And Catholics believe he's infallible!

 

No, they don´t. They believe that a dogma proclaimed by the pope is infallible, and that has happened less then 20 times in history, period. They don´t believe he´s infallible in his speeches, writings, on his private life, etc.

just what we need.... some idiot spreading more untruths in the name of truth.

You´re not forced to watch an youtube channel, you know... There is freedom of speech and people can say what they want and choose to watch what they want. Even tough it must be pretty hard for some people to accept that there´s actually people in the world who think different then themselves. Are you the owner of "the truth"?

 

the human race will not, can not, evolve whilst we shackle ourselves with the yolk of religion. but far from the human race ditching religion, things i suspect will get more and more polarised until there IS a huge religious war...

Nah... it will only evolve when people become completely materialistic and notice that they are nothing but an accident from nature and their existence is completely unnecessary and meaningless, because pessimistic nihilism is the only logical consequence from atheism. Then we have China, the biggest officially atheist state in the world. What a brilliant role model atheists give to the whole world... so that they arrogantly stand in the position to judge the rest of humanity for their beliefs.

I'm agnostic, and I disagree with most things the Church does. I asked somebody "Do you like discussing your sins with child molesters?". I wasn't trying to be cheeky, I honestly wanted to see how they think it's justified. I got a response which worried me slightly: "Not all of them are like that..." :mellow: So, they know that some are, but they still let themselves and possibly their future children be put at risk?

If I had known a priest (or any other person) who is a paedophile, I would call the police. I sugest you to do the same... Simply not letting your kids have put a risk is not enough. If you know something concrete, then it´s your obrigation to denounce... otherwise you´re just another idiot using this old speech without any solid substract because your another brainwashed biases against anything that is christianity-related. There have been loads of cases of paedophile teachers and doctors aswell... why not avoid letting your kids go to school or to a doctor when they get sick? You´re putting them into a serious risk...

You´re not forced to watch an youtube channel, you know... There is freedom of speech and people can say what they want and choose to watch what they want. Even tough it must be pretty hard for some people to accept that there´s actually people in the world who think different then themselves. Are you the owner of "the truth"?

Nah... it will only evolve when people become completely materialistic and notice that they are nothing but an accident from nature and their existence is completely unnecessary and meaningless, because pessimistic nihilism is the only logical consequence from atheism. Then we have China, the biggest officially atheist state in the world. What a brilliant role model atheists give to the whole world... so that they arrogantly stand in the position to judge the rest of humanity for their beliefs.

 

nope, im not the owner of 'the truth' NOR DO I CLAIM TO BE unlike the church! but its pretty clear that all religions aint got a clue.

 

utter nonsense... the way foreward for mankind is to ditch ALL religions and see life for what it is.... a breif moment in time to enjoy yourself, survive, live life to the full by processing 'good' thoughts/deeds, banishing 'self', materialism, jealousy, greed, all humans negetive traits. you dont need a book to tell you that, you dont need the promise of a non existant eternal life in heaven as a carrot to persuade you to be good.. just do it!

 

oh and the chinese are no role model for athiesm, you think all athiests are like that?...:lol: they prove NOTHING.

If I had known a priest (or any other person) who is a paedophile, I would call the police. I sugest you to do the same... Simply not letting your kids have put a risk is not enough. If you know something concrete, then it´s your obrigation to denounce... otherwise you´re just another idiot using this old speech without any solid substract because your another brainwashed biases against anything that is christianity-related. There have been loads of cases of paedophile teachers and doctors aswell... why not avoid letting your kids go to school or to a doctor when they get sick? You´re putting them into a serious risk...

 

It was a generalization. I know that there are a load of good priests out there, but there are bad ones out there. You can hardly get concrete evidence when it's needed. The victims wouldn't say anything until they're older. That has been the case here for years. The whole thing only comes to light when the person admits to it, but by that time it's too late, the damage has been done and the priest is most likely retired or dead.

 

 

There was a case of this where I used to live. I was only two at the time, but my sister was seven. My mother got a knock on the door, there was a kid there and she asked if my sister could come out for a drive with the local priest. He was in the car with other kids. He didn't get out to ask, a child did. My mother said no, purely because she had no idea who the hell this guy was. And about three years ago, he was arrested for child molestation over a period of twenty years. Some people kept a secret for twenty years.

 

Sending your kid to school is a legal requirement, unless you are prepared to home-school them, which most people aren't. Sending your kid to hospital if they're very ill is essential, you don't want your child to get worse or die.

 

Going to church is a choice, a choice which young kids can't make because their parents think they know better. If I had a kid who didn't want to go to church, I won't make them. It's up to them if they want to go or not, I'm not going to make the decision for them.

 

There are many Christian-related things I'm fine with. I'm a fan of some Christian rock bands. I read books by Christians which have christian content. I am friends with a lot of christian people. So I don't think I'm a prejudiced brainwashed person at all. I know what I know, I don't have to believe in something to be a good person.

 

In reference to another post by yourself, freedom of speech is all fine and dandy. It would be helpful if it worked both ways. The Pope can say what he wants, but people who have differing opinions can't? The Pope has said numerous things which have upset a lot of people, yet I don't see him apologizing. I don't see why people who don't beleive in any deity should have to watch what they say. Like I said, I'm agnostic, but that doesn't mean I have to agree with everything that happens in the religious world. If I don't like something [like the child abuse in the church], then I'll say it. It's freedom of speech, after all.

Edited February 2, 200916 yr by Cal★

I'll say that Religion has lost history... :(

No, they don´t. They believe that a dogma proclaimed by the pope is infallible, and that has happened less then 20 times in history, period. They don´t believe he´s infallible in his speeches, writings, on his private life, etc.

 

I stand corrected, I should have remembered that from my Apologetics class when I was a kid! :) Still I think the whole concept of papal infallibility comes dangerously close to breaking the first commandment...

Regarding sexual crimes and priests... I think that within our lifetimes, the Catholic church will probably relent and finally allow priests to marry and possibly even allow gay priests. I think at that point, the phenomenon of priests committing sexual crimes will probably cease.

 

Or maybe I'm being too optimistic... I just think there are a ton of progressive priests and lay people but the Church has ostracized them so much that they're just walking away from Catholicism. Hence its numbers have been dropping for decades, and they barely have a presence left in some places (Europe). So I think Catholicism needs to change or it will die off.

Nah... it will only evolve when people become completely materialistic and notice that they are nothing but an accident from nature and their existence is completely unnecessary and meaningless, because pessimistic nihilism is the only logical consequence from atheism. Then we have China, the biggest officially atheist state in the world. What a brilliant role model atheists give to the whole world... so that they arrogantly stand in the position to judge the rest of humanity for their beliefs.

Why the hell is pessimistic nihilism the only logical consequence of atheism? :/ To quote Douglas Adams, why can we not appreciate a beautiful garden for what it is without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it? If anything the wonder at the genius of evolution is rather uplifting, knowing that we live in such an intelligent (UNDESIGNED -_-) universe and system that we somehow are a part of it - in no place does evolution try to say that we are UNNECESSARY, as we didn't evolve 'by chance' - survival of the fittest and all that. Natural selection ensured that we actually have adapted to suit the world.

 

And so what if our existence is meaningless? Why are we stuck in a REQUIREMENT for our existence to have meaning? And, without wishing to cause offence (although I probably will...), what kind of a meaning is existing for the sake of the entertainment of a supposedly all-powerful being? Thinking about it, surely that would mean that we don't really have all that much meaning at all - after all, what kind of egomaniac creates a universe and several million species for the end result of one of them sacrificing themselves in their millions to worship him? If God does exist (which I consider very unlikely...), he's a right stuck-up c**t...

Regarding sexual crimes and priests... I think that within our lifetimes, the Catholic church will probably relent and finally allow priests to marry and possibly even allow gay priests. I think at that point, the phenomenon of priests committing sexual crimes will probably cease.

 

Or maybe I'm being too optimistic... I just think there are a ton of progressive priests and lay people but the Church has ostracized them so much that they're just walking away from Catholicism. Hence its numbers have been dropping for decades, and they barely have a presence left in some places (Europe). So I think Catholicism needs to change or it will die off.

 

wishfull thinking i think.... the pope has recently been quite harsh on homosexuality and i cant see him/them ever accepting it..... twats.

 

 

Why the hell is pessimistic nihilism the only logical consequence of atheism? :/ To quote Douglas Adams, why can we not appreciate a beautiful garden for what it is without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it? If anything the wonder at the genius of evolution is rather uplifting, knowing that we live in such an intelligent (UNDESIGNED -_-) universe and system that we somehow are a part of it - in no place does evolution try to say that we are UNNECESSARY, as we didn't evolve 'by chance' - survival of the fittest and all that. Natural selection ensured that we actually have adapted to suit the world.

 

And so what if our existence is meaningless? Why are we stuck in a REQUIREMENT for our existence to have meaning? And, without wishing to cause offence (although I probably will...), what kind of a meaning is existing for the sake of the entertainment of a supposedly all-powerful being? Thinking about it, surely that would mean that we don't really have all that much meaning at all - after all, what kind of egomaniac creates a universe and several million species for the end result of one of them sacrificing themselves in their millions to worship him? If God does exist (which I consider very unlikely...), he's a right stuck-up c**t...

 

:lol: a brilliant summery m8!

Why the hell is pessimistic nihilism the only logical consequence of atheism? :/ To quote Douglas Adams, why can we not appreciate a beautiful garden for what it is without having to believe there are fairies at the bottom of it? If anything the wonder at the genius of evolution is rather uplifting, knowing that we live in such an intelligent (UNDESIGNED -_-) universe and system that we somehow are a part of it - in no place does evolution try to say that we are UNNECESSARY, as we didn't evolve 'by chance' - survival of the fittest and all that. Natural selection ensured that we actually have adapted to suit the world.

 

And so what if our existence is meaningless? Why are we stuck in a REQUIREMENT for our existence to have meaning? And, without wishing to cause offence (although I probably will...), what kind of a meaning is existing for the sake of the entertainment of a supposedly all-powerful being? Thinking about it, surely that would mean that we don't really have all that much meaning at all - after all, what kind of egomaniac creates a universe and several million species for the end result of one of them sacrificing themselves in their millions to worship him? If God does exist (which I consider very unlikely...), he's a right stuck-up c**t...

 

Brilliant post Tyron.... Serious contender for Post of the Year....Already.....And it's only the start of February.....

 

Sorry to bump this, but I wanted to quickly share this.

 

It's from 1922 by Marshall Gauvin, talking about whether Jesus really did live or not, and there was this one paragraph that reminded me of discussion going on in here, and thought it was a good point;

 

 

Not only has the divinity of Christ been given up, but his existence as a man is being more and more seriously questioned. Some of the ablest scholars of the world deny that he ever lived at all. A commanding literature dealing with the inquiry, intense in its seriousness and profound and thorough in its research, is growing up in all countries, and spreading the conviction that Christ is a myth. The question is one of tremendous importance. For the Freethinker, as well as for the Christian, it is of the weightiest significance. The Christian religion has been and is a mighty fact in the world. For good or for ill, it has absorbed for many centuries the best energies of mankind. It has stayed the march of civilization, and made martyrs of some of the noblest men and women of the race: and it is to-day the greatest enemy of knowledge, of freedom, of social and industrial improvement, and of the genuine brotherhood of mankind. The progressive forces of the world are at war with this Asiatic superstition, and this war will continue until the triumph of truth and freedom is complete. The question, "Did Jesus Christ Really Live?" goes to the very root of the conflict between reason and faith; and upon its determination depends, to some degree, the decision as to whether religion or humanity shall rule the world.

 

 

 

Full thing;http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html

Sorry to bump this, but I wanted to quickly share this.

 

It's from 1922 by Marshall Gauvin, talking about whether Jesus really did live or not, and there was this one paragraph that reminded me of discussion going on in here, and thought it was a good point;

Not only has the divinity of Christ been given up, but his existence as a man is being more and more seriously questioned. Some of the ablest scholars of the world deny that he ever lived at all. A commanding literature dealing with the inquiry, intense in its seriousness and profound and thorough in its research, is growing up in all countries, and spreading the conviction that Christ is a myth. The question is one of tremendous importance. For the Freethinker, as well as for the Christian, it is of the weightiest significance. The Christian religion has been and is a mighty fact in the world. For good or for ill, it has absorbed for many centuries the best energies of mankind. It has stayed the march of civilization, and made martyrs of some of the noblest men and women of the race: and it is to-day the greatest enemy of knowledge, of freedom, of social and industrial improvement, and of the genuine brotherhood of mankind. The progressive forces of the world are at war with this Asiatic superstition, and this war will continue until the triumph of truth and freedom is complete. The question, "Did Jesus Christ Really Live?" goes to the very root of the conflict between reason and faith; and upon its determination depends, to some degree, the decision as to whether religion or humanity shall rule the world.

Full thing;http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html

 

When I first read it I thought it was outdate, but it makes more sense when I read it again and noticed its from 1922 (LMAO). The mythical Jesus theory emerged in the 18th century among historians, but it gradually lost importance to the point that it´s hardly taken serious by historians today. Of course all the rest of the text sounds hilariously stupid. "Humanity vs. Religion?" ffs!!! Pretty much any civilization in this planet has developed some type of religion or spirituality, belief in a Creator, no matter how geographically and culturally isolated they were from each other. The "coincidence" is so big that some scientist actually believe that human beings have a gene that explains a tendency to religious inclination. So oposing religion to humanity is the biggest joke ever... in fact, our spirituality (which exists in pretty much EVERY human civilization prior to the disastrous materialistic thought took place in Europe - creating the most violent century in human history) is pretty much, from an antropologic point of view, what distinguishes us from the rest of the animals. To wipe this away is making our civilization less "human" after all...

Edited February 18, 200916 yr by Overstaged

Sorry to bump this, but I wanted to quickly share this.

 

It's from 1922 by Marshall Gauvin, talking about whether Jesus really did live or not, and there was this one paragraph that reminded me of discussion going on in here, and thought it was a good point;

Not only has the divinity of Christ been given up, but his existence as a man is being more and more seriously questioned. Some of the ablest scholars of the world deny that he ever lived at all. A commanding literature dealing with the inquiry, intense in its seriousness and profound and thorough in its research, is growing up in all countries, and spreading the conviction that Christ is a myth. The question is one of tremendous importance. For the Freethinker, as well as for the Christian, it is of the weightiest significance. The Christian religion has been and is a mighty fact in the world. For good or for ill, it has absorbed for many centuries the best energies of mankind. It has stayed the march of civilization, and made martyrs of some of the noblest men and women of the race: and it is to-day the greatest enemy of knowledge, of freedom, of social and industrial improvement, and of the genuine brotherhood of mankind. The progressive forces of the world are at war with this Asiatic superstition, and this war will continue until the triumph of truth and freedom is complete. The question, "Did Jesus Christ Really Live?" goes to the very root of the conflict between reason and faith; and upon its determination depends, to some degree, the decision as to whether religion or humanity shall rule the world.

Full thing;http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/marshall_gauvin/did_jesus_really_live.html

 

no probs :)

 

did christ exist?.... :lol: well theres not 1 shred of tangible evidence that 'he' did! irael in them days was full of rebels, full of religious zealots , full of pretty ignorant, insecure people looking for some hope of 'something better'.

 

'the messiah' was expected, but if jesus WAS the messiah, then why didnt the jews recognise it untill 40 years after his death? :lol: .

 

the favoured theory is that the biblical story/creation of jesus being the messiah is that it was a written work of fiction based on some shadowy, nebulous character that did exist. but he was no more then a prominant preacher.

 

the theory that jesus existed and was god incarnate (as the fairystory....erm...bible) would have us believe is of course utter nonsense.

 

 

When I first read it I thought it was outdate, but it makes more sense when I read it again and noticed its from 1922 (LMAO). The mythical Jesus theory emerged in the 18th century among historians, but it gradually lost importance to the point that it´s hardly taken serious by historians today. Of course all the rest of the text sounds hilariously stupid. "Humanity vs. Religion?" ffs!!! Pretty much any civilization in this planet has developed some type of religion or spirituality, belief in a Creator, no matter how geographically and culturally isolated they were from each other. The "coincidence" is so big that some scientist actually believe that human beings have a gene that explains a tendency to religious inclination. So oposing religion to humanity is the biggest joke ever... in fact, our spirituality (which exists in pretty much EVERY human civilization prior to the disastrous materialistic thought took place in Europe - creating the most violent century in human history) is pretty much, from an antropologic point of view, what distinguishes us from the rest of the animals. To wipe this away is making our civilization less "human" after all...

 

religion arose because early human life understood that life itself and the natural world were marvelous, and needed an explaination. thus religion was born, to explain and give reason to primitive man for their very existance. pity many today still are rooted in the stoneage and cannot see that science is gradually explaining everything.

no probs :)

 

did christ exist?.... :lol: well theres not 1 shred of tangible evidence that 'he' did!

Serious historians would beg to disagree. Your pretention is very arrogant. You act like you are an expert in the subject but I suppose you haven´t even studied about it. Yet you always claim to have the final answear...

 

the theory that jesus existed and was god incarnate (as the fairystory....erm...bible) would have us believe is of course utter nonsense.

There´s no scientifical "theory" about Jesus being God incarnate. A fairly literate person would have known that facts of faith are not disputed by the fields of science (even history), and to say that history has anything to say about the divinity of Christ is utter nonsense. I read several books about it, most of them written by atheists/agnostic authors and none of them ever had this pretention, even tought them all are much more credible then your superficial knowledge.

 

religion arose because early human life understood that life itself and the natural world were marvelous, and needed an explaination. thus religion was born, to explain and give reason to primitive man for their very existance. pity many today still are rooted in the stoneage and cannot see that science is gradually explaining everything.

 

Your hope in science explaining everything is dellusional and stupid. For each answear that is found, 100 new questions appear. Scientists today have thousands more questions without answears then they did centuries ago. I don´t think a fairly literate person would ever echo the idea that knowledge has a final limit (aka, explain everything). That´s one of the most stupid things I ever read.

 

You can have whatever reasons to not believe in God (you have been educated in an anti-god culture, so it´s no wonder), but please skip science. That´s not property of arrogant atheists, in fact people of faith have contributed to science more then militant atheists in history, period. The fact that there is a creator is so basic and so intrinsic into our human condition that every culture in the world took notice of it. Men in its natural condition already know that there is a creator without the need of any indoctrination. To deny this fact, it takes heavy indoctrination. You simply believe that matter developed conscience by itself by acident. That is so nuts that make the wildest religions look rational. You believe that matter can develop conscience by making itself more and more complex coming from complete chaos to complex structures, yet you find the idea that this whole process was driven by some intelligence to be impossible. That´s totally nuts! What makes the idea of the universe having an intelligence behind it more impossible then us, pieces of dust that got together by acident, to have one?

 

And then again, if this is all bull$h!t and you don´t believe it, what´s your problem if other people believe that? A christian would believe that, by converting other people he would have earned them Heaven, and what do you atheists believe you earn with that? Making other people less happy by assimilating your inevitably nihilistic worldview, or eliminating any possibility for a morality that is based in something other then materialism (=convenience)? That´s stuck in my head... Surely you´re going to argument that there are holly wars, paedophile priests, the inquisition, etc, but so what... There´s not 1 shred of tangible evidence (to use your own expression) that atheists are any tiny bit more moral then christians or people of any other religion. An atheist claiming that materialistic thought would give a better moral standards then any religion is a total joke.

Serious historians would beg to disagree. Your pretention is very arrogant. You act like you are an expert in the subject but I suppose you haven´t even studied about it. Yet you always claim to have the final answear...

 

 

 

There´s no scientifical "theory" about Jesus being God incarnate. A fairly literate person would have known that facts of faith are not disputed by the fields of science (even history), and to say that history has anything to say about the divinity of Christ is utter nonsense. I read several books about it, most of them written by atheists/agnostic authors and none of them ever had this pretention, even tought them all are much more credible then your superficial knowledge.

Your hope in science explaining everything is dellusional and stupid. For each answear that is found, 100 new questions appear. Scientists today have thousands more questions without answears then they did centuries ago. I don´t think a fairly literate person would ever echo the idea that knowledge has a final limit (aka, explain everything). That´s one of the most stupid things I ever read.

 

You can have whatever reasons to not believe in God (you have been educated in an anti-god culture, so it´s no wonder), but please skip science. That´s not property of arrogant atheists, in fact people of faith have contributed to science more then militant atheists in history, period. The fact that there is a creator is so basic and so intrinsic into our human condition that every culture in the world took notice of it. Men in its natural condition already know that there is a creator without the need of any indoctrination. To deny this fact, it takes heavy indoctrination. You simply believe that matter developed conscience by itself by acident. That is so nuts that make the wildest religions look rational. You believe that matter can develop conscience by making itself more and more complex coming from complete chaos to complex structures, yet you find the idea that this whole process was driven by some intelligence to be impossible. That´s totally nuts! What makes the idea of the universe having an intelligence behind it more impossible then us, pieces of dust that got together by acident, to have one?

 

And then again, if this is all bull$h!t and you don´t believe it, what´s your problem if other people believe that? A christian would believe that, by converting other people he would have earned them Heaven, and what do you atheists believe you earn with that? Making other people less happy by assimilating your inevitably nihilistic worldview, or eliminating any possibility for a morality that is based in something other then materialism (=convenience)? That´s stuck in my head... Surely you´re going to argument that there are holly wars, paedophile priests, the inquisition, etc, but so what... There´s not 1 shred of tangible evidence (to use your own expression) that atheists are any tiny bit more moral then christians or people of any other religion. An atheist claiming that materialistic thought would give a better moral standards then any religion is a total joke.

 

point 1 - i dont claim to have the final answer, unlike you believers who blindly accept this nonsense without any seeming rational thought behind it! because anyone who starts to ask questions soon hits glareing faults whith the theory! WHAT serious historians? WHERE is the tangible evidence that PROVES jesus existed? and WHERE is the further proof that even IF jesus existed he was 'god incarnate'? :lol: 4 books in a book that was selected from tens of thousands of writings about a supposed 'messiah' that wasnt even recognised as such in his lifetime?... theres more evidence for robin hood or king athur!

 

point 2 - of course theres no recognition by the scientists about 'facts' of faith... FACTS? what fact? there is NO fact that 'jesus' was god incarnate... it is merely a convieniant belief held by many to prop up their dodgy doctrine.

 

point 3 - "Your hope in science explaining everything is dellusional and stupid" :lol: now THAT is the biggest load of crap ever posted in here ..... so... how does your pc work?... faith? :lol: ok, it might take hundereds of years but science WILL eventually explain everything because it deals with FACTS, TRUTHS that can be tried, measured and tested. of COURSE for every answer there 10 more questions.... thats the nature of science, to discover and explore .

 

point 4 - "one of the stupedest things ive ever read" - try reading the bible then!

 

point 5 - i was NOT educated in an 'anti god' culture at all! i was brought up to believe (blindly) in what the church told us, so you are totally WRONG in your assumption.

 

point 6 - im not arrogant, i DONT KNOW the answers, but i know what its not! UNLIKE YOU a believer who of course KNOWS he has ALL the answers! that makes YOU the arrogant one!

 

point 7 - there is NO 'fact' that there is a creator at all... its a belief, NOT a fact.

 

point 8 - men in their natural state DONT KNOW theres a creator, its a primitive belief they hold to explain life .... there is NO evidence of a creator. creation? science fully explains how life on earth came to be. but of course the ancients never had access to science, so they created religion.

 

point 9 - of course conscience evolved... its a prefectly rational step in an evolutionary process, you call that 'nuts' yet you chose to believe a totally unsubstantiated, contradictory, gathering of texts put together out of thousands of such texts to prove an unfounded, unsubstantiated point! :lol:

 

point 10 - BUT i dont deny that we exist, that life exists, so whatever that law of nature is that allows development obviously exists. but to imagine it as an intelligent entity is odd, you cant accept that man evolved from nothing but willingly accepts that god did! :lol:

 

maybe there is a universal benevolant force in nature... a god... but that is a completely different theory then any religion suggests, especially christianity!

 

point 11 - yet again you utterly fail to understand that mankind doesnt need religion to create a highly evolved, moral society, crediting all moral goodness to religion! IT AINT LIKE THAT! i dont need a reward for being 'good' . i attack christianity/religion because its totally backward, primitive thinking and is totally WRONG in its suggestion that theres a heaven.... please tell me WHERE IS HEAVEN?

 

point 12 - who is suggesting materialism?... im certainly not! materialism is not the aim of athiests! where do you get that assumption from? im quite happy living my moral life, trying to do good and upholding high standards and the fact that when im dead... thats it...over forever.

 

point 13 - and please answer my question regarding pre-destination! if everything in our lives is already mapped out why then does god WANT paedos to exist? why then did god PLAN people to be evil? why then does god even need jesus? because if our paths are planned out by god why does he create evil people?

 

on the other hand of course, pre-destination is either utter bollox or god doesnt exist (in the religious sense).

And then again, if this is all bull$h!t and you don´t believe it, what´s your problem if other people believe that? A christian would believe that, by converting other people he would have earned them Heaven, and what do you atheists believe you earn with that? Making other people less happy by assimilating your inevitably nihilistic worldview, or eliminating any possibility for a morality that is based in something other then materialism (=convenience)? That´s stuck in my head... Surely you´re going to argument that there are holly wars, paedophile priests, the inquisition, etc, but so what... There´s not 1 shred of tangible evidence (to use your own expression) that atheists are any tiny bit more moral then christians or people of any other religion. An atheist claiming that materialistic thought would give a better moral standards then any religion is a total joke.

 

What's your problem with people who don't believe in it? Do people have to believe in something to be accepted? And why do Christians have to "convert" people? People can make up their own mind.

 

I'm not going any further because I don't see the point. I'd just like to point out what I classify myself as before I start getting called a "nihilistic" atheist : An agnostic atheist is atheistic because he or she does not believe in the existence of any deity and is also agnostic because he or she does not claim to have definitive knowledge that a deity does not exist.

 

Peace out.

Edited February 19, 200916 yr by Cal