Ah..have you heard the one about no athiests in foxholes?
I think there are very few athiests out there that actually are true athiests that truly believe there is no such thing as a higher or supreme being. (with the possible exception of DLH
I,m not sure if Enstein was particularly religous (I believe he was jewish) but he did believe that from studying the universe and the way it works led him to believe there was a higher intellegence out there.That the our universe did not come into existance by chance.
The Supreme Being doesn't have to come from an organized religous group. It is what you feel in the core of your being.
_________________________
To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible". ~Thomas Aquinas
#774209 - 05/07/0706:28 PMRe: The Religion Control Debate Thread
[Re: 1oldminer]
Cutlass
The Man Who Wasn't There
Registered: 02/04/04
Posts: 77550
Loc: U.S. of A.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote: Kill them all and let God sort them out!!
but there is no god
Ah..have you heard the one about no athiests in foxholes?
I think there are very few athiests out there that actually are true athiests that truly believe there is no such thing as a higher or supreme being. (with the possible exception of DLH
I,m not sure if Enstein was particularly religous (I believe he was jewish) but he did believe that from studying the universe and the way it works led him to believe there was a higher intellegence out there.That the our universe did not come into existance by chance.
The Supreme Being doesn't have to come from an organized religous group. It is what you feel in the core of your being.
Polls in the US place believership in the mid to high 90s percent depending on how the poll is run.
Einstein once said something like "Nicht ist Nicht" which by that he meant there is no point in not believing in God because: If there isn't God and you believe in God, when you die, and then that's it, well then you aren't out anything. No big deal BUT, if you DON'T believe in God and you die, and there IS a God, well then you are in trouble.
Me, I don't care either way, religion is responsible for all the wars and hate in this world and I think we would be way better off with out it.
Quote: Einstein once said something like "Nicht ist Nicht" which by that he meant there is no point in not believing in God because: If there isn't God and you believe in God, when you die, and then that's it, well then you aren't out anything. No big deal BUT, if you DON'T believe in God and you die, and there IS a God, well then you are in trouble.
Me, I don't care either way, religion is responsible for all the wars and hate in this world and I think we would be way better off with out it.
It is not religion in itself that is responsible for all the misery that is going on today. It is the perversion of whatever faith (essentailly created by humans in thier puffed up pride that thIer god is better than his nieghbour's god.) one professes to claim to be.
I happened to believe in God (being of the mormon faith) but if I go around telling you or anyone else that my faith is the only faith and everyone is going straight to hell because they are whatever, be it jew, christain, muslim or even an atheist, other than being an lds member, well I am certainly not what I profess to be, would I?
_________________________
To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible". ~Thomas Aquinas
Quote: Einstein once said something like "Nicht ist Nicht" which by that he meant there is no point in not believing in God because: If there isn't God and you believe in God, when you die, and then that's it, well then you aren't out anything. No big deal BUT, if you DON'T believe in God and you die, and there IS a God, well then you are in trouble.
Me, I don't care either way, religion is responsible for all the wars and hate in this world and I think we would be way better off with out it.
I'm not aware of Einstein implying anything of the sort. It would go against everything I've read of him. What you are referring to is Pascal's Wager. It's a ridiculous argument if I might say.
It goes something like: If you believe in God, and he exists, your gain is infinite. If he doesn't exist, it doesn't matter anyway. If you don't believe in God, and he doesn't exists, it doesn't matter, but if he does exist, you are condemned to eternal damnation. So the only reasonable position to take is believing in God.
It sounds terrific, until you give it a little thought and realize it's nothing more than a bet. A bet in which you are assuming that God rewards belief. But why should that be the case?
Quoting Richard Dawkins: "Then again, suppose the god who confronts on you when you die turns out to be Baal, and suppose Baal is just as jealous as his old rival Yahweh was said to be. Mightn't Pascal have been better off wagering on no god at all rather than on the wrong god? Indeed, doesn't the sheer number of potential gods and goddesses on whom one might bet vitiate Pascal's whole logic? Pascal was probably joking when he promoted his wager, just as I am joking in my dismissal of it."
By the way, Einstein used the term "God" freely to refer to the mystery, beauty and order he felt were part of the Universe. He explicitly said he didn't believe in a personal God, or immortality. When asked if he believed in immortality he replied: "No, and one life is enough for me."
Registered: 12/28/04
Posts: 9655
Loc: In a country with no army =)
Of course you were all expecting ME to turn up in this thread. Bet some were timing me. Anyway... _____________________
As you know, I believe in the Bible to be God's Word. The Bible does not say anywhere that God will condemn you to eternal suffering in a fiery hell for just 70 or 80 years (at the most) of sinning.
To the contrary, the God of the Bible extends a loving invitation to the meek, the humble, to seek him out, promising that He will let himself be found, and will reward those people.
As for all the bloodshed caused by religious groups throughout history (of which Christianity holds the worst record), I quote a fellow member:
"The Supreme Being doesn't have to come from an organized religious group."
It's those organized religious groups who have spoiled God's reputation with their actions. But that doesn't have anything to do with proving or denying God's existence.
_________________________ Crushingly Beautiful (tm) Ladies - (as of March 31st, 2013)
#774216 - 05/07/0710:21 PMRe: The Religion Control Debate Thread
[Re: Crux Australis]
Cutlass
The Man Who Wasn't There
Registered: 02/04/04
Posts: 77550
Loc: U.S. of A.
Quote: How about the new "religion" of climate change and global warming.
Look at how they deal with climate change skeptics - almost like heretics.
I have not seen any convincing "proof" that humans are causing global warming.
Is Al Gore it's new "High Priest"?
The difference is that scientists cane up with the idea on the basis of the evidence. And few people who understand the evidence disagree about it in it's entirety. People quibble over details. People say the evidence isn't conclusive. But the world is warmer. The warming corespondes in time with human activity. There is no faith involved. Coincidence does not prove causality when doing statistical models. But when you know you have a good chance of stopping your house from burning down (with your children locked inside) with a few simple precautions, only a sociopath or a retard refuses to act.
Quote: A companion thread to the "Gun Control Debate thread". Have at it.
I've got an assault weapon that I bought right here in God's Country, the good ol' US of A, after a 7 day waiting period at the local Wal Mart (got me some Cheetos on sale there too that day ). And if some Commie bastard disagrees with me about my havin' the bestest religion there is, by God I'll blast his nuts off.
_________________________
My avy reg. date is inaccurate! I actually joined 11/10/04, same day as my bud bh13.
). And if some Commie bastard disagrees with me about my havin' the bestest religion there is, by God I'll blast his nuts off. 
Previous Topic
Index
