You want to see what John Lennox said in response to this.Let's say that the consensus is that our species, being the higher primates, Homo Sapiens, has been on the planet for at least 100,000 years, maybe more. Francis Collins says maybe 100,000. Richard Dawkins thinks maybe a quarter-of-a-million. I'll take 100,000. In order to be a Christian, you have to believe that for 98,000 years, our species suffered and died, most of its children dying in childbirth, most other people having a life expectancy of about 25 years, dying of their teeth. Famine, struggle, bitterness, war, suffering, misery, all of that for 98,000 years.
Heaven watches this with complete indifference. And then 2000 years ago, thinks 'That's enough of that. It's time to intervene,' and the best way to do this would be by condemning someone to a human sacrifice somewhere in the less literate parts of the Middle East. Don't lets appeal to the Chinese, for example, where people can read and study evidence and have a civilization. Let's go to the desert and have another revelation there. This is nonsense. It can't be believed by a thinking person
Christopher hitchens
I’m not arrogant at all and I have asked what people have thought, go back and read the thread.Your arrogance is breathtaking.
I notice you haven't asked the atheists what they actually believe, rather you have told them what you think they believe.
So, for example, you told me I believed that the universe was the result of a "random" event. Interestingly, this is an active area of current scientific debate: what rules appertained before the big bang? Where were the rules of physics before? In any case, there are more choices than an intelligent designer vs a random event.
Actually, I have no view on this other than a passing layman's interest in science. I am an existentialist by inclination and thus think the question is irrelevant.
Similarly, I do not think my brain is the sole source of my moral views. There is a higher power, but it is not divine, it is the process of civilization. The higher power is man, and, while I am free to develop whatever personal moral philosophy I wish, I do not think that it is a good idea to ignore the intellectual weight of millenia. Metron Anthropos is a very old idea.
Well I believe in God, Christ as the Son of God and that he died for our sins and rose on the 3rd day.You have an intelligent mind, cut through the rubbish and tell us what you think is real...
You make stuff up in almost every reply to my posts.It’s actually been quite interesting with some.
Others have described Christians as “horrific”, “flat earther types” and morons.
All the aggression and the sour arguments have come from a handful of atheists, not the other way around.
But don’t worry, you get back on your high horse and pretend otherwise.
Have a lovely day.
Spectacularly and unamusingly missing the point.Not only that, he has to prove he isn't a murderer or he is one. I don't have to prove he is one, I'm just showing true grit by believing in it, he has to prove in every single day of his life that in every 24 hours that's passed he hasn't killed someone at some point. I await his irrefutable evidence.
I said:You make stuff up in almost every reply to my posts.
Show me where christians have been described as 'flat earther types'.
Show me the posts where you've come to the conclusion i'm on my ''high horse''
Show me where i've claimed 'the aggression' has come from christians in the thread.
You said:Comparing an Anglican Christian to a flat earther is a little stretch isn’t it?
Not really.
Well whatever the reason mate, I'm glad you are feeling less stressed. You seem to have whipped up a storm here. I will leave you to it. Good luck.I don’t think that’s all down to my faith but it’s certainly helped.
When you view even those you disagree with as God’s children too, you tend to not get as angry with them.
Some arguments were during a time when I was under a lot of stress earlier this year and it’s why I took a break to be honest.
Haha thanks mate, enjoy the bank holiday!Well whatever the reason mate, I'm glad you are feeling less stressed. You seem to have whipped up a storm here. I will leave you to it. Good luck.
I have expressed no views on those calling you a loon. Fwiw, I admire your dogged defence of your faith, but you do yourself an injustice when you ascribe views to others which you cannot possibly know.I’m not arrogant at all and I have asked what people have thought, go back and read the thread.
I’ve not criticised atheists at all, nor have I been personal.
You think I’m arrogant but those calling me a loon, moron or horrific aren’t?
The “random event” point was to try and differentiate it from there being an intelligent designer, I was using it as an example.
No of course you haven’t, because they agree with you, so you’re not critical of people calling Christians morons or horrific, because they’re on your side. That’s why your faux critique of my posting style is a little boring, you’re not on a moral crusade to ensure the debate is held to a decent standard, because if you were, you’d have pulled up those who have been personal. I really cannot be bothered with that though, I’d much rather we just talked about the topic at hand.I have expressed no views on those calling you a loon. Fwiw, I admire your dogged defence of your faith, but you do yourself an injustice when you ascribe views to others which you cannot possibly know.
I have detected no example in the thread where you genuinely solicit the views of others. Your usual technique is to put words into their mouths followed by the rhetorical "surely you agree that you...." type question. I have noticed you do this on other threads as well.
As I posted earlier, stick to your defence, but eschew this type of approach to atheism. An argued crit of atheism would make more sense.
Oh, and your last sentence is just squirming!
Hmmm.......not good enough.No of course you haven’t, because they agree with you, so you’re not critical of people calling Christians morons or horrific, because they’re on your side. That’s why your faux critique of my posting style is a little boring, you’re not on a moral crusade to ensure the debate is held to a decent standard, because if you were, you’d have pulled up those who have been personal. I really cannot be bothered with that though, I’d much rather we just talked about the topic at hand.
The reason why I have suggested people might have a particular view being atheist, is because that’s what atheism is, the “random event” is merely a very basic example of what happened at the Big Bang, it was to distinguish it from being something of intelligence. Maybe “random event” isn’t the best way to describe a non-designed/intelligent Big Bang but that’s all I meant by it.
Well it’s the truth.Hmmm.......not good enough.
Until then what?When the anti-religionists on here begin to discuss something like Nagarjuna’s Mulamadhyamikakarikas, the inner chapters of the Zhuangzi, Meister Eckhart, the mystical insights of Ibn Arabi, or the impenetrable lyricism of Dogen’s Shobogenzo with some kind of rudimentary facility, it might then be possible for a meaningful discussion to take place.
Until then....
Church of England.@Ban-jani. A serious question. Of all the Christian "sects", which one did you choose, and why?
It is brilliant in the sense that it described most people's conversions. A personal incident, a feeling, you did say you had that reading One of the anonymous writers given a name. So, it's closer than you are willing to accept. Let's face it, it wasn't proof that God existed it was you having a feeling he did. Just like Collins who saw a frozen waterfall in three frozen parts and he concluded, with out a shred of evidence, that this was the Trinity. If he carried out his scientific work with such irrational abandon, he would have failed to get his first degree.Not really at all.
It’s a completely false assessment of my conversion.
I’d say with total honesty that it’s a mixture of emotional and objectivity on my part.It is brilliant in the sense that it described most people's conversions. A personal incident, a feeling, you did say you had that reading One of the anonymous writers given a name. So, it's closer than you are willing to accept. Let's face it, it wasn't proof that God existed it was you having a feeling he did. Just like Collins who saw a frozen waterfall in three frozen parts and he concluded, with out a shred of evidence, that this was the Trinity. If he carried out his scientific work with such irrational abandon, he would have failed to get his first degree.
It was all about an emotional response. And reading your story, that seems to me to be the same. Anyway, regardless of how you got there, if it brings you peace, and you don't want people in the book who have a hard time, women, gay people to be persecuted because the book does, you're ok with me. Hope you had a good Christmas.
There are a couple of responses to this. The first (Dawkins' position) is that most people who describe themselves as atheists are technically agnostic, just agnostics who are making a probability judgement that makes the idea of a god so monumentally unlikely that for all intents and purposes they call themselves atheists to differentiate themselves from the people who claim it's unknowable or equally likely either way.Agnostics have nothing to prove as they’re not claiming to know how the universe was formed, an atheist is claiming that it wasn’t created intelligently and with that claim, they’re making an assertion without evidence too.
That being the case people will choose to focus on the negative impact religion might have, seen most noticeably on a large scale through wars and other atrocities where religion is used to rationalise such acts.Until then what?
People are typically anti-religion because of the impact it has one our society, which is why anyone who is anti-religion will typically focus most of their attention on the dominant religion in their society. When I lived in Morocco, most atheists didn't spend most of their time slagging of Christianity, because that's not the religion that affects their life without their consent.
Yeah, and you made that up as well. I never compared a flat earther to a christian.I said:
You said:
This was yesterday at about 1:30pm.