It kind of helps if you're in the same conversation as everyone else I hope you realise.
The pope. Popeing about.
- Thread starter benneh
- Start date
It kind of helps if you're in the same conversation as everyone else I hope you realise.
LOL it isnt...get off your high horse for a second and point out where i have said its offensive for someone to question my religion
There's no high horse to get off. The mainstream religions have positioned themselves in such a way that you cannot question them - the very act of doing so is seen as disrespectful by members of whatever religion is questioned.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,724
- Location
- Worcestershire
It seems that the general view on this thread is if an atheist questions someones religious belief then it's somehow considered an attack with various 'prove god doesn't exist' posts whereas I am repeatedly informed by other posters that my atheism is in fact my 'faith' but it's o.k. to disrespect my beliefs apparently
That's what's so funny.
The believer takes the evidence on faith. Let us say that the evidence he accepts as proof of God is the fact that he can think and emote like as an individual.
That is perfectly acceptable evidence to him that God exists, Science cannot prove currently otherwise and thus if you wish to say he is wrong in his belief and that the evidence he has produced which he finds acceptable is also wrong then it is up to you as the critic to prove your claims.
Nope, it is simply proof that they have not found it yet. Who is to say that the Loch Ness Monster hasn't simply moved or died or has skin impervious to detection equipment or simply wasn't in the right place the right time.
The same with Unicorns or Mermaids or God, Animals die out all the time, we are currently finding around 5000 new species of plant and animal life be it existing or extinct each year, so you can say it is improbable, but you cannot prove it didn't or doesn't exist.
God is the same only with God you would have to define the concept rather narrowly to disprove each and every personification or spiritual concept that could be regarded as a God. Who is to say that Religion is simply not mistaken in it's definition of God, God may well exist but not in any form that we are currently able to detect or comprehend.
Associate
- Joined
- 16 Oct 2007
- Posts
- 1,724
- Location
- Worcestershire
I think common sense is to say that they don't exist.
If the same logic is applied to Bigfoot, the Yeti & many dozens of others worldwide does in not lead you to the conclusion that none actually exist & that they all originated in folklore then I think you must be a bit gullible.
[/QUOTE]
The same with Unicorns or Mermaids or God, Animals die out all the time, we are currently finding around 5000 new species of plant and animal life be it existing or extinct each year, so you can say it is improbable, but you cannot prove it didn't or doesn't exist.
God is the same only with God you would have to define the concept rather narrowly to disprove each and every personification or spiritual concept that could be regarded as a God. Who is to say that Religion is simply not mistaken in it's definition of God, God may well exist but not in any form that we are currently able to detect or comprehend.[/QUOTE]
The many millions of Christians & Muslims have a very clear definition of how they perceive god though don't they. It's apparently a humanoid figure with a long beard .
BS and you know it...i dont have an issue with people questioning my religion and i get plenty of my friends who do but they do it in a respectful way and without causing offence...unless you feel that its perfectly ok to offend someone for their beliefs because you may not agree with them??.
I know for a fact that most of the muslims i know have never felt offended or disrespected when questioned about our religion...but my point being is that they dont purposely offend when asking questions.
Last edited:
It seems that the general view on this thread is if an atheist questions someones religious belief then it's somehow considered an attack with various 'prove god doesn't exist' posts whereas I am repeatedly informed by other posters that my atheism is in fact my 'faith' but it's o.k. to disrespect my beliefs apparently
To me its not...i dont see it as an attack but when someone purposely offends or mocks my religion or faith then yes i do take offence and you, yourself have made some offensive remarks in the past regarding islam and religions in general...so dont pretend otherwise.
Anyhow its the same ole **** in here...atheists want proof that God exists...religious people cant provide proof so then turn on the Atheists to prove that God doesnt exist but yet they cant...repeat and rinse ad finitum
Common sense would dictate that we say that they are improbable, but again to rule something out as impossible is a narrow-minded viewpoint to take if you cannot prove beyond a reasonable doubt your assertion. Folklore is interesting because most folklore has some basis in fact and thus supports my argument.
Many of those millions accept that anthropomorphic representations of God are simply that, representations borne of a more primitive age.
Many religions have differing personifications of God, some have none, they simply believe he exists. So while you can argue that a specific religion is mistaken and for this you would need a reasonable knowledge of it's beliefs and doctrine an how they relate to modern thinking within any given demographic both religiously and socially, you cannot reasonably and honestly say definitively "There is no God" without the burden of proof being on you the critic.
To me its not...i dont see it as an attack but when someone purposely offends or mocks my religion or faith then yes i do take offence and you, yourself have made some offensive remarks in the past regarding islam and religions in general...so dont pretend otherwise.
Anyhow its the same ole **** in here...atheists want proof that God exists...religious people cant provide proof so then turn on the Atheists to prove that God doesnt exist but yet they cant...repeat and rinse ad finitum
The problem is not that Religions cannot provide proof, they can and do all the time, it is that the proof they offer is not acceptable to Atheists, Unbelievers or even Agnostics like myself.
This is the difference between Science and Faith.
I dont know about Christians but muslims have no idea about how God looks like..as far as we are concerned God is a being, an omnipotent being to be exact and takes no form of human shape...the only person in islam who has seen God was our prophet Moses who after receiving the 10 commandmants begged God to reveal himself...Moses didnt actually see God though as he lost consciousness before he actually saw God.
Indeed.
That really isn't the case. The whole "God on a cloud" thing stems mostly from art trying to depict God. Few christians I know actually attribute such things to God in reality.
Why though? What does it matter if someone finds your religion stupid, silly, burns the Koran, draws a cartoon of Mohammed or any of a number of things that can cause offense to the religious? If God cares he will do something about it, if you are secure enough in your faith what should it matter if others think it silly?
But is it not the intent of the act to offend that is offensive, not the act itself.
Burning the Koran for example, what if I took a picture of your daughter and burnt that with the same intent, that to offend. Would you find that offensive, would you be just think so what, who cares what you think about my family.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 4,432
What is this proof you speak of?
At the end of the day you have to take offence. My general thoughts would be "Meh, the guy is a nutter." But instead we had "Oh no! How can you?" and then riots and effigies being burnt...
I would think you were a bit of a nutter, but I really wouldn't find it offensive. Why would I? Unless you are specifcally threatening my daughter it is having no direct impact on her. Not to mention my daughter is only a four year old and not a religion with millions of follows and supposedly all powerful God that can look after himself...
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Sure the act is intended to be offensive and indeed inflammatory in every sense of the word, however there's a certain part of me that can't help thinking if I had a god surely they'd be big enough and ugly enough to look after themselves without my help? My being offended on their behalf doesn't serve a vast deal of purpose.
Not incidentally if they're completely incorporeal (as is generally the wont of most deities it seems) then we can't even translate the burning of a photograph of them (potential threat to your family) into a threat to the person of god.
I'm all for people respecting the right of others to believe what they want, it's just one of those little logical anomolies that I find sometimes occur.