Customer Discussions > religion discussion forum

The Trinity


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 151-175 of 369 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:01:46 BDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:08:58 BDT
Bellatori says:
No she is not and neither are you... we have been through this so many times. Do try and keep up...

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:11:58 BDT
How many times does the word "Atheist/Atheism" have to be explained to people

These kind of posts really just make it seem as though you are a complete and total moron of the highest sense with a complete lack of memory capacity as it has been posted so many times verbatim exactly what "Atheist/Atheism" means, it's also an extremely clear definition and not hard to look up yourself

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:14:46 BDT
C. A. Small says:
Cretin. How many times do you dullards need to have it explained to you? Do you own a dictionary?

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:16:57 BDT
HotFXMan says:
Meaningless drivel.

You still owe me an apology.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:21:26 BDT
HotFXMan says:
"Atheists have 'complete trust or confidence in' the non-existence of God."

M0r0n

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:34:58 BDT
No, Atheists lack trust or confidence in the existence of god. Athesist are those without belief in god.

Even Strong Atheists don't have absolute confidence in the lack of existence of a god and hold the position tentatively due to lack of relevant evidence rather than any certainty.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 16:58:53 BDT
Last edited by the author on 29 Apr 2013 16:59:23 BDT
Bellatori says:
"Even Strong Atheists don't have absolute confidence in the lack of existence of a god and hold the position tentatively due to lack of relevant evidence rather than any certainty."

That does not really sum up my position exactly though I don't entirely disagree either. The word tentative suggests atheists are really agnostic which is not the case either.

Perhaps I can illustrate what I mean to be clearer (I wish!)...

Hypothesis: God exists.
Evidence: None

In my view the hypothesis isn't credible and I hold no view on it. (Not to be confused with having a blast on the Forums when I find myself less than occupied). This is not tentative. Its a 'come back when you have something worth looking at and until then don't waste my time.' kind of position.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:03:56 BDT
Perhaps I just don't get it. If it were so simple, it wouldn't keep raising its head.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:06:00 BDT
Atheists have no belief in God. Most seem to say this is because their is no evidence. This is a statement of faith.

'complete trust or confidence' that there is no evidence.

Posted on 29 Apr 2013 17:09:02 BDT
Bellatori says:
"Atheists have no belief in God. Most seem to say this is because their is no evidence. This is a statement of faith." No it isn't. It is a statement of fact.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:10:48 BDT
But if there were evidence your position would change. Tentative (as I use it) means changing on the basis of very little evidence. Let me get a dictionary.

Adjective

1 Not certain or fixed; provisional: "a tentative conclusion".
2 Done without confidence; hesitant: "tentative steps"

More 1 than 2 but it seems I've been misusing tentative all along.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:11:58 BDT
That's not faith.

I have yet to be presented any compelling evidence for god, therefore there is no reason to believe in him. I have been presented reasonable arguments against its likelihood, therefore i lean towards believing there is no god.

There's no faith involved there and the position would change at any time evidence changed.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:13:24 BDT
C. A. Small says:
There is no evidence- none, not a jot. If you have some please produce it and my position will change, but so far not one theist has ever produced any real evidence. If they had some it would be produced, and all other religions would have to kow-tow to the one that had the evidence. But there is none.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:24:51 BDT
to quote tim Minchin's Storm

Science adjusts it's beliefs based on what's observed
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved.
If you show me
That, say, [religion works]
Then I will change my mind
I'll spin on a [censored] dime
I'll be embarrassed as hell,
But I will run through the streets yelling
It's a miracle! Take physics and bin it!
Water has memory!
And while it's memory of a long lost drop of onion juice is Infinite
It somehow forgets all the poo it's had in it!

You show me that it works and how it works
And when I've recovered from the shock
I will take a compass and carve Fancy That on the side of my [censored].

Posted on 29 Apr 2013 17:37:07 BDT
C. A. Small says:
If you replaced "god" in any of your belief systems with "giant yellow space squid" nothing would change- it would just be more humourous and you might see what atheists see- that it is all nonsense.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 17:41:49 BDT
Bellatori says:
"Science adjusts it's beliefs based on what's observed
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."

A nicely put couplet... however, in case Diane is offended by the {censored] I will remind her of what our old friend Robert A Heinlein said which I have posted before but... hey... why waste a good quote by using it only once...

"A religion is sometime a source of happiness, and I would not deprive anyone of happiness. But it is a comfort appropriate for the weak, not for the strong. The great trouble with religion - any religion - is that a religionist, having accepted certain propositions by faith, cannot thereafter judge those propositions by evidence. One may bask at the warm fire of faith or choose to live in the bleak certainty of reason- but one cannot have both. [Robert A. Heinlein, from "Friday"]"

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 18:35:03 BDT
[Deleted by the author on 29 Apr 2013 18:35:51 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 18:39:38 BDT
DB says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 18:40:02 BDT
Spin says:
Archibald: No, I did think of that, but monotheists would deny that God can be "partial"; they insist He is "One". Such is the absurdity of the doctrine of "Trinity".

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 18:57:22 BDT
Archibald F says:
"Occam and I disagree." Yes, well Occam says he's been cross with you ever since you took his razor.

"Complexity is usually a very good way to obscure untruths..." Yes, sometimes. But at other times, the truth is complex. It's like at school. My eldest son was recently complaining how at Junior school he was taught that lightening was caused by clouds rubbing together. I remember in geography regularly being taught "remember what you were taught two years ago - well it doesn't really work like that".

"No... You are confusing theology which is the attempt to shore up religion when Faith weakens in the face of evidence. Try a dictionary..."
I'm happy with the first definition.

Now try 'theology' - the study of the nature of God and religious belief.
* religious beliefs and theory when systematically developed.

"Which is , in its way, an admission that that is what religion is for...!!" No, but I'd happily agree that religion can help and support people through difficult times, so yes, it CAN be a crutch - something which supports people. eg Psalm 40 -
I waited patiently for the Lord to help me,
and he turned to me and heard my cry.
He lifted me out of the pit of despair,
out of the mud and the mire.
He set my feet on solid ground
and steadied me as I walked along.
He has given me a new song to sing,
a hymn of praise to our God.

But to believe everybody turns to religion because they need a crutch is just untrue.

As an aside, why did you ever read theology?

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 19:06:14 BDT
Last edited by the author on 29 Apr 2013 19:06:55 BDT
"or do you truly believe that to be true? "

Wholeheartedly. And I'll add a few qualifiers - the largest, most successful, organised paedophile ring in history.

The last Pope should be arrested like a common criminal and put on trial.

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 19:16:01 BDT
Bellatori says:
Great fantasy writer, CS Lewis. One of my childhood favourites. Shame the films of the Narnia books were so tacky.

Posted on 29 Apr 2013 19:18:30 BDT
kraka says:
A crutch you say................

Here's a bit of "what if"

What if beneath the atoms and the energy that creates them, and deeper down to the very roots of our physical dimensions it was found that God was the sustaining source of the universe. That He was the crutch upon which the whole universe rested. What then would you say your life rested on?

In reply to an earlier post on 29 Apr 2013 19:24:19 BDT
C. A. Small says:
And so say all of us. or at least those with a shred of decency.
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  religion discussion forum
Participants:  26
Total posts:  369
Initial post:  25 Apr 2013
Latest post:  8 May 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions