Atheism

It's simply flat-out hypocrisy and a bit of cheap repentance does nothing to change that. "Saying" is real cheapskate. By which is meant cheap and easy and soon forgot.

I tend to agree with you here. The question then becomes, is everyone a hypocrite by some measure? Probably so.

You are supposed ed to provide some justification for your assertion that Pahu's post was "illogical crap". Asserting it is simply proof of your intolerance so there is no need for you to want to be.

What objections are you raising to the statements of the experts Pahu quoted?

Cicero was a political propagandist. He was executed after being caught whilst running away.

Like I said... uncanny similarities between doubters of yore and today. It seems it doesn't much matter which system of god(s) the nonbelievers are trying to depose. The Republican response is much the same.

A couple of quotes from Samuel Johnson for you to consider.

On being asked about the first Protestant reformers being burnt for not believing the bread and wine to be Christ, he replied--



Now there is no risk. Indeed there are rewards.

On being asked about the toleration of heresy he replied-



In many other places in the conversations reported by Boswell he is at pains to support authority. The habit of attacking religious authority can easily spread to all authority. If authority is undermined then every man and woman's opinion has equal validity and only confusion and anarchy can result which, being intolerable, is corrected by punishments in this life there being no other to rely upon.

The support of authority was Johnson's main theme throughout his adult life and the basic position from which all his other ideas stemmed.



I can't disagree with that but I was taking your statement in response to the lady in isolation.

I suppose that at the time of the Founding Fathers women did not have a vote, confined their interest to domestic affairs and were not noted for speaking in public. But a reading of Boswell's Like of Johnson offers many instances of ladies being welcomed into intellectual circles and encouraged even. Possibly Boswell refrains from mentioning any opposition to women not having the vote at that time or being disqualified from jury service or even giving evidence under oath. Whether he self-censored his reports, which I doubt, he has no instances of such protests. Maybe the ladies knew that having a vote might cause them to be employed in war, or pressed, (just the lookers I mean) and to defend their honour in duels rather than men fighting them on their behalf.

The writings of ladies of those periods are noticeably lacking in protestations. They give a general impression of contentment. It's ironic that now they have the vote and are spouting on every TV channel they seem much less contented. I think it was the rise of that class Darwin belonged to that caused women to become more like objects.

Tolerance acceptance. Best to practice both and know when you use each.

Acceptance
R
Tolerance

Anyone believing the Christian doctrine as outlined in the Bible believes that non-believers are going to hell. I know that some Christians prefer not to focus on this aspect of their religion - because I used to be among them. However, if you call yourself a Christian, you do open yourself to answer for Christian beliefs. Maybe you should call yourself a Loving Jesushead Bunny.

My siblings tell me "it's not too late" every time we meet. I guess they are getting desperate at our age...they won't see their yellow sheep brother in heaven.

A guy I have known for about five years kept his silence, until a few days ago, when he told me he wanted me to come by his home daily so he could help me accept Jesus and thereby be allowed into heaven. I couldn't keep myself from grinning as I declined. He was sincere and he was concerned. Can't fault him for that. But, if he pursues the matter, I will start avoiding him.

I think Intrepid can believe what he wants. How he identifies certainly suggests what he may believe, but I won't demand that he believe I'm going to hell or that other non-Christians are less spiritually entitled (or whatever). Religion always has and always will be pick and choose. There's nothing wrong with a person who identifies as any religion following their own morals and values, even if it means defying orthodox doctrine.

I'd say that a great many atheists have stood their ground to defy that they can find goodness without god, so why can't people of religion practice their own will?

A
R
T

Because there's a group of people who readily define what you have to believe to be in their club. I may as well go about calling myself a Muslim and you - a heart surgeon.

Call me the Kool-aid man, the point should be that titles aren't as important as the beliefs themselves.

People defy the club all the time. There's a growing group of female priests that are now happily excommunicated, and happily practicing their beliefs and calling themselves Catholics.

Much conversation in this thread has been about how many atheists didn't choose the title for themselves as much as they were identified with it. It's not important that I'm called an atheist, but it's important that people understand what I believe.

A
R
T

If there is a God, and the Bible is his instruction manual, then clearly we are unable to interpret it and as such it is useless.

The elites charged with interpreting it have made cock up after cock up - from persecuting people who could provide observable, reproducible data that the Earth rotated around the sun, to fighting against condom use, and burning witches.

Democratising the 'interpretation' process, thanks to Gutenberg, has splintered meaning even more. I see no evidence that we are any better at interpreting 'the word of God' after 2000 years of practice.

The fault lies with our manufacturer. If you accept a creator God, then we are what we are because of God. The 'free choice' argument is bollocks because an omniscient God knew everything that would happen in the entire span of his creation on day one before he said 'Let there be light'. The whole thing would be/is pointless masturbation.

I'm a Godless heathen because God made me that way.

I for one don't mind being called an atheist. There has to be some word for it. Why not this one?

Intrepid - don't immediately dismiss the Loving Jesushead Bunny movement.

I'm on it Lash. T shirts are being designed as we speak

Don't waste your time, Pan.

The Flying Spaghetti Monster Rules!!!

I think I wince from labels AND that one in particular. Cultural values on it give it a "mean" connotation.

I was watching C. Hitchens (BRILLIANT) on a Conservative Christian debate...and at the end of it, I was so horrified by the closing comment of the moderator. It was to the effect, if Hitchens is right - I have nothing to live for...no moral compass, no reason to live a decent life... I am shocked that so many Christians think that non-Christians have no genuine lovingkindness or internal moral code- and that seemingly this moderator (and how many other Christians?) live decent lives fueled by no other emotion than fear of retribution from an angry god.

Kisses you all over, and orders a shirt!