Has anyone been on the Alpha Course?

Can you petition the Lord with prayer?

not according to the lizard king

Doors/ Jim Morrison reference BTW

Th Psalm below
1The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.

2The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.

3They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one

So apparently no aethist does any good and we were being rude to them.
I look at the good of the catholic church in africa in respect of AIDS /condoms and child deaths. I struggle to see how their position is the good position to maintain.
What Lord wants dying children and people for the sake of a condom?

Sorry I forgot not only is God infallible so is the Pope , even when he contradicts a previous infallible pope!

I always wonder why they have to vote for a Pope as they commune with God surely they all want the same person?

EDIT: Yes ernie Mr Woopit did take bad taste to new depths with his palliative care comment and his defence of not using fluffy enough language.

Nasty old Mr Woppit here. Boo! Hiss! He's behind you! etc.

Yes, I do find that being told I am being "prayed for" to be SO offensive that the only way to describe how it makes me feel is as I said, which I won't repeat. It is a vile and patronising act that insults my intelligence and anyone who offers it can shove it, frankly…

I think t's worth repeating (evidently, you didn't take the point,Junkyard) that Loulabella's description of her way forward actually agreed with my analysis of the need for respitive care. As I said, my use of the word "palliative" was an error, but my analysis was spot on, confirmed by the subject, no less. Sorry about that.

Anyway, if this thread teaches anything, I think it's this:

An argument is joined between atheists and the superstitious.

The superstitious attempt, unsuccessfully, to try and meet the atheists on their own ground by employing what they think is a reasoned approach.

This doesn't work because their "reasoning" is, as ever, warped by the filter of "faith" (in whatever…) concreted into their psyche by indoctrination and contains no internal logic.

Eventually, these attempts trail off, to be replaced by the first fallback position – quoting scripture. This is doomed to failure – the atheist argument has already said that the particular "scripture" thus employed is (as far as the atheist is concerned) at least invalid, if not complete nonsense. Despite this, the superstitious continue to try and use the tactic to argue their case, ignoring the fact that it is not going to work. Note: an indication of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over again whilst expecting a different result.

Having eventually been made to realise that the scriptural quoting is a dead end, the superstitious then resort to "prayer", informing the atheist that this is happening.

As prayer has been shown to result in being able to affect no change whatsoever, nothing happens.

Next: The circular argument starts up all over again with the same results.

Endgame: still no evidence.

Please employ the following regarding any further comments you may have:

"I refer you to my earlier comment on this subject" – just look it up back in the thread, it's already been said and you probably missed it.

That's me done on this one.

Nasty old Mr Woppit here. Boo! Hiss! He's behind you! etc.

It's ok, Jesus loves you.

Y'know I think Jesus would make an exception here 😉

Yes ernie Mr Woopit did take bad taste to new depths with his palliative care comment and his defence of not using fluffy enough language.

In defence (of the indefencible?)… I don't understand 'palliative care' to be exclusively end-of-life. I understand it to be any care aimed at relief of symptoms/suffering as opposed to a cure.

Make what you like of the rest of his comments but I wouldn't get too hung on on choice of the word 'palliative' over 'respite'.

Atheist botherer doesn't make sense otherwise

There was no attempt to make grammatical sense, indeed spellcheck always reminds that there is no such word as 'botherer'. The intention rather, was to convey an opinion or feeling, in much the same way that fanatical atheists insist rather childishly, to spell God without a capital gee, despite the fact of it being quite incorrect.

that's not his strong suit…

No SFB, english grammar is most certainly not my strong point. If I recall correctly, I received grade 4 in CSE english. But do I detect a tinge of disapproval ? Because that would be indeed strange, from one who claims to support linguistic anarchy.

Note: an indication of insanity is to repeat the same thing over and over again whilst expecting a different result.

except in relation to software ?

Oh and palliative is not necessarily to do with dying:

pal·li·a·tive (p?l'?-?'t?v, -?-?-t?v)
adj.

1. Tending or serving to palliate.
2. Relieving or soothing the symptoms of a disease or disorder without effecting a cure.

n. One that palliates, especially a palliative drug or medicine.

The intention rather was to convey an opinion or feeling, in much the same way that fanatical atheists insist rather childishly, to spell God without a capital gee, despite the fact of it being quite incorrect.

I've noticed that atheism and atheist have been capitalised a few times in this thread.

Woppit isn't the only one to take being told someone will pray for you less than graciously, it really does wind me up as well. Usually because when someone has said it to my face they have been being simultaneously patronising and pitying. They'll usually get a hearfelt FOAD in response, at best.

in much the same way that fanatical atheists insist rather childishly, to spell God without a capital gee, despite the fact of it being quite incorrect.

My usage is god or gods in the sense of an unknown number, where 'Gods' wouldn't make sense

God –noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol.
7. (lowercase) any deified person or object.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater.
a. the upper balcony in a theater.
b. the spectators in this part of the balcony.

I should probably point out that I've spelt "God" as "god" previously because I was on my mobile and couldn't be bothered to capitalise it…

isn't it the nature of conversation to wander ? If I were talking to someone who insisted we had to stick the their agenda I'd soon lose interest.

.

This thread didn't "wander", it was immediately sabotaged and hijacked by fanatical atheists in a feeding frenzy of abuse and insults.

Indeed the bulk of this thread (which despite being 3 days old is about to overtake Petesgaff's month old thread in size) appears to be nothing more than abuse, insults, and ridicule.

Quite why some feel the need to resort to hysterical rantings full of abuse, I'm not sure I understand. But I do find it 'interesting'. Maybe it betrays a lack of confidence in their own beliefs.

Because whilst I personally have very strong beliefs, I find when I am confronted with someone who has diametrically opposed opinions that rather than launching into a hysterical frenzy of insults and abuse, I calmly sit back in the warm comfort of my own smugness.

I am able to calmly make my point (or to not bother making my point, if I so wish) confident in the superiority of my beliefs. Much in the same way as someone who has perfected a fighting system feels no need to shout and holler in an altercation.

It would appear that some of the more hysterical atheists, might be a little unsure about their own strengths.

The problem with this thread is that anyone with an ounce of common sense, has stayed out of it. I rather stupidly blundered into it, in the naive belief that I could make a point, and leave it at that………despite all my instincts telling me otherwise.

Ernie I dont recognise the "abuse and insults" etc and I am not sure why you should feel the need to be quite so indignant. This thread has been no more or less offensive than many you yourself have partaken in.
Could it be the subject matter and the fact that you may feel it should be beyond sensible debate? Are you being hypersensitive?
You appear to be more guilty than most of using emotive and melodramatic assertions in your posts, which has suprised me a little.

I have made my position clear and summarised it on the previous page. If you read that you will see why I feel it is appropriate to challenge religion and not to be diverted.

My usage is god or gods in the sense of an unknown number, where 'Gods' wouldn't make sense

God –noun
1. the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.
2. the Supreme Being considered with reference to a particular attribute: the God of Islam.
3. (lowercase) one of several deities, esp. a male deity, presiding over some portion of worldly affairs.
4. (often lowercase) a supreme being according to some particular conception: the god of mercy.
5. Christian Science. the Supreme Being, understood as Life, Truth, Love, Mind, Soul, Spirit, Principle.
6. (lowercase) an image of a deity; an idol.
7. (lowercase) any deified person or object.
8. (often lowercase) Gods, Theater.
a. the upper balcony in a theater.
b. the spectators in this part of the balcony.
Posted 2 minutes ago # Report-Post

Ah, you resort to pointing out the 'rules' to me SFB !

So you don't believe in "linguistic anarchy" after all ? !

Or do you support it when spoken, but not when written ? !

LOL !

a hysterical frenzy of insults and abuse

Where? Really, where on this thread are you seeing a "a hysterical frenzy of insults and abuse"?

The thread I see is actually pretty restrained and largely discussed at the general, rather than personal, level (leaving the LoulaBella/MrWhopit thing out of it).

confident in the superiority of my beliefs

superior for you perhaps, but we're all different

I calmly sit back in the warm comfort of my own smugness.

I said you were just teasing us 🙂

As an aside, how would one measure the superiority of a belief ? Bearing in mind it's inherently an act of faith not based on concrete fact, what relative criteria can be applied ? Is believing in two gods twice as good or only half as good ? My suggestion would be on behaviour, which on this thread at least has us about level pegging.

Ah, you resort to pointing out the 'rules' to me SFB !

language doesn't really have rules, it's usage. However, in the same way I wasn't convinced that evolutionary theory applies identically to societies as to species, my disrespect for the rule of law doesn't necessarily extend for instance to the rules of physics or snooker.

Ernie I dont recognise the "abuse and insults" etc

Some people have though…

LoulaBella – Member

How come all the 'atheists' on here are so horrible and full of snide sarcastic putdowns about Christians?
You dont see me writing derogatroy comments about you and your beliefs. I'm not trying to convert any of you, if your happy then fair play, live and let live and all that jazz.

Posted 2 days ago

How come LoulaBella no longer posts on this thread ……… it is clearly a subject close to her heart ?
I suspect that Woppit's insults eventually became too offensive to stomach.

my disrespect for the rule of law doesn't necessarily extend for instance to the rules of physics or snooker.

You mean you didn't have one of those Roox(?) "Gravity: I fought the law" t-shirts back in the day?

I didn't spot too many hysterical atheists in the thread either, unless you regard all atheists as hysterical.

I can't beleive this is still rolling, I'm so not interested in reading it all either too many petty arguments, let people with their beliefs be no matter which way they fall and remember as a wise man once said "Never loose faith in the colour of the sky …"

it was immediately sabotaged and hijacked by fanatical atheists in a feeding frenzy of abuse and insults.

So what you really mean is an insensitive remark that (as far as I can see didnt offend LoulaBella) which I agree was badly worded gives rise to the description above?
LoulaBella did post a couple of times after this and even posted a picture of her beautiful son.
Could you be guilty of "offence by proxy"?
I think you are over egging it a bit Ernie.

You're very sensitive ernie which by your own logic suggests actually that it's you not quite so sure of your beliefs as you'd like to try and portray.

Anyway, leaving aside Woppit (since I think it's just his style to post in that way, either that or he's trolling), can you go through and pull out from each of the main contributors, including me, where we've sabotaged and hijacked and given abuse and insults. I'd be keen to see whether what to me seems mainly perfectly reasoned comments are being taken by you as insults/abuse.

Loulabella should really comment for herself but I suspect that she's too close to it emotionally to be reading some of the comments how they're intended. I made the point at the time that if she reads the comments back she'd probably see that they're mainly not intended to insult/abuse (Woppit excepted again though technically I think he was being extremely insensitive rather than actually insulting/abusive).

I suspect that you're mistaking the 'non-believers'' challenging of religion as insults when it isn't. For instance, I've mentioned mumbo jumbo a few times. That's not meant as an insult about religion but rather about the dogma that surrounds it and to me seems reasonable enough – what's wearing a silly hat got to do with believing in God (capitalised!) or not?

I guess I just decided to stay out of it but as I've been name checked…
This thread
Offensive – yes
Ignorant – yes
full of moaning old gits – yes (rudeboy agrees with me 🙂 )

Was talking about this forum post last night with the girls over a glass or two of wine and we were wondering what atheists shout out during, ahem, sex?
'DARWIN, OH DARWIN, OH DAWKINS, OH MY, OH GOSH!'
Not very sexy.

I'm so not interested in reading it all either too many petty arguments

I think what people are willing to believe is fascinating, perhaps because I'm so sceptical

as a wise man once said "Never loose faith in the colour of the sky …"

too wise for me I don't understand what it means

So, Ernie, by "fanatical atheists in a feeding frenzy of abuse and insults" do you mean one person has upset one other person (and possible a few more who were upset by association)?

Loula, you posted since I did.

Offensive – yes
Ignorant – yes

Out of interest, can you give some examples – I know there are some, clearly but do you honestly think that all the comments that don't agree with your views are offensive and ignorant?

Not very sexy.

one doesn't necessarily need actual words…

PS "Gosh" means God

You're very sensitive ernie……..

😀 Not at all.

In fact ……. I find the way some people appear to get carried away with their own insults, really rather amusing. Although I do appreciate that it is not so funny for some other people.

……..anyways, I think it's time to just 'sit back in the warm comfort of my own smugness' now 8)

If you have a faith great.
If you haven't well thats great also.
If you feel prayers have been answered whilst going through bad times. Well, thats good also.
Its all about what makes a person happy and what can get them through life in general.

We are all individual people and have our own beliefs and opinions so lets stop the pointless arguing and chill.

Peace and Love mannnnn.

toby1 – I couldn't agree more

These are from the first three pages. After that I got bored. We could argue about whether they are "ignorant" and "offensive". But they don't exactly add up to a pleasant tone of conversation or erudite debate. 🙂

embarrassing for the civilised world
brain washing ceremonies
Vacuous gibberish sold by delusional, brainwashed propagandists.
Adults with imaginary friends are stupid.
a form of child abuse
Faith is complete shite.
just childish
brianwashing [sic] by do-gooders
a crock of sh!t whichever way you spread it
the weak, the needy and the impressionable.
Your doctrine requires faith because it is utter b0llocks.
sheeple
like a toddler smacked up on Sunny-D and demanding reasurnace [sic] that you are some how "special".
dressing up in silly outfits and saying mumbo jumbo

I keep quiet during sex, hoping god turns a blind eye to the contraceptives 🙂

bigdummy – Very good. One thing religion certainly does is cause people to insult one another. Hence the reason we have so many wars today.

one doesn't necessarily need actual words…

PS "Gosh" means God

the illusion is shattered for me now 😉

calm rational view on religion from an atheist POV 😉

Newsnight vid

Have we reached the Renaissance yet?

😉

is there a place of worship/belonging for stoic hedonsists?

I'm sticking to my policy of pantheistic indifference.

but do you honestly think that all the comments that don't agree with your views are offensive and ignorant?

no but do you honestly think none of them are offensive?
See BD above of which one is actually mine 😳