[Closed] God and the Afterlife......?

it's a very real thing to people who believe, and I have a huge amount of respect for that.

it's a comfort to know this has happened for a reason, even if I don't know what that reason is".

If i was to take comfort form something i could not show you, demonstrate to be real or give any evidence of its existence and yet I followed its guidance still,despite not really knowing what it was doing, would you respect me? What if that thing was the farting honey monster that made us all or would you respect me or think I perhaps needed some help?

Ask me why.

I would rather not as it is very silly to assume that my pretend and facetious answer is as valid as any other - not least as I made it up and dont believe it myself. You have more respect for it than I do

For me, I just go 'shit happens' and move on. Nothing confusing about that.

Indeed it is comforting but it is still not true or accurate.

That's just your belief, Junkyard.

If i was to take comfort form something i could not show you, demonstrate to be real or give any evidence of its existence and yet I followed its guidance still,despite not really knowing what it was doing, would you respect me?

Yes of course, but what'd really make me respect you is if you learned how to understand other people's points of view 🙂

I would rather not as it is very silly to assume that my pretend and facetious answer is as valid as any other

If the honey monster created the universe then the honey monster is God, by definition, so you've not really come up with anything new.

I said

"A: It's nonsense.
B: Religions as a whole (including Christianity), are (or have been) responsible for homophobia, subjugation of woman, and child genital mutilation. No amount of 'good' makes that acceptable."

You replied

That's a really stupid argument.

That's like saying that people have been responsible for wars and death, therefore Sesame Street is evil.

I responded

"REALLY?

**** me, I must be thicker than I thought (and I think I'm quite thick). Explain to me just how that is in any way similar."

Perhaps unsurprisingly, you didn't offer an explanation.

I posted

"Where no evidence exists FOR something, it can safely be dismissed. It's basic common sense"

You retorted

No, it can't, and no it isn't.

SOME things can be dismissed without evidence, based on extrapolated probability. You know where money comes from and what it is, and how people deal with it, so you are unlikely to be owed £1bn by any of us and we're unlikely to have it.

I replied

"But unlikely isn't the same as PROOF is it. So, you cannot disprove it. It's really an extremely simple concept to embrace. If unlikely WAS the same as proof, no gods exists."

You ignored me.

You posted (in response to someone else)

go on about religious people being really stupid because they believe in God, but it's YOU that's apparently too stupid to understand their thoughts and opinions of intelligent people. Dunning Kruger at work.

You clearly have no idea what 'intelligence' means and you've obviously used the Dunning-Kruger effect in reverse, which, if you think about it, is rather amusing and also QED. One cannot be 'intelligent' and believe in things for which there is absolutely no tiny iota of proof, the two things are non compatible, indeed, polar opposites.

I'm going down the Lamb in Leadenhall market if you fancy a pint Woppit.

Love to, but by the time I'd walked there and back there'd be no time for an actual pint I'm afraid... (still not up to cycling anywhere yet).

If i was to take comfort form something i could not show you, demonstrate to be real or give any evidence of its existence and yet I followed its guidance still,despite not really knowing what it was doing, would you respect me? What if that thing was the farting honey monster that made us all or would you respect me or think I perhaps needed some help?

* Exceptions to this are people whose beliefs are detrimental to other people and society as a whole**, for example those involved in the mass slaughter of innocents based on their belief in religious or political ideology, or furtherence of themselves at the expense of others financially or environmentally, or through the purchase of the recordings of those who find fame through the medium of reality TV shows, thus ensuring I can't escape their uninspiring warblings on the radio.

** This it seems to me is a largely arbitary categorisation based on nothing stronger than our own opinions of good and bad.

Creator god - No. Nothing can appear on its own and not even big bang.

Science - Limited in grand scheme of things.

Many gods - Yes.

Afterlife - Yes.

[b]
This thread is officially closed. Go away.[/b]

🙄

I don't have to share or even understand your beliefs to be able to respect your belief in them

Well get yourself down the mental institute and show some respect as you will find plenty of beliefs there you dont understand.

Perhaps Molgrips can accompany you on your mission of respect?

I am not saying religious views are mental I am saying some beliefs are clearly gibbeirish and not worthy of respect. We all draw the line in a a different place but we do all draw the line somewhere.

Whilst addressing me directly molgrips you have said

You aren't that intelligent then

That's a really stupid argument.

and

I think the debate has moved past your level of competence Tucker.

Perhaps I should make you aware of the concept of 'ad hominem' (it's Latin), where someone feels compelled to attack the person making the argument because they are unable to attack the actual argument they are offering.

You'll notice I haven't needed to resort to calling you names, your responses do all the work for me.

Well get y down tourself down the mental institute and show some respect as you will find plenty of beliefs there you dont understand.

and in words?
Would you respect those beliefs?

and in words?
Would you respect those beliefs?

Exceptions to this are people whose beliefs are detrimental to other people and society as a whole

This is why I'm uncomfortable discussing an [i]individuals[/i] beliefs, and would rather focus on the wider role which religion plays in society.

A vicar friend mentioned something about militant atheists on Facebook. I responded by saying that so long as religions didn't interfere with secular matters, 'militant' atheists wouldn't care what people believed. Her response was that there are [i]no[/i] secular matters.

This makes it rather harder to ignore religion generally.

Talking of "militant Atheists" - latest news from the front line:

http://www.secularism.org.uk/media-round-up.html

Ok. Tucker, I was phone browsing in a rush, I must've missed some of your posts.

REALLY?

**** me, I must be thicker than I thought (and I think I'm quite thick). Explain to me just how that is in any way similar.

I was highlighting the fact that a correlation between religious people and atrocities does not indicate a causal link. Do you accept that?

"But unlikely isn't the same as PROOF is it. So, you cannot disprove it. It's really an extremely simple concept to embrace. If unlikely WAS the same as proof, no gods exists."

You chose a bad example. Financial tranasations have a strictly limited context. You have a bank balance, your money is defined as the combination of that and any cash you have. Financial transactions are clearly defined.

The existence of God is unknowable for sure, so people can claim the positive, and people can claim the negative, but no-one's got any way of proving either way. So why should people NOT believe in God? You have no evidence of the existence of God, but as we know that isn't good enough. Furthermore, since we don't (or can't) know what God would be if it it existed, we don't know what evidence would look like. So you can't even say there isn't any with any certainty.

You clearly have no idea what 'intelligence' means

Please enlighten me!

Perhaps I should make you aware of the concept of 'ad hominem'

I'm not making ad hominem attacks. I'm not replacing argument with insults, I'm giving lots of arguments. But I also don't think you're as bright as you think you are.

That's basically where I'm coming from. But I'm not attributing it to a higher power...

Giving it a title, a name ... I've come to it via the name God

I’m just a bloke like you, I like beer n birds n football.

Unfair scoring system its at 1 1/2 as you do play football so you must like it on some level...oh actually the fact you dont like it enough means the man bit is questionable so fair enough 1 it is 😉

why should people NOT believe in God?

if you wish to belief in all these things then fine but it should be self evident why this is unwise.

the main reason for not believing is that it is not true but apart from that its fine.

you know all this its why you yourself dont believe.

why should people NOT believe in God?

Same reason you shouldn't believe in Underpants Gnomes.

Going with capital g you've identified yourself with the christians and distanced yourself from all the other religions

It's up to him to tell us what he's identified with, not you.

if you wish to belief in all these things then fine but it should be self evident why this is unwise

It's not. Tell us.

I went out with a girl once who's family were quite big in the local church.. they were really really good, nice, fun people..

The young lady had a very strong sense of her own identity, and was a very strong independent young woman, with a really positive attitude to life..

I'm not sure if any gods of any religion would have wholeheartedly endorsed her bedroom antics, but it was certainly a heavenly summer as far as I was concerned

It's up to him to tell us what he's identified with, not you

It's not. Tell us.

the class of events we cannot prove to be false is limited only by your imagination and all I have to do is make sure the thing i make up is

Why not tell us why you dont believe then?
Is it something to do with the lack of proof or are you just going to say you did on a whim for no reason?

These threads would die a death without the atheist asking the aethists why they are aethists

your right though clearly intelligence is not the preserve of either side 😉 and 🙄

You said it's self evident why it's unwise to believe in something without proof.

That's a really big question, so if you have the answer please share it. You just posed another question.

Get a room, you two.

Hold on Woppit, I think he's on to something - if we speak in hushed voices they may finally finish all this

I was highlighting the fact that a correlation between religious people and atrocities does not indicate a causal link. Do you accept that?

Between all atrocities, yes, between specific atrocities, no, not at all. Would children still have their penises mutilated were it not for the bibles? Almost certainly not.

You chose a bad example. Financial tranasations have a strictly limited context. You have a bank balance, your money is defined as the combination of that and any cash you have. Financial transactions are clearly defined.

My example stands. You made a bet with me and lost, don't tell me you don't remember, you owe me that money. Prove otherwise. You can't. Period. YOU CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE.

Please enlighten me!

I'm not sure that I can because thus far you seem unable to grasp some fairly simple concepts. Intelligence (my definition) is the ability to take information and process it, to be able solve, to be able to deduce, to adsorb information and from that information provide answers. The ability to calculate, invent, design.

I'm not making ad hominem attacks. I'm not replacing argument with insults, I'm giving lots of arguments. But I also don't think you're as bright as you think you are.

As I've already said, twice, I don't think I am that bright. Read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect again.

If my argument is running rings around yours, which it clearly is, because not only is my argument supported by the whole of science, and yours by nothing at all, not even a credible reply, then what makes you think you are qualified to judge my level of intelligence, competence, or brightness?

Now read up on the Dunning-Kruger effect once more.

I am against religion because of the negative affect it has on others. It really has no effect on me. I'm male, heterosexual, and my genitals as are as they should be.

Those who do chose religion often talk of the benefits to themselves.

I wonder if we can take anything from that.

1 out of four isn't a great strike rate TBH

Oh well. There you go ... maybe you're the weirdo... 😀

As for God, god or whatever you want call it ... because I don't care.

That's the point I'm trying to make ... just get involved in tapping into that spiritualism ... whatever you want to call it.

Stop getting hung up on technicalities

But FYI , like I’ve said …. I found myself in church trying to get the kids in the school.

And lets be fair, as a typical STWer, I was hardly likely to rock up at the local Sikh Temple …. Although no doubt they would have made me more than welcome… but if I had and I’d gone in with the same mind set of…. Lets have a look at this and see whats it’s all about… who’s to say I wouldn’t be feeling the same today as a Sikh rather than a Christian.

You know what, for the edification of others, here's what Dr David Dunning and Dr Justin Kruger concluded:

"The skills needed to produce logically sound arguments, for instance, are the same skills that are necessary to recognize when a logically sound argument has been made. Thus, if people lack the skills to produce correct answers, they are also cursed with an inability to know when their answers, or anyone else's, are right or wrong. They cannot recognize their responses as mistaken, or other people's responses as superior to their own."

That's the point I'm trying to make ... just get involved in tapping into that spiritualism ... whatever you want to call it.

maybe you're the weirdo...

That's the point I'm trying to make ... just get involved in tapping into that spiritualism ... whatever you want to call it.

Stop getting hung up on technicalities.

Can you not get the same 'spiritual' benefits through secular ways? I suspect what you've experienced is a bit of cognitive behaviour therapy and a bit of conditioning.

If it works for you, brilliant. But, I know of quite a few Christians with depression, including the daughter of the current Archbishop of Canterbury, so clearly religion doesn't have the same effect on others as it has upon you.

Those who do chose religion often talk of the benefits to themselves.

Yep I defo have.

But one of the reasons I welcomed the change to my life was, that by being generally happier…. I was nice to those around me.

It’s nice to be nice….. nothing new there… you don’t have to be religious to live by that of course.

But like many obvious things that make life better for all, feelings like that don’t necessarily get verbalized and so recognized as much as they should.

I believe in general, for the most part (sadly there are exceptions) religion of any type will do this.

Tucker go down to your local on Sunday, see what it said, and report back to us.

And just for the record molgrips, do you consider this thread to now be beyond the capabilities of people like (were they all living now):

Stephen Hawking
Richard Dawkins
Charles Darwin
Leonardo DaVinci
Peter Higgs
Alan Turing
Sigmund Freud
& Noam Chomsky?

Are they also not very intelligent, not very bright?

And lets be fair, as a typical STWer, I was hardly likely to rock up at the local Sikh Temple

I occasionally get the urge to attend one of those hateful (if you don't believe in jesus you'll go to hell) "Alpha" sessions, just for the hell of it... 😉

Oh no, not a "my list is longer than yours"...

...stick to [s]circumcision[/s] gential mutilation please. Your Roundheads v Cavaliers obsession is much better.

YOU CANNOT PROVE A NEGATIVE

Yes, I know. I've never said otherwise.

As for your arguments including DK - you are aware that it could be working both ways, aren't you? Either you're too stupid to understand my argument, or I'm too stupid to understand yours.

Let's recap - your argument is that the current evidence means it's extremely unlikley that God exists.

My argument is that you have no way of knowing how likely it is, which makes it a matter of faith BOTH WAYS.

And just for the record molgrips, do you consider this thread to now be beyond the capabilities of people like (were they all living now):

Why do you quote that list? Because they don't believe in God? I don't believe in God either. This is not my point.

If it works for you

That's all I've ever said.

But if you don't try (in whatever form that takes) how will you ever know ?

Edit.... Mike, I'm not directing that at you personnally, you understand

how will you ever know ?

I'll take my chances if its all the same with you.

I don't believe in God either

Why ?

God is a gas.

God is a gas

But Jumping Jack Flash is a gas, gas, gas.

Why do you not believe in god then - you seem to be arguing its just as likely and yet you have chosen to not opt for it

[img] [/img]

But if you don't try (in whatever form that takes) how will you ever know?

This is why my eldest, who is ten, is still being taken to church on a Sunday. My wife says that she needs to go so she knows what she's rejecting, so she has to go until she's at secondary school.

I was quite proud of her when she pointed out to my wife that [i]she[/i] hadn't gone to Zeus Church, so how did she know that wasn't true? 🙂

I think it's just that believers believe, non-believers don't believe, and as much as we like to think otherwise, neither side can prove anything to the other to the contrary.

But that means... 13 pages in and... it's all been a waste of time. 😉

Why do you not believe in god then

Pondo has it.

I don't believe in God, because I don't feel the need to. However if you ask me if I think God exists, I'll tell you that I don't know.