Is the UK a Christian Country?

Guess what i did?

I’m guessing you made up an elaborate story to back up your impossible to evidence assertion that there is a walrus in your biscuit tin? Then expensively bound it, passed it down generations and called it the Truth, so that it would be accepted by millions as actual evidence, when actually only heresay?

Did I get it?

Edit; yes, but cougar got it first…

Provide evidence. Frankly, there’s more historical data to suggest that Sherlock Holmes existed than Jesus.

Well if you disregard all the gospels, gnostic gospels, possible references in Josephus account of the jewish uprising.

I am not saying god exists just that a man called jesus probably did exist and was able to get people to listen to him.

They will all have the word BELIEF in the definition.

Because dictionaries are impartial. If there was a term to describe people who rejected the flat Earth model, it would say “… the belief that the Earth is round.”

Ok, i think we just need to wait until cougar and TJ tell us if bogeymen or unicorns exist. If they cannot be sure then they need to tell us what they think, or believe.

TJ still needs to clarify why the contents of my biscuit tin are unknowable yet the ‘fact’ of the non existence of god is.

Did I get it?

Edit; yes, but cougar got it first…

Nope, i hoofed it into next week, ‘cos it looked at me funny

There’s some rather bizarre use of the Schrodinger’s Cat thought experiment going on here especially as it’s now turned into Charlie Mungus’ Walrus! Some of you appear to be pushing the analogy way past the limits of it’s usefulness as a way of reflecting on the difficulty of pinning down the state in which certain particles exist.

TJ still needs to clarify why the contents of my biscuit tin are unknowable yet the ‘fact’ of the non existence of god is.

Biscuits exist. I have seen them with my own eyes. therefore there are two possibilities in the tin – it has biscuits in or it does not.

Once i have accepted that I do not believe in god then there is only one possibility. There is no god.

God and biscuits are not equal. Biscuits exist and are proven to exist. God does not.

it is a reasonable assumption that Jesus did exist
…
a man called jesus probably did exist

You need to be careful here. It’s absolutely possible that someone called Jesus existed, and that some or all of the stories about him are based on actual events. It’s equally possible that the ‘person’ we know as Jesus actually comprised of stories told about many men over generations, or that he was largely fictitious.

But, we simply don’t know. There is very little in the way of written records to give us any clues, let alone actual proof. There’s no “probably” about it.

Look at it this way. We don’t really know for certain what the truth is behind the Robin Hood legend and whether he actually existed, and that hails from this country a few hundred years ago rather than in a different continent a couple of millennia back.

i think we just need to wait until cougar and TJ tell us if bogeymen or unicorns exist.

I thought my stance was clear (and nominally different from TJs).

please, just restate it for clarity?

I remember a bloke on Hill Street Blues called Jesus. Jesus Martinez I think. Course that was an (excellent) work of fiction, so that muddies the water a bit…

There is no god.

So, you believe there is no god? Obviously it can’t be ‘know’ because scientific method would not allow you to make that claim.

Just clarify please. Because your premise for ‘there is no god’ is based on a belief.

Once i have accepted that I do not believe in god

TJ still needs to clarify why the contents of my biscuit tin are unknowable yet the ‘fact’ of the non existence of god is.

But that’s only half Schrodinger’s thought experiment – the point is surely that if, for example, you ‘open the box’ by experimenting on light to observe it’s characteristics as a ‘particle’, you preclude the possibility of it’s existence as a wave, but someone in the next laboratory can be observing experimental phenomenon that indicate it’s nature as a wave. That’s perhaps carelessly worded, but the essential argument is that it’s possible to produce verifiable evidence in favour of one conclusion that does not invalidate the evidence for the other.

I have sat through lectures by scientists who are Christians who use this analogy to justify their commitment both to scientific enquiry and belief in God, but I’d be the first to admit that they were discussing concepts in physics that were pushing the limits of my knowledge in this area – I went along as ‘arm candy’ for my wife who studied maths and physics at uni, and who loves this sort of stuff.

I did say it had frig all to do with schrodinger, but i didn’t want to split the discussion

I believe CM is getting really boring now.

CharlieMungus – Member

please, just restate it for clarity?

Cougar – Member

In answer to my own analogy,

I don’t believe that there is a walrus in your biscuit tin. I do believe that there are no walruses in your biscuit tin. It’s a made-up concept and so absurd that I’d go as far as to say that I know that there are no walruses in your biscuit tin, because there’s no reason to think that there are beyond the made-up premise I invented (though of course there may be biscuits shaped like walruses.)

However, if you were to show me your biscuit tin and go “look, a walrus” then I would revise my stance. Presented with such evidence, I would then know that you have walruses in your biscuit tin, and I would decline offers to visit you for coffee.

Substitute unicorns and bogeymen for biscuit-walri as appropriate.

ok, so i can assume you do not believe in unicorns and you believe that unicorns don’t exist?

would say

I believe CM is getting really boring now.

only because i’m trying to squeeze an answer out of TJ.

CM – Ihave answered you several times. what do you want an answer to now?

only because i’m trying to squeeze an answer out of TJ.

Thats not going to happen, It would be easier to squeeze a unicorn into a biscuit tin 😉

The killfile will be in full effect, for all those “difficult” questions TJ doesn’t like.

Neal – I have actually answered the best of my ability.

There is no god.

So, you believe there is no god? Obviously it can’t be ‘know’ because scientific method would not allow you to make that claim.

Just clarify please. Because your premise for ‘there is no god’ is based on a belief.

Once i have accepted that I do not believe in god

CM – sorry – what is the question you want me to answer there?

the one which leads up to the question mark

and from earlier, do you believe that unicorns / bogeymen do not exist?

So, you believe there is no god?

???

answered a dozen times on this thread

perhaps so, but a simple yes or no would help right now. unless you want to consider the ‘i know’ response, which you accept is based on belief. so can’t really be knowledge.

Time out required:

or…

Right. Carry on.

There is no spoon.

Ceci ne pas une cuillère.

There is no yes or no answer – its a meaningless question as explained above

Mu is the only answer. The concept of “no god” is a meaningless one in a universe where there is no belief in gods.

Mu is the only answer. The concept of “no god” is a meaningless one in a universe where there is no belief in gods.

Is the concept of no unicorns meaningless?

and if the concept of “no god” is meaningless how come you can say “there is no god”

CM – please stop with the partial quotes. Have a read thru what I have posted with an open mind.

It’s not a partial quote, you say there is no god, am I misrepresenting you? Do you in fact say there is a god?

Once i have accepted that I do not believe in god then there is only one possibility. There is no god.

The concept of “no god” is a meaningless one in a universe where there is no belief in gods.

I couldn’t be arsed to read the thousand pages of BS, but i’d just like to say that i couldn’t give a toss about religion, and don’t care what other people think of it either.

A good bloke is a good bloke and a nob is a nob regardless.

Just don’t tell me what i should think or believe, either way.

CM – you don’t actually want to understand my point do you?

The concept of “no god” is a meaningless one in a universe where there is no belief in gods.

And you keep saying this like it is true, “no unicorns” is not meaningless just because folks don’t believe in them

CM – you don’t actually want to understand my point do you?

If that were the case i’d have given up long ago. The reason i keep asking you these questions is because i want to understand your point

I think it is more likely that you don’t want your point to be understood, hence red herrings about partial quotes evasion about knowledge / belief

Cougar – Member

I do not have any belief in the concept of “no god” “No gods” is a meaningless concept to me

I don’t think it’s a meaningless concept. I think it’s a weaselly one.

To acknowledge that there are no gods, you first have to acknowledge that gods exist and then say there aren’t any. It’s a theist point-scoring exercise.

My walrus tin analogy falls down on exactly this point, thinking about it. I already know(*) that walruses exist, the question is whether they exist in CM’s biscuit tin (or whether none of them don’t, or something). Perhaps instead we need to consider whether or not we know that there are no live unicorns in the tin.

(* – at least, I know beyond reasonable doubt; I’ve seen them on TV. They could be an elaborate hoax, but it’s not likely).

To acknowledge that there are no gods, you first have to acknowledge that gods exist and then say there aren’t any. It’s a theist point-scoring exercise.

but that’s no true either, because we can all agree that unicorns don’t exist

and furthermore you have already acknowledged that there is no god, many times. All we are trying to establish now is whether this is fact or opinion or belief

there can be no god.

no way would any supreme being allow this mindless onanism to continue for 3 days.