even certain it should be called that) happened when “human beings” were nothing more that shrews: or the equivalent. I doubt that a racial memory would linger with such tenacity and clarity. Many cultures have a “Worlwide Flood” mythology but it would be easy for a culture to think that a disasterous localised flood was happening everywhere else. It may also be possible to interpret such stories as archetypical images common to all humans.

        • Gordon_UK says:

          Just look at Doggerland, up until 9000 years ago it was a green and pleasant land between the UK and Europe and now it’s the north sea.

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

        • Mr Cooper (all hail FSM) says:

          exactly even the adamans have something simaler, this is a culture that no one knows their language all we know is that they believe in a global flood and like the colour red.

        • Noodlity says:

          Like I said, local floods are well documented, and, more importantly, keep happening right now, including at scales that could have been considered “global” in the olden days. However, folk accounts are difficult to synchronize with one another, so without a common timeframe, the myth of a global flood will remain just a myth.

          Of course, there’s also the small matter that the total amount of water on Earth, even if the ice caps melt, won’t be enough to completely submerge the entire landmass (basically, anything ofer 300 feet would still be dry land) , and even if it could, there would be an overwhelming amount of geological evidence.

          Yeah, OK, so I’m just ranting and nitpicking here, I know. Maybe I just miss Anonymous. Adjusting to rational discussions with people who don’t threaten to cut your bodyparts could be quite difficult. Who would’ve guessed?

        • gordon_uk says:

          Sorry it was meant to be an example where a local flood of only a few meters could wipe out a substantial land mass and to the peoples living there seem like the end of the world.

        • Noodlity says:

          @gordon_uk: “Sorry it was meant to be an example where a local flood of only a few meters could wipe out a substantial land mass and to the peoples living there seem like the end of the world.”

          No, I got that, and I agree. I actually meant to reply to Mr Cooper, but the reply system here is somewhat limited.

        • sam says:

          also did you know that the mortality of crist was decided when the scattered christian leaders in rome came together soon after the time of christ, and it was decided that jesus was to be made a god to help convert the sun worshipers in rome. also do you go to church on sunday? its not the sabbath, sun day was the day when the sun was worshiped in rome. and you thought you hated pagans. and so the few gospels that depicted him as gods son, not a mortal were put into a bible(edited then, and transcribing loses translation, even in latin the transcribation from hebrew was bad) and the rest that dipicted him as mortal (the large majority) were burned and all protecting them were deemed heritics. the gospels depicting the love between mary magdalne and jesus was also taken out. this was a three pointer: 1. it cause jesus to lose mortal ties. 2. it destroyed the implacations that jesus had a bloodline. 3. it was part of a smer campain aganst woman, to destroy belif in the sacred feminin. also in the original versions mary magdalin was not a prostitute, they changed that. and so if you wish to attack our belifs anonomas, look at the truth and reliability of your own.

    • Rev Toni Rigatoni says:

      I usualy like to argue intelegently, bur all I can think is ‘What the f*** are you talking about?’

      • Rev Toni Rigatoni says:

        Sorry about the spelling on the last entry, a bit tired and to long at the beer volcano. Sauce be with you all!

    • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

      God didn’t build churches, or temples, or mosques. They were built by the ruling class to control weak-minded people. Success!

      • Rev Toni Rigatoni says:

        Well said!!

    • plumberbob says:

      For all of your words, you need to study a great deal before you know what you are saying.

      “… It is wholly credible, because it is unsound…” Tertullian

      RAmen

    • sam says:

      you are right in part, we should not look down on people that belive in god. but that does not make you better than us. religion does not make you a poor sap, but not agreeing with you does not make us heartless monsters as you seem to belive. sure god may be covering his tracks but do you not think that if he did create us, not evolution, than would not judaism have appered in our socity sooner? did you not think of all the great civalazations that came before it? greece, persia, assiria, egypt, mesoamerica(the pre incans in south america built great stone citys while worshiping “hethen” gods.) and even babalon and sumer. all of these and more prospered w/o your paticular belifs. if as you suggest god was only making us dout him, then why did he not cause them suffering, other then the fall of their civalazations, which ALL civalazations do? also cristianity did and does promote several good morals, but they did not invent morals, think of athens citezens rights. i find your close mindedness amusing though.

  4. Anonymous says:

    Jedi Knight, nice appeal to ridicule. http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/appeal-to-ridicule.html Not like I’m making it up or anything. Good job, Joel, that’s what I was getting at – it doesn’t prove anything.
    Fact: Half of those things aren’t facts. Some of them I agree with.
    Fact: You stole my argument. How original.
    Fact: You sound like Dwight.

    Every day I try to be as unhypocritical as possible. I try not to be stuck up, I try not to lie to myself. I try to accept things. I try not to do any of those thought crimes at all. I cannot say the same for the rest of the world – “…hung up on that ‘christ’ dude and that ‘god’ thingy” is an example of dismissing everything I say. As soon as you see words that have to do with religion, your brain goes to lockdown mode. No thoughts will go in. You’ll read everything else, not taking it in, just fuming about how wrong they are. Just constantly thinking, “This is wrong. This is wrong.” You think, “This doesn’t say anything, he’s just being a dumb religious person.” Right now I bet you’re thinking that. You’re not reading, saying, “Hm. He just read my mind, maybe he’s onto something.” You’re thinking, “This is wrong. This doesn’t say anything, he’s just being a dumb religious person.” I try not to do that. I can’t force you to not do that, but I can ask you to. Just humor me. Consider it. Think, “He’s reading my mind, maybe he’s on to something.” Honestly think about these things, and don’t constantly think, “It’s going to be wrong. He’s wrong.” Just think about it openly. I don’t if I’m getting through to you, but it’s worth a shot.

    • Jedi Knight says:

      My young Padawan, I have heard pretty much all of your arguments already, from other people. And I have tried to understand them before I made any definite judgements. Over and over, however, they just don’t add up. This is the quality of Atheism that self-professed believers actively refuse to admit – that we have not “decided”, once and for all, to deny the existence of the supernatural. But that, time and again, no reliable proof has ever been shown for it.

      For this is what Atheism is about – not any subjective “reality”, but *reliablity*. You think your god is real – mazal tov, good for you! But if we can’t rely on him to, y’know, *show up*, at least once in a while, then how can we rely on him to save our souls, protect us from evil, etc. ? Excuses, mind-games, and overexaggerated “faith” can not replace actual *confidence* . Also, considering the growing futility of the various churches’ efforts, even forced indoctrination can only go so far.

      And indeed you *are* hypocritical – dismissing my post as an “appeal to ridicule” , instead of actually addressing it. So tell me – why god, and not The Force? Why christ, and not Lucas?

      And, respectively, why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster and Bobby Henderson, for that matter?

      • Xenocyde says:

        Jedi Knight, while I agree with just about everything you said, I feel that I must point out two discrepancies in your argument.

        First: god isn’t supposed to save your soul, you are by supposedly believing in it. So in that little nugget, god is even less reliable than you made it out to be.

        Secondly: god doesn’t “protect” anyone from evil. Yet again, its up to each person to keep themselves out of harms way-according to christianity anyway. That makes god pretty much useless in my book.

        **** side note: my spell checker says “christianity” is spelled wrong because i didn’t capitalize it – messed up, huh?

        Anonymous:

        I understand your argument. You’re saying that god let humanity “create” false religions in the past in order to trick people in the present day world. And you say god did this in order to hide evidence of his existence because we have to believe in him on faith alone. I also understood that during the whole post you were talking down to anyone who doesn’t believe as you do. tsk tsk – i thought you were trying to not be a hypocrite.I guess you failed today, try again tomorrow.

        Now, as for the rest of your argument, while i understood the concept you’re trying to get across, it still doesn’t make any sense to anyone with any kind of reasoning ability. Your argument isn’t written in your bible, which is supposedly written by your god. Also, since according to your mythology, no one has actually ever spoken to him since moses-you can’t say that god said it. Its your own thoughts and ideas-not fact. You’re just trying to enforce your own beliefs on people that have different views than you. Maybe you should really read the replies to your offensive posts, maybe you’ll learn something.

        • Noodlity / Jedi Knight says:

          Oficially, it is the Xian god’s direct influence that saves our souls. It’s not so much our belief, but our professed *submission* to his power, and that only gives us the right to be saved. It’s he, supposedly, that does the actual work.

          The whole “believing” thing, by the way, is often used as a “No true Scotsman” excuse by priests and the like. Namely, if $hit happens, it’s a test of faith. If $hit stops happening, our faith is sincere. If it doesn’t, we weren’t sincere enough. You get the picture.

      • Matt says:

        Jedi Knight, I disagree with you as a result of what is, in my opinion, a flaw your argument. Anonymous’ religious definitions mean that for him God does not need to appear to be proven to exist because:

        tandards that many religious people hold mean that a wide variety of religious people It is impossible to logically convince Anonymous that God does not exist because no matter what fact you bring

        In think FSM (sauce on him) can be used as an example of my argument.

        1. Humans have not explored much of the galaxy, let alone the universe.

        • Matt says:

          Wow. Didn’t finish writing or editing that, pressed submit by accident.

          I give up. Disregard me totally.

        • Matt says:

          Just by way of explanation, I was going to argue that FSM could well exist as we haven’t been to any planets other than our own. As a result, I find it hard to disrespect religious people as it is impossible to fully disprove their views.

        • Matt says:

          More explanation.

          What I mean to say is that there could well be flying spaghetti-ish monsters living on distant planets. You can’t disprove that statement because you haven’t been to any distant planets.

          Therefore, you shouldn’t argue with religious people because their claims are impossible to disprove.

        • Matt says:

          By extension, I also accept that one shouldn’t try to argue that Atheism is in some way wrong.

        • Matt says:

          By extension, I also accept that one shouldn’t try to argue that Atheism is in some way wrong.

        • Theo says:

          you sure know how to get your point across

    • Gordon_UK says:

      Anonymous

      Yes us nasty Atheists are so mean to the religious not letting them use ‘god’ as the all purpose answer to the question.

      “religious people are those poor confused people who think that there’s actually a God, how ridiculous.” – Yes you are right, why? Well they believe in something without proof, and the only thing they have (the bible) has more holes in it then a paper tank. Or come out with poor explications as to why there is no proof.

      Example, “He doesn’t want there to be any proof of his existence” so what was all that stuff with Noah, Moses and Jesus? Not the best way to avoid the lime light!

      “Fact: Half of those things aren’t facts” please expand on this providing the reasons and evidence.

      Atheists get a harder time from Theists, most of the time they don’t even realise they are being offensive when they ask questions like ‘if you don’t believe in god how do you have morales?’. Then we get the pope come over here and link Atheists to Nazi’s (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11332515) claiming “a Nazi tyranny that wished to eradicate God from society”, odd as Atheists found them selves in the camps along with any other non-Christian believes, non-white and gypsies. He’s also been coming out with shit like how Britain is built on a Christian foundation, nope try pagan pope you dope.

      You seem to also assume what we are thinking, I personally was thinking is this person pretending to be a twat or is he actually just a twat. I gunning for the latter.

      RAmen

      Gordon

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      No, see the difference between my argument and yours is I can make 1+1=24. I could probably make your equation work as well. My point was you could not think outside the box to make it work.

      Religion is something you are taught and never question. You can’t see outside that box and think that there is another possibility.

      And, no, you aren’t actually saying anything. Since you are saying half of the things I stated are not facts, I would appreciate you providing evidence of this claim and not just more blather. Then you are putting words into our mouths but offering no proof or backup for your claims. Before you tell us that we should consider your side, perhaps you should present one.

      • Matt says:

        Provide evidence that God does not exist.

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          You are the one claiming it does. The burden of proof is on you to prove it does exist. There is no evidence to support the claim that a god exists, so my work is done.

        • Noodlity / Jedi Knight says:

          Like I said, lack of evidence for both the existence and inexistance of something simply means that it is *irrelevant* in any logical context. That includes scientific studies and school curricila. I have nothing against dressing in funny clothes and discussing fictional characters as a hobby, but without any reliable evidence, this is as far as it gets.

    • Joel says:

      Personally I don’t think “This is wrong. This is wrong.” I used to be religious myself and I can say that I think I’ve been through the sort of thinking you are in at the moment. Throughout all that time I had purely believed in god because my parents had told me to and now I find it impossible to believe in god and when I read opinions like yours I think “that really reminds me of when I was younger.” Ask yourself ‘why do you believe in god?’ ‘Why do you take the word of a single book more seriously than all the overwhelming evidence presented for evolution?’ When you do make sure you think about it with an unbiased mind because this is what I did and I gave in to overwhelming evidence.

    • Steve The Pirate says:

      I wonder if you would be willing to follow your own advice?
      You say we should give your religion a try but how many other beliefs have you truely given a chance? surely you cannot undoubtably claim that you are right and we are wrong until you have tried to put your faith in every other diety.

      This of course would be a rediculous thing to do as there are countles dietys across the world and how would you be sure your faith is well placed. Any respnce to your blind faith could just be coincidence.

      with this in mind i have reasoned it is better to just ignore religion alltogether as in my opinion it only ever causes conflict.

      “Just humor me” and believe for a second that blind faith and a book could be wrong. After all a book can be writen by anyone and interpreted in many ways and faith, no matter how strong, can be misplaced. If you just stop and “consider” this for a moment you will see there is alot more reason in this than there is in the idea of an all knowing all powerful “God”

      “I don’t know if I’m getting through to you, but it’s worth a shot.” (Sorry this is such a patronizing thing to say, to assume we are missing out if you dont get through to us when we couldnt care less)

      • Matt says:

        Provide evidence that God does not exist. Or for that matter that he does.

        This debate is pointless.

  5. Anonymous says:

    Fine – I’ll go through the facts.

    Fact: The Earth never stopped for a day
    Maybe it didn’t…maybe the sun moved around the Earth so it seemed like it was one day.
    Fact: There is no proof of a global flood
    Maybe all the water floated an inch above the surface of the ground, leaving no archaeological evidence.
    Fact: Evolution does exist
    Maybe so. Your point?
    Fact: The bible is full of contradictions
    Actually, there are absolutely none. Give me a single one, you’ve just misinterpreted things.
    Fact: 19 books in the new testament were forged
    …No they weren’t.
    Fact: The Jesus of the bible never existed.
    That’s not provable.
    Fact: There is no such thing as free will if your god is everything you say it is
    Obviously there is or everyone would automatically be good.
    Fact: Religion has been the #1 cause slowing down or stopping scientific progress.
    That’s not my fault. I have nothing against science.
    Fact: 1+1 can = 24
    It’s an example. Jeez. It means saying that FSM is real doesn’t prove anything.
    Question: Are you able to think outside of the box and see other possibilities? I am thinking no.
    I’ve considered atheism, yes.
    Fact: You are an atheist about 99.9% of the gods that have ever existed.
    That’s true. How about that?
    Question: What makes yours any different?
    He’s real.

    Joel, I’m not against evolution. It does have a lot of evidence. And I have evidence of God. I have had several experiences that would make it extremely stupid to deny him. Evolution does not equal no God. You gave it up too easily.

    And why not the force? Why not FSM? No reason. There is no proof against them. But that doesn’t mean anything towards God. You’ve made a statement, not an argument.

    Anyway, my point is, there’s no proof against or towards God, so don’t think of religion as completely ridiculous because there’s proof against it. I respect your beliefs or lack of them, but you should respect mine because there’s nothing saying God can’t exist. Just don’t feel completely superior to religious people always.

    • Jedi Knight (Noodlity in disguise) says:

      “And why not the force? Why not FSM? No reason. There is no proof against them. But that doesn’t mean anything towards God. You’ve made a statement, not an argument.

      Anyway, my point is…”

      In other words, you make a completely arbitrary choice in favor of a particular deity, while at the same time berating others for making (what you perceive to be) the same choice against it. Just because “he’s real”… for which you admit having no proof. Arguably, even if we were to consider your “experiences” as viable evidence, then we’d have to consider every other religion’s as well – which, given the claim of your god to be the “only” one, would burst that particular bubble rather quickly.

      And of course, you use the popular “there’s no proof against” defence. Y’know. this really is why religion always loses against proper scientific rigor, whether people admit it or not. It’s called *refutability*. In scientific terms, if a theory is repeteadly demonstrated true by controlled testing, it is deemed “proven”. If it is demonstrably wrong, it becomes “disproven”.

      But if it cannot be reliably shown to be either right *or* wrong, it is *irrelevant*.

      Your god is irrelevant. Nothing more, nothing less. Any debate would only serve for entertainment purposes, and quite frankly, scientists tend to have better sources of entertainment.

      I, on the other hand, am not a scientist, so I can happily spend some of my time practicing my debate skills, for cases where the topic actually means something in the real world.

      RAmen.

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Fact: The Earth never stopped for a day
      Maybe it didn’t…maybe the sun moved around the Earth so it seemed like it was one day.
      *** No. It did not. Otherwise we would not be here. Our atmosphere would have shot off our planet into outer space. And there are equally devastating consequences for not orbiting the sun as well. There are no maybes. Only facts.

      Fact: There is no proof of a global flood
      Maybe all the water floated an inch above the surface of the ground, leaving no archaeological evidence.
      *** Again, not maybes facts. I asked you to show me which ones were false. If something happened there would be evidence.

      Fact: Evolution does exist
      Maybe so. Your point?
      *** Hopefully you agree.

      Fact: The bible is full of contradictions
      Actually, there are absolutely none. Give me a single one, you’ve just misinterpreted things.
      *** HAHAHA! The typical response. The first 2 chapters of Genesis contradict each other. In what order was the earth created? Who was at the tomb? Was it 2 Mary’s or just one? Who was Jesus’s dad? Cause Luke says it was Joseph. How many animals were on the ark? 2 of each or 7 of clean and 2 of unclean? Where exactly was Jesus’s first sermon? On plains or in the mountains? And don’t even get me started on the inconsistencies of Acts with the gospels…

      Fact: 19 books in the new testament were forged
      …No they weren’t.
      *** Bart Ehrmann, a professor of biblical studies, and one of the world’s leading authorities on the bible says so. I have his evidence. Yours is what?

      Fact: The Jesus of the bible never existed.
      That’s not provable.
      *** No, what is not provable is your idea of Jesus. One who caused so many problems for the Roman government surely would have shown up in their records! But no… Hmmm… And there definitely was no slaughter of the innocents. So, that part of the story is false as well. The 4 gospels tell different stories of the birth of this Jesus character, and they don’t really match… Hmmm… another contradiction.

      Fact: There is no such thing as free will if your god is everything you say it is
      Obviously there is or everyone would automatically be good.
      *** Your foundation for this argument is? Here is mine:
      If god is the most perfect being then he is omniscient and knows everything
      If god is the most perfect being then what it knows cannot be wrong because it is perfect
      It therefore knows all that has happened in the past and what will happen in the future
      If god knows what will happen in the future he already knows the choices I will make
      If he already knows my “choices” then I did not choose.
      I cannot make a choice any different then what god knows will happen because he cannot be wrong.
      I do not have free will

      Fact: Religion has been the #1 cause slowing down or stopping scientific progress.
      That’s not my fault. I have nothing against science.
      *** But it is still a fact.

      Fact: 1+1 can = 24
      It’s an example. Jeez. It means saying that FSM is real doesn’t prove anything.
      *** 1 represents 1 dozen. But my previous point still stands.

      Question: Are you able to think outside of the box and see other possibilities? I am thinking no.
      I’ve considered atheism, yes.
      *** How deeply did you actually dig into religion? If you had dug to any depth, you would at least know that there are contradictions in the bible. That is year 1 of seminary.

      Fact: You are an atheist about 99.9% of the gods that have ever existed.
      That’s true. How about that?
      Question: What makes yours any different?
      He’s real.
      *** Prove it. You are the one offering the claim therefore you must offer the proof. The bible does not count because, as I have already shown, it is full of contradictions. Not to mention the fact that it has been translated, ripped apart, and put back together more times than anyone will ever know. Christianity is just religions from ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and pagan beliefs thrown together in the most convenient way possible to make the pagans feel comfortable. Jesus couldn’t have been born in December. Otherwise there would have been no shepherds out. There is another contradiction.

      I am still waiting on this proof that you are supposed to offer to prove that what I said was false.

      • Steve The Pirate says:

        Just a quick point
        The Romans celebrated “Dies Natalis Solis Invicti” on December 25th as this was the first detectable lengthening of daylight hours and so a festival to thier Sun God Sol Invictus. So if Jesus was ever born it is likely that the date was chosen as it was already a popular celebration not because it was the actual date of his “birth”

        • Matt says:

          I absolutely agree with you.

          How does this make the existence of Jesus impossible?

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          If you actually read, then you would know the discussion is about inconsistencies. Not proving Jesus’s existence.

      • Matt says:

        I am still waiting on proof that a non-literal interpretation of the Bible is in some way false.

        Many religious people do not interpret the Bible literally, so this is a valid point.

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          Whatever interpretation you take doesn’t matter because the bible is not the book it originally was, it was not written by the people that are labeled as the author, it is mistranslated, torn apart, and put back together full of inconsistencies. How can any interpretation be correct?

        • gordon_uk says:

          Matt

          “so this is a valid point”

          No, not really. People are taking the bible less literally then say 100 or 500+ years ago as our access to knowledge increased, Christianity’s biggest enemy is not Atheists or other religions but knowledge. How can you take a religion seriously that it’s most important texts cant be taken literally?

          You could also say “I am still waiting on proof that a non-literal interpretation of START WARS is in some way false”.

        • Theo says:

          oh my fsm, I can’t disproof your imaginary friend, so he MUST be real!

      • Some guy says:

        “If god is the most perfect being then he is omniscient and knows everything
        If god is the most perfect being then what it knows cannot be wrong because it is perfect
        It therefore knows all that has happened in the past and what will happen in the future
        If god knows what will happen in the future he already knows the choices I will make
        If he already knows my “choices” then I did not choose.
        I cannot make a choice any different then what god knows will happen because he cannot be wrong.
        I do not have free will”

        Knowing what you will do and telling you what to do are two different things. In essence, God does not see the future. He sees a constant “Now” because He is not bound by linear time. Simply because it is known to God what decision you will make does not mean that you haven’t made it.

        • B. says:

          So you presume to know how God sees things? That seems… blasphemous.

        • Drained and Washed Clean says:

          No, if it knows the choice I will make, and it is a perfect being and cannot be wrong, I do not have the choice to choose anything different. Whether I know I have to choose it or not change the fact that I have to make that choice. If I have to do it that is not free will.

    • Joel says:

      I did not give up too easily. I went through months of personal doubt and anxiety about what my parents would say. In the end I just couldn’t find any reason that I believed in god so I gave it up and put up with my parents comments on my atheism. I have never received any religious epiphany nor been given any sufficient reason to believe in god so I have chosen to stick with atheism. And even if i did have an experience i would not be able to prove that it came from god given that the brain is not perfect. And even if god is real how does he know he wasn’t created by another more powerful god that exists beyond his knowledge and has set the world up for it to seem like god is all powerful. Think about it, you’d never be able to prove it wrong..

    • sam says:

      i agree, there is no proof aganst god but there is a major flaw in your agument. the earth revolves around the sun, not the other way around. god could make water float, but corpses sink so would there not be a huge layer of plant and animal fossils less than 6000 years ago? also there is no mention of land plants on the ark, they need the atmosphere too. :0 besides, no human is superior to another.

  6. Insightful Ape says:

    Anonymous, will you please
    tell me why you are not a Muslim?

    • Danimal says:

      Insightful Ape,
      I’m assuming he meant he doesn’t believe in the prophet Muhammad as Allah would be the Arabic name for the god of Abraham.
      Anywho, ignorance aside, I think this needs to be expanded upon.

      Dear Anonymous,
      Why are you a Christian instead of a Muslim? Or why do you believe in Jesus and not Muhammad?
      Danimal

  7. Anonymous says:

    Jedi Knight: Good point. Did I say religion was a scientific theory? No. Does it matter? No. It doesn’t have to be a scientific theory to be true. Now, I realize that science always picks the simplest solution…like, if you have a pattern that starts with 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, then you’d assume the next is 64. Not to say that the next can’t be 1, then 2, 4, 8, 16, and 32, repeat. But, you’ll assume the former, because it’s simpler. This doesn’t necessarily mean it’s for sure going to be the correct choice. It’s just, according to science, it is. Science isn’t always right, and they’ll admit it if you ask them.

    I know this whole thing is kind of stupid-sounding. And sounding unlikely. You think, “Oh, brother. You’re putting stuff together to make it seem unprovable but not disprovable.” But it’s perfectly valid. It sounds stupid, it feels stupid, it makes you think it’s wrong, but there’s nothing factual about this feeling, no evidence that it’s wrong – just a feeling.

    Drained whatever: To the first two, IT’S GOD. Just shut up now. 3: Yes I do.
    4.
    HAHAHA! The typical response. The first 2 chapters of Genesis contradict each other. In what order was the earth created?
    Look at this: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/09/03/feedback-genesis-1-and-2

    Who was at the tomb? Was it 2 Mary’s or just one?
    Mary. It’s not known entirely if there are two, if she’s a different person. However, I see no contradiction.

    Who was Jesus’s dad? Cause Luke says it was Joseph.
    That’s, officially, according to the record, what his father is. Do you think they’re going to put God? Luke probably put that out of habit, without thinking about it.

    How many animals were on the ark? 2 of each or 7 of clean and 2 of unclean?
    Clean animals are animals they eat, such as chickens and pigs. They’re for eating.

    Where exactly was Jesus’s first sermon? On plains or in the mountains?
    Look at this: http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20010923.htm

    And don’t even get me started on the inconsistencies of Acts with the gospels…
    Perhaps you should get started.

    5: I don’t care enough to look that up and disprove it. Sorry.

    6: Actually, most historians believe there was a Jesus Christ who started Christianity, whether or not they believe he was resurrected. Get your facts straight.

    7: You’ve assumed he knows the future. Actually he doesn’t. We could change our course at any time. There’s no definite answer, but maybe time itself is an illusion, and he just changes things around all over the course of history.

    8: Yes it is. And I regret that.

    9: Forget about the dumb equation. Whether or not it’s right is beside the point. Assume it’s wrong. It’s still not says nothing about the nature of the first equation.

    10: I think #4 explains this well.

    11: Jesus was actually born sometime in April, and we only celebrate it during December because the Romans persecuted Christians, and they were celebrating at that time because the days were getting longer, so they celebrated Christ’s birth to hide it. And I can’t believe you actually just told me to prove the existence of God.

    Joel: For that last thing, very good! Actually, that may well be the case, although he does know. What was your first hint? As for the beginning, with no proof nor disproof of God’s existence, at least I know I wouldn’t have just abandoned the notion.

    Insightful Ape: Because I don’t believe in Allah.

    And now I’m feeling convinced that no matter what I say, you’ll keep arguing. Generally I only go into debates if I know I’m right, I know why I’m right, and I know that I can possibly convince my opponent. Possibly. I’ll stay with you for a while, but I’m doubtful right now that I can convince you, so don’t expect me to hang on for long.

    • Joel says:

      Actually Allah is just the arabic word for “The God”. You believe in the same god as muslims with a varying version of the story. As for the other thing I can’t disprove god and i can’t prove god but I do have a number scientific theories which will be proven or disproven or adjusted as new evidence comes in. I don’t see any point basing my life around something i can never prove or disprove.

      • Joey says:

        good show old chap

    • Joey says:

      your a dip shit

    • Jedi Knight says:

      “Good point. Did I say religion was a scientific theory? No. Does it matter? No. It doesn’t have to be a scientific theory to be true.”

      Young Padawan, “truth” is a subjective matter. What you need, are some more reliable *facts*. Without those, religion becomes nothing more than a collection of fairytales and blowhard sermons.

      Which reminds me, this is one of the coolest and most thought-provoking pictures I’ve seen online:
      http://www.funz.ro/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/darth-vader-priests2.jpg

      You know what it shows? A bunch of fanboys cosplaying, nothing more. Weird clothes, overopinionated attitudes, little to no social life – they fit the description. Let’s face it – pretty soon, the “truth” of your god being real or not, will have no more value than whether “Han shot first”, or if the LotR Balrog has wings.

      * * *

      “Now, I realize that science always picks the simplest solution…”

      Not really, no. Occam’s razor goes that *without enough evidence* , the simplest solution is most probably the correct one. However, should evidence be provided, scientific theories are diligently rewritten and re-tested.

      So, in the spirit of your metaphor, where in Stale Beer Hell is your “not 64″ ? When it shows up, *if* it shows up, then we’ll do some proper testing. Until that time, however, it will be… wait for it… Irrelevant.

    • Drained and Washed Clean says:

      Drained whatever: To the first two, IT’S GOD. Just shut up now.
      ** For one who has a problem with name calling and respect, you sure do have an odd way of showing it. And no, I do not accept that answer. I would like proof. Where are your facts and proof.

      Look at this: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2010/09/03/feedback-genesis-1-and-2
      ** That offers no proof of anything. Two different stories = two different stories. This is not an explanation.

      Mary. It’s not known entirely if there are two, if she’s a different person. However, I see no contradiction.
      ** It is clearly a contradiction when one says Mary Magdelene and the OTHER Mary, and one just says Mary. One book has two people, the other book has one. Obviously a contradiction.

      Who was Jesus’s dad? Cause Luke says it was Joseph.That’s, officially, according to the record, what his father is. Do you think they’re going to put God? Luke probably put that out of habit, without thinking about it.
      ** So now you are supposing to know what the intent of the author was? You are the one claiming no contradictions, so you cannot just claim error while trying to disprove error.

      Clean animals are animals they eat, such as chickens and pigs. They’re for eating.
      ** That does not answer why there is a contradiction in the numbers

      Look at this: http://www.lookinguntojesus.net/ata20010923.htm
      ** I repeat the question. Jesus could have only had 1 first sermon. Where was it? It is a contradiction.

      Perhaps you should get started.
      ** Like a majority of the story of Paul not lining up with the gospels? I’d be here all night. Perhaps you should go take a look and read this book you pretend to know so much about horizontally.

      5: I don’t care enough to look that up and disprove it. Sorry.
      ** Then you are lazy. And you have nothing to disprove it with.

      6: Actually, most historians believe there was a Jesus Christ who started Christianity, whether or not they believe he was resurrected. Get your facts straight.
      ** Actually I have my facts straight. Historians also say that Christianity was invented by Constantine to keep his empire from falling apart. Since the gospels were not even written until approx. 50 years after Jesus’s death, the supposed authors were dead.

      7: You’ve assumed he knows the future. Actually he doesn’t. We could change our course at any time. There’s no definite answer, but maybe time itself is an illusion, and he just changes things around all over the course of history.
      ** Then god is not a perfect being and not the greatest thing imaginable so why call it god? And the time is an illusion thing is crap. We know how time can work, and the out of time thing is impossible because then it could not change things around because it would be seeing all things happen at once… Our past present and future.

      10: I think #4 explains this well.
      ** Nope.

      11: Jesus was actually born sometime in April, and we only celebrate it during December because the Romans persecuted Christians, and they were celebrating at that time because the days were getting longer, so they celebrated Christ’s birth to hide it. And I can’t believe you actually just told me to prove the existence of God.
      ** You are just making things up now. Where did you go to high school? No, it is celebrated in December to make the Pagans feel more comfortable converting to Christianity. It was the Winter Solstice. Almost every “Christian” tradition that is included in xmas is from the Pagans. Nothing to do with god except the fact that religion has to steam roll everything in its path to gain power. And that is not the existence of god I am trying to prove. That is your job. Remember, I am pointing out inconsistencies and contradictions which you still have no good answer based on fact or truth.

      • Dr_Devious says:

        #11: Not to mention Halloween and All Hallows eve. Just to add a tidbit, because I would rather not disturb this flow of awesome thought! The only reason for All Hallows eve and Halloween was due to Samhain, which was Celtic.

      • Rev Toni Rigatoni says:

        Don’t forget Easter (a corruption of Aster the godess of fertility) in the spring, when pre-christian peoples celebrated the rebirth of the land after it’s period of ‘death’ during the preceeding winter. Death and rebirth at easter?, sounds familiar doesn’t it? Oh yes, another pagan festival kidnapped by christianity to make subjugation of the pagans more acceptable.

        • B. says:

          You make me miss Easter.

          Over here Easter is a lovely jumble of Christian and pagan traditions, like the bonfires to scare of witches and celebration of the end of lent. I don’t care much for Jesus, but I like the other stuff. When it hasn’t been kidnapped by Christianity, of course.

          R’Amen

  8. Pa-Pa says:

    Because this religion has hatemail, it shows how open and welcome to other believers and opineons it is. Arn’t you glad you got to share your opineon? Many religions would of tried to hide the critisisms, and their followers deserve more than that. This religion is letting you see the good and bad so you can truly and completely decide so it can have true believers.

    FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER, I <3 YOU LIKE BUTTER!

    • theFewtheProudtheMarinara says:

      “Tried to hide critisisms”? Like burning them at the stake? Or do you mean the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre of August 1572, when the Catholic party annihilated between 30,000 and 100,000 Huguenots across France?

      • tekhedd says:

        It could have worked!

        ;)

1 14 15 16 17 18 24

Leave a Reply