The few that have joined, or come back, recently though are non theists. I feel they may not be inclined to do so, and this board may change into a political and philosophical one.
The few that have joined, or come back, recently though are non theists. I feel they may not be inclined to do so, and this board may change into a political and philosophical one.
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.By "theists" I mean Christians, we also have some pagans who don't seem to come in for the same roasting, probably because they accept their faith is faith.
This goes out to anyone who looks in on this forum but hasn't yet joined.
I have to say that I have no regrets on starting posting a few weeks ago.
So come on in the water is lovely, whatever your opinion or views might be.
By "theists" I mean Christians, we also have some pagans who don't seem to come in for the same roasting, probably because they accept their faith is faith.
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.Then what would be the point of this forum?
Then what would be the point of this forum?Why does it need a point?
Why does it need a point?It was created for those wanting to discuss religion in all its forms. If that goes then it will just end up as a group talking jibber-jabber and non-sense to each other....though that may be what we've been doing anyway ???. Also, I have noticed that some atheists need their daily rant at the theists. If they don't get this then they may withdraw into themselves and wither away....
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.............or, unlike you Jeremy they have a life.
If you're anti theist and want your arse soaped and your ego massaged then this is the forum for you.And you are a real Pro at providing a first class service for this... ;D
That is lovely (not that I am a 'long time poster' compared to others but I really like this forum.He can't prove his beliefs either.
I accept that my faith is ''faith'', in the sense that I cannot prove it, jeremy.
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.What a laugh.....Religionethics where antitheists are antitheists and theists are scared.....Ho Ho.
He can't prove his beliefs either.
Are you referring to me?Is your name Jeremy, Stephen?
Is your name Jeremy, Stephen?No, but it seemed a reasonable question.
.....
So come on in the water is lovely
.....
No, but it seemed a reasonable question.Unfortunately like much of science religious experience is instrumental.........with yourself as the instrument.
Are you ever going to give us your methodology?
Lol! Stephen that should read..... Come in the waters are shark infested....
Beware, the R&E forum..... enter if you dare...
Spoken in a deep gravelly voice.... ;)
Unfortunately like much of science religious experience is instrumental.........with yourself as the instrument.
Apart from that God crops up in philosophy, moral philosophy and cosmogony. And of course Religion itself........seek and he shall find.
Possibly because most of the English-speaking world is becoming non-theist.I'm sorry to break this to you Len, I'm afraid the sun has set on the British empire....
I'm sorry to break this to you Len, I'm afraid the sun has set on the British empire....
now, the theists are a bit grumpy, but come in anyway
I am seeking. I am finding nothing other than assertion though.You are no further in converting me to your beliefs.
Let's keep that to the other thread though.
Dear Stephen,
The theists!!!!! stick around old chap the atheists are not all balls of sunshine.
Gonnagle.
No, we are just little lamps trying to dispel the Stygian gloom of theism.Yes L E D ...by the nose
In all seriousness this is a great forum with some very interesting people and when push comes to shove we generally look out for each other...."..............sorry, Rhiannon.........not quite getting that.............over...........
In all seriousness this is a great forum with some very interesting people and when push comes to shove we generally look out for each other. It's a privilege to be a part of it and not one that I take for granted.
Give me a big soppy hug, Lennie. :PGives you a warm feeling....Religionethics....the forum for antitheists by antitheists and on behalf of antitheists.
Besides which, if you think that's me being sentimental...
Gives you a warm feeling....Religionethics....the forum for antitheists by antitheists and on behalf of antitheists.
If that is the case why are you still here? - Oh yes, of course, you are a troll and a WUM and this is just the environment for your kind of shit stirring by making all kinds of assertions and refusing to explain your reasoning behind those assertions, but making different assertions to create more requests for clarification et cetera ad nauseam!!I have explained the grounds on which I make statements.
I have explained the grounds on which I make statements.
Something lacking from all antitheists and pagans on this board.
End of message.
Oh for goodness' sake.
In all seriousness this is a great forum with some very interesting people and when push comes to shove we generally look out for each other. It's a privilege to be a part of it and not one that I take for granted.]
Agree 100%!QuoteExcept that Vlad bloke. He's a right theist.Quote
Don't know about that. Is he OMW by another name?
Give me a big soppy hug, Lennie. :P
Besides which, if you think that's me being sentimental...
You are no further in converting me to your beliefs.
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.
By "theists" I mean Christians, we also have some pagans who don't seem to come in for the same roasting, probably because they accept their faith is faith.
In all seriousness this is a great forum with some very interesting people and when push comes to shove we generally look out for each other. It's a privilege to be a part of it and not one that I take for granted.You mean atheist and pagan look out for each other whilst you slag the Christians off.
If that is the case why are you still here? - Oh yes, of course, you are a troll and a WUM and this is just the environment for your kind of shit stirring by making all kinds of assertions and refusing to explain your reasoning behind those assertions, but making different assertions to create more requests for clarification et cetera ad nauseam!!
You mean atheist and pagan look out for each other whilst you slag the Christians off.
What are you taking?
By "theists" I mean Christians, we also have some pagans who don't seem to come in for the same roasting, probably because they accept their faith is faith.Yeh, Jeremy but we all know that if there were an exodus of Christians like previous exodi atheists would begin to parasitise the pagans.
You really need to get a grip.You're fooling yourself.
If we go around asserting our subjective pagan beliefs as universally true for everyone without a shred of evidence to back that up then we'll deserve getting it with both barrels.I think you'll find the BHA think there beliefs are true for all mankind.....that kind of makes you guilty of humbuggery of the big stripey variety.
I think you'll find the BHA think there beliefs are true for all mankind.....that kind of makes you guilty of humbuggery of the big stripey variety.
I think you'll find the New atheists think there views are true for all mankind.
You think an awful lot of total rubbish. It seems to be your stock in trade.Says the arch bollocktalker himself.
Me parliamo mucho testiculo aye caramba mi sistabelinda she pissed out the window and fucked up my granny's sombrero................Ole (L James)
Says the arch bollocktalker himself.
Me parliamo mucho testiculo aye caramba mi sistabelinda she pissed out the window and fucked up my granny's sombrero................Ole (L James)
I think you'll find the BHA think there beliefs are true for all mankind.....that kind of makes you guilty of humbuggery of the big stripey variety.No they don't. The BHA provides their own opinion on an ethical approach within a society, which people can chose to follow or not to. Clearly they hope that their ethical philosophy is appealing enough for lots of people to chose to agree with them. But the whole approach is entirely subjective - nothing from the BHA suggests they think their approach is objectively 'true'.
;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;Dso I cant' do;.....Punctiation.
Very good, Junky! You are infinitely better at nonsense stuff than you are at speaking English.
No they don't. The BHA provides their own opinion on an ethical approach within a society, which people can chose to follow or not to. Clearly they hope that their ethical philosophy is appealing enough for lots of people to chose to agree with them. But the whole approach is entirely subjective - nothing from the BHA suggests they think their approach is objectively 'true'.
I think you'll find the BHA think there beliefs are true for all mankind.....that kind of makes you guilty of humbuggery of the big stripey variety.
I think you'll find the New atheists think there views are true for all mankind.
Idiot! Neither the BHA nor the New atheists are Pagan!No you guys are antichristian because we believe that God is true for everyone.
No you guys are antichristian because we believe that God is true for everyone.
You love antitheists though who believe that Godfree is true for everyone.
I think what I am saying is that you guys are hypocrites.......in that respect.
You really are stupid!Noooooooo
I have dieties that I believe in as fervently as you believe in yours - how then can I be antitheist? How can I believe in Godfree?
Noooooooo
You knock Christians because they believe that God is true for everyone but love antitheists even though they believe Godfree is true for everyone. Can't you see your dissonance in tha?
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.I hadn't noticed any theists having their arses handed to them, let alone kicked, since I joined in 2011, jeremy. What I have noticed, though, is non-theists thinking they have kicked ass, because of their inability or refusal to accept that life exists beyond the merely natural.
I think that's because the theists here are always getting their arses handed to them.
I hadn't noticed any theists having their arses handed to them, let alone kicked, since I joined in 2011, jeremy. What I have noticed, though, is non-theists thinking they have kicked ass, because of their inability or refusal to accept that life exists beyond the merely natural.
I hadn't noticed any theists having their arses handed to them, let alone kicked, since I joined in 2011, jeremy. What I have noticed, though, is non-theists thinking they have kicked ass, because of their inability or refusal to accept that life exists beyond the merely natural.That life extends beyond the merely natural is sheer bald assertion on your part for which, despite multiple and repeated requests over a lengthy period of time, you have yet to provide a single scrap, iota, jot or tittle of evidence or - especially - any methodology for evaluating such claims.
Your posts don't give any indication of 'love' towards antitheists. ::)I luvs ya Godfree.
That life extends beyond the merely natural is sheer bald assertion on your part for which, despite multiple and repeated requests over a lengthy period of time, you have yet to provide a single scrap, iota, jot or tittle of evidence or - especially - any methodology for evaluating such claims.Great
You know it; I know it; we all know it. You may be a slave to the negative proof fallacy and take anything to be true until and unless there's explicit evidence against it (and are constitutionally incapable of posting without said fallacious mindset); the rest of us are not.
As SKoS so succinctly put it, we keep asking, you keep evading. And will continue to do so.
That life extends beyond the merely natural is sheer bald assertion on your part for which, despite multiple and repeated requests over a lengthy period of time, you have yet to provide a single scrap, iota, jot or tittle of evidence or - especially - any methodology for evaluating such claims.In fact, I gave an example only a week or so ago, and about the only reasoned reponse was along the lines of 'I know when I'm in love, but I can't prove it to you'. Barely a day goes past for any of us when something occurs that we either take for granted - our love for a parent/spouse/partner/child/sibling - or assume its validitry without ever having gone into deep evidential searching to check its validity. OK, you can say that we often do this because others have told us ot he validity - but I'm not convinced of the scientific validity of this.
As SKoS so succinctly put it, we keep asking, you keep evading. And will continue to do so.
In fact, I gave an example only a week or so ago, and about the only reasoned reponse was along the lines of 'I know when I'm in love, but I can't prove it to you'. Barely a day goes past for any of us when something occurs that we either take for granted - our love for a parent/spouse/partner/child/sibling - or assume its validitry without ever having gone into deep evidential searching to check its validity. OK, you can say that we often do this because others have told us ot he validity - but I'm not convinced of the scientific validity of this.But none of that was or is in any way beyond a natural world of matter-energy in the way that you keep touting. That, as I said, is simply flat assertion on your part, summarily dealt with by Hitchens's First Law.
Have you come up with a methodology (any objective methodology, not necessarily 'naturalistic') to determine the truth of your particular god as opposed to all the others or none?I and others have come up wth plenty of methodologies - only to have them dismissed because they don't satisfy the physical, naturalistic requirements of many here. One example, of course, is of heling, which is shot down and explained away by reference to some other sort of 'magic' that in itself has no scientific validity.
We keep asking, you keep evading.
Until you (or some other theist) does, it is quite clear whose arses are being kicked...
But none of that was or is in any way beyond a natural world of matter-energy in the way that you keep touting.You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to disagree with you.
You're entitled to your opinion, and I'm entitled to disagree with you.But you have no basis for your opinion. We know this because you've been asked umpteen times by umpteen different posters over many months and although you claim that you've shown a methodology elsewhere (and claim that it "flummoxed" people ::) ), you won't do it here or provide a link to the alleged other place.
I and others have come up wth plenty of methodologiesWhere? Not here that's for sure.
only to have them dismissed because they don't satisfy the physical, naturalistic requirements of many here.As you've been told many times, this so-called methodology doesn't have to be naturalistic, it just has to be objective and capable of testing claims so that their truth or falsity can be ascertained and not, as is your wont, merely asserted.
One example, of course, is of heling, which is shot down and explained away by reference to some other sort of 'magic' that in itself has no scientific validity.I don't know whether this is a brazen lie or sheer ignorance. I posted a link to a BBC article on spontaneous healing a couple of months ago; I posted the link for a second time more recently when the subject cropped up again, so there's no excuse for not having seen it.
Unfortunately for you, Sass, your right is everybody else's wrong ... and no matter how loud you shout you can't change that. :)
If we go around asserting our subjective pagan beliefs as universally true for everyone without a shred of evidence to back that up then we'll deserve getting it with both barrels.
Dear Vlad,
It's good but it's not Carling ;)
Gonnagle.
I and others have come up wth plenty of methodologies - only to have them dismissed because they don't satisfy the physical, naturalistic requirements of many here. One example, of course, is of heling, which is shot down and explained away by reference to some other sort of 'magic' that in itself has no scientific validity.
I and others have come up wth plenty of methodologies - only to have them dismissed because they don't satisfy the physical, naturalistic requirements of many here. One example, of course, is of heling, which is shot down and explained away by reference to some other sort of 'magic' that in itself has no scientific validity.
I and others have come up wth plenty of methodologies...
...only to have them dismissed because they don't satisfy the physical, naturalistic requirements of many here.
One example, of course, is of [healing], which is shot down and explained away by reference to some other sort of 'magic' that in itself has no scientific validity.
Dear Stephano,
Are we still appealing to lurkers ::) maybe lurkers is the wrong word, what about silent viewers, hey!! Silent viewers come and voice your opinions, all are welcome, we even welcome Tories :o
Gonnagle.
............or, unlike you Jeremy they have a life.And by "you" of course you mean "us".
Then what would be the point of this forum?I thought the point of the forum was for different people from different walks of life to discuss philosophical ideas, concepts, beliefs or issues (involving a deity or not) that were meaningful to them - or as some people like to put it "true for them" and to gain an understanding of other perspectives based on those discussions.
And by "you" of course you mean "us".You are like my antitheist twin.
I thought the point of the forum was for different people from different walks of life to discuss philosophical ideas, concepts, beliefs or issues (involving a deity or not) that were meaningful to them - or as some people like to put it "true for them" and to gain an understanding of other perspectives based on those discussions.What you may have missed from another post of mine was that what I was saying was is that it seems as if many of the theists are leaving this forum and those few who are joining are atheists. If it ends up as being pretty much all atheists then what is the point of it, with regards to its original purpose?
If it is meaningful to atheists to use the forum to try to convince theists to adopt an atheist perspective or vice versa - great - that's the point - an exchange of ideas. It's kind of irrelevant whether anyone is actually persuaded by anyone else's argument or not so long as conversations continue, when time permits. The mods are there to cool things down when some people get a bit over-excited.
Hi,
Yes your wording does seem a bit more welcoming.
Not sure about the Tories thought. You can go too far!:)
This goes out to anyone who looks in on this forum but hasn't yet joined.
I have to say that I have no regrets on starting posting a few weeks ago.
So come on in the water is lovely, whatever your opinion or views might be.
Your way of seeing it always begs the question why does the sky fairy only 'heal' when in the mood?
Hello Stephen this forum is dead I have looked in and may look back in 3 months from now 99.9% seem to be Hell bound plonkers united.Arse.
~TW~
Arse.
2 And, behold, they brought to him a man sick of the palsy, lying on a bed: and Jesus seeing their faith said unto the sick of the palsy; Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee.
3 And, behold, certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.
4 And Jesus knowing their thoughts said, Wherefore think ye evil in your hearts?
5 For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?
6 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.
7 And he arose, and departed to his house.
What is it with all the arguments about healing with the atheists?It's to highlight the wretchedly flawed/horribly fallacious/just generally terrible arguments that believers in magical healing use.
I thought the point of the forum was for different people from different walks of life to discuss philosophical ideas, concepts, beliefs or issues (involving a deity or not) that were meaningful to them - or as some people like to put it "true for them" and to gain an understanding of other perspectives based on those discussions.
If it is meaningful to atheists to use the forum to try to convince theists to adopt an atheist perspective or vice versa - great - that's the point - an exchange of ideas. It's kind of irrelevant whether anyone is actually persuaded by anyone else's argument or not so long as conversations continue, when time permits. The mods are there to cool things down when some people get a bit over-excited.
I thought the point of the forum was for different people from different walks of life to discuss philosophical ideas, concepts, beliefs or issues (involving a deity or not) that were meaningful to them - or as some people like to put it "true for them" and to gain an understanding of other perspectives based on those discussions.
If it is meaningful to atheists to use the forum to try to convince theists to adopt an atheist perspective or vice versa - great - that's the point - an exchange of ideas. It's kind of irrelevant whether anyone is actually persuaded by anyone else's argument or not so long as conversations continue, when time permits. The mods are there to cool things down when some people get a bit over-excited.
That is the problem.. whether universal or not - pagan beliefs hold NO TRUTH. There is no evidence required to back anything up because the beliefs have no merit, purpose or value to mankind.
Pagan beliefs are exactly as true as your beliefs. They have the same merit, purpose, and value - and also precisely the same evidence.
ht
I can see Sass taking that on board, NOT!
The problem for her is that I can demonstrate that I'm correct...
ht
My dear, you can demonstrate it until you are blue in the face, but it will still fall on blind eyes and deaf ears.
<doh>
<gift>
<devil>
(gift)
{{{}}} <hug>
Pardon?
ht
Dear Floo and Horsethorn,
Especially you Floo ;) I was bored, if you look below Horsethorns little avatar you will see a small picture of the world, click on it. :o
Gonnagle.
It's to highlight the wretchedly flawed/horribly fallacious/just generally terrible arguments that believers in magical healing use.
You Wish! As time goes by and more healedNo evidence of this.
You would have to disprove he was the Son of God and did what he did.Negative proof fallacy. You assert it, you prove it, otherwise Hitchens's First Law applies - what is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Pagan beliefs are exactly as true as your beliefs. They have the same merit, purpose, and value - and also precisely the same evidence.
ht
Simply saying it won't make it so. That is similar to you believing in paganism. It won't make it real because you say it.A point entirely lost on you, ironically (and hypocritically).
Simply saying it won't make it so.
You Wish! As time goes by and more healed your argument weakens...wait it never had any strength to weaken because it was always merely an opinion. Jesus Christ, is what stands between your argument having any weight, merit or truth.As I have mentioned previously what we might describe as 'spontaneous healing' is actually much more common than we might think - actually it happens all the time, for most trauma or illness. So the physiology of the body is well set up to achieve this. Sure there are cases where the body's physiology is overwhelmed by pathology or trauma to an extent where it cannot successfully heal itself and medical intervention is necessary - but in every case there will be a physiological response attempted and many medical treatments are designed to work alongside or augment the body's natural response.
You would have to disprove he was the Son of God and did what he did. Not luck of that any time soon. Which leaves you with less hope than Bob Hope and that is in fact No HOPE...
Coincidently, neither does putting stuff in
really big fonts
::)
It is to get it noticed... and see it works perfectly... ::) ;D
it won't make it so.
but .....
Which is the point being made but that I suppose is lost on the hard of thinking? ::)
That last part is an opinion and one which is not really any value as it cannot be proved by you.What can't be proved?