deleted

deleted

Deepak Chopra is a fraud. O’Reilly,, on the other hand, is simply arrogant and doesn’t like to lose – he essentially told Dawkins in their first interview that he Was a Catholic because of “Pascal’s wager,” that if he was wrong about it he stands to lose nothing, and as such is hedging himself against the possibility of Hell. This is both not a very compelling reason to believe in something, so much as an expression of obvious fear, and it implies either a God who is incredibly stupid and cedulous or one that cares less about the sincerity of faith than the lip service. Hence why I say this isn’t about the truth of the doctrine for O’Reilly. He’s just annoyed that so many people (rightly) ridiculed his “sun goes up, sun goes down, tides come in, tides go out” nonsense, so he’s decided to make criticizing Dawkins while he’s not there his personal hobby horse.

Faux News clean up on Billdo’s show.

Billdo brought a sacred cow and Billdo left a mess.

I could almost see the Herpa Derp hanging over their heads.

Chopra: “Evolution does not contradict…”
Bill: “That’s what I think, Intelligent design does not contradict science.”

That was not what he was going to say, Bill.  

What a punk! He even had the balls to say he cleaned Dawkins’ clock. Dawkins didn’t even engage his dumb butt on an intellectual level. This is the guy who thinks the tides are a divine happening. Last I checked, it’s not atheists or agnostics knocking on my door when I’m having dinner trying to sell me their dogma. We are a minority, why are you religious folk so petrified of us?

You can criticize Dawkins all you want.  Just affects Dawkins’ personality, not Dawkins’ arguments

I loved the specious and categorical lie about the American justice system being based on the biblical 10 commandments. Now, Bill, how many commandments did you break in that one segment with Deepak yet breaking no American laws?

Ide love to see Hitchens take a swing at him. 

Dawkins maintains that believers are deluded, not idiots. However, in the case of Chopra and O’Reilly? THEY’RE idiots, plain and simple.

They give genuinely religious people a bad name by trotting out completely unsupportable opinions which they maintain are facts.

I understand O’Reilly — he’s paid millions of dollars a year to lie through his teeth — but Chopra doesn’t do that well and is even more bullshit-prone that O’Reilly.

But thanks anyway, Deep and Bill — you do the work of the righteous when you make such asses of yourselves.

Hitchens has appeared opposite O’Reilly on multiple occasions and, predictably, mops the floor with him every time.

Bill’O and Chopra are complete and utter morons. Richard Dawkins is a brilliant scientist, writer and speaker. He is NOT a great debater and not so good in an argument. O’Reilly should have Matt Dillahunty or Sam Harris on. Either one of these two guys would hand O’Reilly his ignorant ass inside out when they were through with him. Sam Harris has already destroyed Chopra in a face off. Dawkins is too intelligent and it is difficult for him to stoop to the level of ignorance required to speak with Bill-O-Idiot.

President Barack Obama
Wednesday said even God wanted to put Americans back to work, invoking
divine blessing for his joust with Republicans over measures designed to
slice into high unemployment.

Falafel-Billy didn´t kick anyone´s butt, especially not Dawkins. Always the same routine from Falafel-Billy.
When he loses a debate, he claims he kicked the butt of the one who showed him his intellectual limitations.

The judicial system is clearly not in tune with Christian beliefs. Neither Jesus Christ`s teachings
nor “you shall not kill” support in any way the death penalty. Again, Falafel-Billy spreads a completely wrong statement.

Falafel-Billy lies routinely and knowingly breaking another commandment. Same goes for FixedNews.

Organized religion is a very successful business. 
 
The personal believe of scientists doesn´t say anything about their scientific credentials. It´s a private thing and anyone is free to believe whatever he wants privately.  Being a great scientist and a religious person doesn´t prove anything to anyone.

Deepak Chopra certainly riles up a lot of people although his message is very simple and has helped millions of people. i.e. yes, there is a loving God and we can all access Him/Her. Just take a look at any of his books. His thinking has incoporated the best of Hinda, Vendantic, Buddhist and western religions. O’Reilly is the type of hypocritical jerk who gives anything he likes like religion a bad name. It’s no wonder he’s the star of FOX. Also, much of Christianity as practiced in this country has very little to do with God or spirit. Black Americans have the best slant on Christianity, for obvious reasons.

 You simply prove O’Reilly’s point  by your anger and vitriol.  If you really want to convince someone of the intellectual superiority of atheism, you need to use arguments, not name-calling. 

I wonder why only christianism and jewish religions are only ones good enough for bozo the clown

This is why people watch Fox.  O’Reilly gave a platform to Dawkins, and now to Chopra — following the Fox formula of presenting frank, honest discussions with all viewpoints represented.  Maybe MSNBC and other bastions of the liberal media should pay attention.  Their unwillingness to present anything except politically correct liberal opinion is boringly predictable, no matter what one’s political affiliation.  Given their unwillingness to practice honest journalism, who can be surprised that Fox wins the ratings war every evening by a huge margin?

Get off your high horse. O’Reilly is the only one on Fox who’s capable of having a moderately civilized dialog with someone he disagrees with, but he often talks over them in his patented bloviating way. 

He may be the sanest of the pundits on Fox, but as Jon Stewart notes, that’s like being called the skinniest kid at fat camp.

Two words: prove it.

You make the mistake of believing that atheists are like religious folk in that we’re looking to convert those who don’t agree with us. If you want to believe this stuff, do so with our “blessing,” but just keep it to yourselves. Don’t bring it into the school or government buildings, don’t legislate your bible, and don’t make us pay for it in tax breaks to religious institutions.

I’m pretty sure it’s because conservatives don’t want to be challenged on their wacky beliefs such as “we can’t explain it, therefore (christian) god did it!”.

Even in his diminished state, he could run circles around O’Reilly.

What a lame piece.
O’Reilly says “Our justice system is based on the 10 commandments”.  Really?  

That is patently absurd.

Yes, the bizarre rituals required of politicians in the US are counterproductive and rather creepy. Luckily, the grownups understand.

Last I checked school prayer is not allowed. The state is not forcing anyone to attend a particular church or believe in any set religion.

I have yet to hear any convincing argument that proves God does not exist.

I have yet to hear any convincing argument that the Flying Spaghetti Monster is not God.

I have yet to hear any convincing argument that proves the flying spaghetti monster does not exist. So what’s your point? The burden of proof is on the claimer that God does exist.

“You have to listen to the heart. The heart has reasons that reason doesn’t know.”

That’s not how thinking, science, or reason works, Mr. Chopra. It’s non-thinking or anti-thinking, and it encourages people to accept things that are not true.

Yeah, that’s fine, but evangelicals have been fighting to force prayer into schools for years. It’s very high on their agenda. They’ve also tried — with some success — to bring creationism into the science curriculum. 

And while we’re at it, why the f–k should it be on our money or in our pledge (it was only added to the pledge in the 1950s as a knee-jerk response to the communist threat)?

Or that the world wasn’t created last Thursday, like the Last Thursdayists believe.

Whoa, lady — it’s not up to us to prove that God does not exist. It’s up to you to prove that he does! 

EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS REQUIRE EXTRAORDINARY PROOF.

I guess you should go back in time to our founding fathers and ask why they mentioned the word “Creator” in the Declaration of Independence.

Whoa, man – I find *your* claims extraordinary. It takes far greater faith than mine to believe we’re all here by nature’s chance. I don’t know how you do it!

http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/ignorance.html
…also..
http://confirmation-bias.behaviouralfinance.net/

You are welcome!

Atheists don’t claim to know how we got here; they just admit that they don’t know how it happened. I have no idea how or why we came to exist. How does that take faith?

Rejecting the fairy tales of other people is not faith. The same way you feel about Greek myths, atheists feel about all god myths. This does not require faith in anything.

Alex, you could have given the perception of unbias if you had written “supposed” agenda in regards to what we atheists are up to….considering we pretty much are up to no agenda but living our lives and not being endlessly harassed with the bias perpetrated by ya’all religious folk.

Choprah proves to be a pathetic coward in his unwillingness to intellectually debate Hawkings….instead he cries “bigot”….and of course that fits right in with O’Really’s agenda.

The true bigots are the imbeciles who believe in the spaghetti monster in the sky who watches over them as some man written bible claims……and Mary was a virgin! and praying for touchdowns, diamonds, elections, and that your car doesn’t run out of gas until the next exit-really works! The spaghetti monster is worried about abortions and gays but is ambivalent to all the starving, suffering, tortured and dying around the world! yep that’s it! He She It is really up there and gives a sh’t what you and I are doing! He laughs at children slowly dying of cancer who are in endless pain….afterall, he’s busy aking sure you go into a building and pray to him every week like a devoted little indoctriated zombie!

Oh ya, and that MAN named Jesus died for your sins and he rose from the dead and did the cha cha!

isn’t it amusing. (well i find it amusing) that jesus the man, a jew, is portrayed in american churches as a bleached white skinned, blue eyed, golden haired attractive man with no sign of ethnic features in his tone, stature, facial features such as his nose, eyes or ears? just tall, thin, attractive, generic white guy!

lmao. indoctrination at its finest…and by who? the people you trust most when your a small child, the parents who drag you into that building every week and force you to sit there and believe.

pathetic

really?  That’s a new twist.

Don’t have to prove anything.  You can’t prove that he doesn’t.  

Since I believe he does – that’s proof enough for me.  Your not believing makes no difference to me or my belief.  That’s the big difference.  

You are hell bent on me not believing.  I don’t care what your position is.  See the difference?
So you don’t believe – bully for you.  

I must not have gotten this memo about having all the responsiblity of proving the unseen with physical evidence. In any case, I can see where people come to the conclusion that God doesn’t exist. I question sometimes.

The fact that we now have 7 billion people on this planet and not one of them carry the same fingerprints or the same DNA is beyond me. The fact that the human species is the only species to have the brain power we have is beyond me. The fact that our planet is the only one we know of right now that has just the right environment to sustain life is beyond me.

Again, the faith atheists have is a far greater faith than mine.

only for people who want to convert non-believers.  Most believers take a live and let live attitude.

Don’t give a flying fig if you think you turn into a worm in the after life.  

There is no “burden of proof” required.  If you had faith you’d understand that.  

I think you are confusing cause and effect. It is not an extra-ordinary claim because we are here, and since we are here, and because we are h wondering how we got here? He is not making a claim that he knows how we got here, that some invisible man created us all, left no evidence behind, just to test our faith in him.
If you are scientific person, you would realize that many many very intelligent people over the last 5,000 years of civilization have worked on an explanation that works back to the point that all matter in existence was compacted to a singularity about 14 billion years ago. I find that more convincing than God going ‘puff,’ but that’s just me.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o

I don’t care what your position is either. You believe what you want, I believe what I want. I thought I’d just flip the question for once, but that’s offensive I guess. Atheists can be just as big of bullies as Evangelicals.

of course you want to convert people to believing in nothing!
How freaking stupid is that?

You put up goofy signs right next to Church’s etc.
So, you want others to not believe.  Why can’t you live and let live.

I don’t care if you believe that you were hatched from an egg.  I don’t care about your belief, but you sure get bent about mine.

they didn’t make asses of themselves.  They had a conversation.  You didn’t like it – why did you watch?

Bugged you didn’t it.  I think what O’Reilly said was the ten commandments were posted in the Supreme Court.  There, now you have something to fight to get removed.  You pathetic excuses for humans.  

p.s.  Have you ever read “The Shack”? 

because it can’t be proven either way.  Belief if faith based – non belief seems to be the soup du jour.   Suddenly it’s in style to claim to be an atheist.   

Wonder if these “atheist” when facing a life and death situation call on any “outside” assistance?

Oops, replied to the wrong comment…if only I could delete it. Dang. *hands head in shame*

How about to each his own don’t judge me. Isn’t that the liberal mantra? But not for us ignorant folks who choose to believe? You are showing your true agenda and it rings of Al queda.

a brilliant comment I’m sure. lol

Perhaps because Christianity and Judaism is based on scripture.  Ever hear of the bible?  

Have you read the 10? Are there people in jail for breaking 1 or 2 of them? are you really this stupid?

Gotta give it to O’Reilly. Anyone who can corrupt a guy like Deepak deserves some credit. 

The downside is that I can never read a Deepak book again because he’s a fraud.

The Purple Truth A Political Blog

We bring it to the election booth! Did you see the results in 2010? Local, state and federal. We are a christian nation.

Science has limitation all by itself. Many discoveries and great ideas are made in dreams, by accident, or just by leaving  the thought process to rest.

hmmm I wonder how Hitchens is going out of this world?  Have heard that many non believers find God just before expiring.

What did you think of Jobs and his “oh wow, oh wow, oh wow”?  Think he might have got a glimpse of something that he found unbelievable?  Just think – what if he did?

For a guy not trying to change what people believe you sure are campaigning against Christians a lot.

really?  you’re not putting up billboards etc.?  

Last I checked you were.  You were also suing everyone and his brother to get crosses and religious figures removed from all sorts of places.  Why?

Dawkins was toast with O’Reilly.  don’t even attempt to say he won cause he didn’t.  I know – he didn’t bring his “A” game to the debate. lol

Make sense one time please.Are you 12?

The Founding Father’s, were men of their time, and men of their time were, to varying degrees, religious.  So too were the Founding Father’s products of the age of enlightenment and help set the protocols for future scientific exploration and experiment.

I suspect that O’Reilly and others like him, would prefer that religious inclination be the dominant factor in human relations, as opposed to reason and intellect.  I guess I would like reassure Mr. O’Reilly, that Atheism and reason are NOT mutually exclusive.  That a Nation founded and based on reason can still see and feel God’s presence and light.

Purveyor   

The founding father’s were deists, people who believe that God set the world in motion, there were no atheists at the time, because you could still be hung from your elbows in the Spanish inquisition as late as the early 19th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Picard.jpg
Yes, ‘God’ is in the Declaration of Independence, but is in the tradition of social contracts, either god gives rights to the king and the king gives rights to the people, or god gives rights to the people, and the people give rights to the king and/or government. “..that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights..” All of which is largely influenced by the writing of John Locke in the 17th century, who first argues that people are free and equal before god, and not the natural subjects of a monarch. I have yet to see anyone point to any evidence that God in the Declaration of Independence is actually the Christian God. There is no mention of Jesus, they could be talking about Zeus, for all I know.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke-political/

If our justice system were based on the 10 commandments we wouldn’t have the death penalty.

What method do you use to disprove fairies?

“removed from all sorts of places”

No Einstein, just off government land. There is this thing called the Constitution that is
pretty clear on the issue. Try expanding your reading list from the Limbaugh News
Letter to get some perspective on the debate.

I cannot believe the revolting lies O’Reilly is prepared to spout about Dawkins. And the notion that that he has ‘kicked his ass’ twice is transparently untrue to anyone who has seen those interviews. In both cases, O’Reilly came across as an ignorant fool, and Dawkins admirably and politely put up with his non-sensical bullshit. It does not surprise me in the least see him align himself with ‘Prince of Quantum Flapdoodle’ Deepak Chopra.

“I have yet to see anyone point to any evidence that God in the Declaration of Independence is actually the Christian God. There is no mention of Jesus, they could be talking about Zeus, for all I know.”

Even people who believe in Zeus aren’t atheists. You do realize there are people out there with faiths different from Christianity?

What if God’s “puff” was that singular moment? I find life in and of itself extraordinary.

Hitchens has been pretty clear on the subject on how he is going out of this world. 

WHOA lady, EVIDENCE!!!! is what exGOPman is saying…………………………..Faith has NOTHING to do with EVIDENCE.

And I got a bridge in Brooklyn that you can buy……………………………..BELIEFS vs EVIDENCE………….Your beliefs end where evidence begins…………………

“Thou shalt not kill.” In the original Hebrew, the term ”kill” refers to ”murder”. In the Old Testament, God actually ordained the death penalty for certain sins. To correct you, if we based our justice system on Christ’s teachings, we wouldn’t have the death penalty. Christ came to fulfill the Old Covenant (such as capital punishment for sin), so we could live without condemnation or Death.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-RGN21TSGk
If we didn’t covet our neighbor’s things the economy would never work, imagine all the people who would go to jail for buying an ipad, TV’s, or computers.
I think its unconstitutional to throw someone in jail for their religious beliefs, so we can have gods before the christian god.
Come to think about it you don’t generally go to jail for lying, adultery, wanting to be adulterous, working on the sabbath, taking the lords name in vain, dishonoring our parents. I think the only commandments that result in jail time are about stealing and killing, and those are pretty obvious. So, I fail to see how justice system is based on the ten commandments???

You are never going to form any reasonable opinions if you only watch things you like. Besides this is a news site, why else would anyone be here?

I think the conversation was pretty contrived. It doesnt really tell you anything when everyone agrees.

That just diminishes him as another politician pandering
to the masses. No surprise here.  If it
won him support he, and every other politician, would praise Allah.

Whenever you feel the urge to criticize Christianity as if it’s the silliest thing out there, I’d ask you to quietly speak one word three times: “Scientology. Scientology. Scientology.”

Afterwards, I think you’ll find that your Christian neighbors seem a lot more reasonable than they did before.

And no, it doesn’t always work for me, but it’s worth a try, if for no other reason than to avoid fistfights in parking lots.

I have never seen a fairy. Then again, I’ve never physically seen God. I guess “sight” is out of the question. I’ve never experienced a fairy’s presence (don’t know what they feels like, but if you do, please enlighten me), but I’ve definately experienced God’s presence. The feeling that even in a world as chaotic as this one, He is with me. It’s the same feeling, if not a greater feeling, you have when you know someone loves you; a parent, a friend, or a lover. It’s goes much deeper than human love. So, that’s how I disprove fairies. I do not know them.

You realize that you are an atheist to every other religion except your own, I gather that you are not a fan of Allah, Vishnu, Zeus, Jupiter, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Saturn, Neptune, Apollo, etc. I just don’t believe in 1 more god then you, and since there are about 1,000 gods, it’s within a margin of error.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2008/02/11/gods-we-dont-believe-in/

Ideas, maybe. But real science requires discipline, methodology, and technique.

Archimedes may have shouted “eureka” in the bathtub, but after streaking the streets of Syracuse he almost certainly trotted into his lab (probably dripping wet) to measure the weight of displaced water. Until he did that, his “eureka” was no more than an “eek.”

Chopra: Goniff, Fraud, or Crackpot?

Discuss.

We usually call 911!!!

Ever hear of Greek Mythology???

Maybe.. that is the basis for deists, that God was the primary mover, the action that put everything else into motion, and the world is governed by nature law. Historically we have found that science keeps pulling back the curtain, and has yet to find the divine, and there is no reason to believe that the big bang is any different. Now, I will also argue that, “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and
willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then
why call him God?” -Epicurus 270 BC

What? To a Muslim, I’m seen as a Christian. To Hindus, people of the Jewish faith are seen as Jews. To me, I see someone who believes in Allah to be a Muslim. You don’t believe in any god. That’s why you’re an atheist…

I sit here hoping someone is correct, because I have a feeling the right god to pray to is one no longer believed in.  

I’ll say the Vikings had it right and Thor was the real supreme god of everything.

Then you will never believe.

you obviously see things differently. Just Because Mr. O’rielly disagreed with Mr. Dawkins does not make it a FACT………..Mr Dawkins deals in FACTS…………….Mr O’Rielly deals in BELIEFS.

no “surfing” today? LOL!

In the 10 Commandments, the first four statements concern the relationship between a god and humans, while the next six statements concern the relationships between people.
Look closely and tell me why the first 4 should be codified into laws of a “FREE PEOPLE”

yet, you voted for and still support him. so does clovis or whatever his name is, today

“You have to listen to the heart. The heart has reasons that reason doesn’t know.”

Sounds like Chopra describes a .”God”  of the Gaps–
… a way of explaining some gap in scientific knowledge by placing a deity there to be responsible for “flipping the switch” whether it be lightning , a tsunami or the Big Bang.In fact given this logic, any arbitrary imaginary entity can be placed in “the gap” and a surrounding story created to accommodate what is observed in nature .

Faith is for the deluded. Its believing in bull manure which has no evidence.

To reply to your Epicurus quote:

I believe He is in fact able, but not always willing. Why? I don’t know. I don’t know why some people suffer and others don’t. I won’t pretend to know. It frustrates me. He does tell us life will be difficult at times. He never promises us it will be easy, even for believers. He does promise He will always walk with us through whatever it is we’re facing – good and bad.

He causes His sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. Matthew 5:45

In this world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world. John 16:33

I can say this: Even though I have never physically seen God, He has absolutely never hurt me, lied to me, or abandoned me. His love reaches even the deepest depths of my soul. He’s very stubborn. 

What if is not an answer. Please provide evidence for your God puff fairy tale

OK what I believe is my business and what you believe is ur business. Why does your foolish God want to get in my business and damn me into hell ? Is he a sadistic moron ?

The comments section is more interesting than the actual article. The idea that it would be possible to change someone’s position on this issue is practically null. Most people change their mindminds because of some personal experience. As a child I was a christian, primarily due to what I call indoctrination. When I started to think for myself, I questioned my religion & god, it just didn’t make sense. I remember a kid in my Sunday school class becoming ill. He had chicken pox & was given aspirin. He became gravely ill. He did survive but had Reyes syndrome. The church members said it was a miracle, god had saved him. I asked our youth pastor, if god was responsible for him living wasn’t god also responsible for his current state. If god is in charge of everything isn’t god responsible for the bad & the good? I was told we can’t understand the ways of god. I’ve been a free thinker since.

What a brain power to believe in some non-existing sky fairy ?  LOL. If our planet is the only one we know of which has life, it doesn’t mean there is none elsewhere. It means we we don’t know enough to say if we are alone. If ours is the only planet, then it also means our kind of life is very suited to this one planet.If it was created by some creator, it also means he is an absolute moron to create life in a single planet across such a vast universe. He/She is not worthy of my worship

Your feeling of presence of something can also be reproduced by chemical drugs. With drugs, poeple have experience fairies to aliens to God. So, if that is the case, fairies are as likely as God

All these ideas will be thrown out of the window, if they don’t confirm with experiment and observation. So, Science is not entirely based on ideas, its also based on confirmation with reality

He doesn’t want to “damn you into hell”. That’s why He died for your sins.

He still loves you even if you think He’s a moron.

I wouldn’t know. I’ve never done drugs.

CORRECT! We agree.

I totally agree, Bill knows how to draw them in
the first four statements concern the relationship between God and humans, while the next six statements concern the relationships between people.

SO what he is saying is that our  justice system is based on how we obey god on the 1st four and then the obvious ones later in the piece………………………………

So, if you could understand the ways of God, you’d believe? Wow. Yeah, I don’t always understand Him. Then again, I can hardly understand myself sometimes! lol

I’m sure you’ve heard every argument in the book and are just being precious. But what the heck.

It is a logical impossibility to prove the nonexistence of anything. It is pointless to try. However, that does not translate into evidence that the subject something does exist.

If for you god does seem to exist, well that’s your cross to bear (so to speak). However, your believing that has absolutely zero influence on anything else in the universe.

That’s because it’s the religious people using govt or public land to proselytize. O’Reilly was arguing a strawman as usual. He’s a complete moron when it comes to an intellectual argument about religion and non-religion. Dawkins knows this and never bothers engaging him intellectually.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0scyrMpin5M

How I wish you were correct that rationality was coming into fashion and fairy tales being relegated to their proper place in the nursery.

Sadly, the level of religious nuttery seems to be growing, at least in traditional Muslim countries and the United States. On the upside, there are now several countries where religion is expected to become totally irrelevant within a generation or so, so there is some hope.

P.S.: Ya know that old saying “there are no atheists in foxholes”? Bullshit.

“You have to listen to the heart. The heart has reasons that reason doesn’t know.”

I do not have scientific evidence to support it, but my heart tells me O’Reilly is the biggest assh*** on television….

“Faith” and “conclusion” are not identical. They’re not even very similar.

You keep your faith that the universe is so wonderful that purely natural processes can’t possibly explain it, and I’ll remain content in my conclusion that the universe is so wonderful that supernatural forces are meaningless and unnecessary to explain it.

It’s a very crowded field.

Not to be cruel, but hadn’t you figured that out about Chopra before this?

O’Reilly deceptively “forgets” that there are OTHER non-religious and non-Christian inscriptions/references at the U.S. Supreme Court. So he was being intellectually dishonest by selectively omitting that. Yes…it bothers me because he peddles lies to an ignorant audience.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/capital.asp
He fails to also notice that the Supreme law of the land — The U.S. Constitution — has absolutely NO Judeo or Christian “god” references. How strange eh? These are simple facts that you can verify.

Gotta love testimonials … sure, survivors as well as the living can talk … but the dead can’t … so even though many prayed only the ones that lived get to do testimonials, sometimes in front of big audiences, on how well God, Jesus, Mary, some guardian angel, or saint came through for them. How nice.

But what about the ones that prayed just as or more desperately, just as or more sincerely and/or just as or more devoutly as any survivor did but died anyway … we all know at least someone like that … what about their testimony? The indisputable fact is that they are silenced forever.

For example there are 58,000 names on The Vietnam Memorial Wall and most of them were indeed religious … but they can’t give their testimonials … as they are silenced forever.

Think about that a bit … what would 58,000 dead men say? What kind of testimonial would they give?

That’s why your claiming as some sort of “proof” all those Christian testimonials is totally bogus because the ones that it didn’t work out for can’t talk … get it?

I’m all for “to each his own” until someone tries to influence public policy and cites religious doctrine as the reason a policy needs to be amended or promulgated.

Keep your god out of the public square and I won’t call you deluded to your face. Deal?

You never wonder how the universe came to be so wonderful?

What a cheek to clearly quote Dr Hawkins out of context!

“If for you god does seem to exist, well that’s your cross to bear (so to speak). However, your believing that has absolutely zero influence on anything else in the universe.”

If that’s the case, why does it annoy people like Hitchens or Dawkins that I believe? It annoys them enough to write whole books about it!     

You want to believe? Knock yourself out. You want me to behave according to your god’s rules? I can’t hear you.

As long as no one tries to mandate behavior based on religious doctrine then I have no more to say about Jesus Christ than I do Xenu or the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Doesn’t mean I surrender my right to consider you deluded. I’m just supposed to be polite about it, which I’m willing to do.

That’s not from lack of trying from your ilk. A good number of your fellow GOP nominee candidates for potus would love to have prayer in public schools and have it preached.

Dude, its 8 oclock at night here on a thursday. You are obviously on the night shift or on some kind of pharmaceutical. I told you, I live in in a different hemisphere.

lol

you believe anything

Science is still in its infancy yet still has disproven 2500 years of relgious claims . Relgious ideology hinges on one word .. “faith” .. not fact.

How terrible. Kind of like your “ilk” wanting kids to know about beastiality and oral sex in elementary school.

If he is not willing, then is not benevolant.

So he sacrifices himself to save us from the sin he has imposed on us himself because a naked woman eat an apple listening to a talking snake ? And you want me to believe this rubbish ?

I don’t understand why people quote the Buybull, when Atheists clearly don’t give a rodent’s posterior for anything in that fairy tale. Yea people take drugs, feel halucinated and also think that the flying spagetti monster was always with them, and they got raped by aliens. Everybody has their own personal beliefs, and it is no evidence for a sky deity.

You’ve put your finger on the problem. Religions call for particular behaviors from their adherents and all too often — especially when a given religion is dominant in a community or society — go on to insist that non-adherents also behave according to that religion’s rules. Or the religion insists that the society’s resources be allocated in accordance with a given belief.

Neither of these are acceptable to non-adherents and so those non-adherents push back.

An obvious example? Most people who object to abortion do so at least partially on religious grounds.

Not acceptable.

The contempt one feels for a person who believes something that’s clearly nonsense comes out of human nature, but common courtesy (a trait shared by or absent from humanity on both sides of the issue) requires a civilized person not to harass a believer unless that believer or that believer’s organization steps over the line.

However, Dawkins and Hitchens feel that believers stepped over the line so long ago and have been marching ever since that they need to be resisted every possible way. Hence their books.

You do them every day. Your body produces them.

Sure. But “wonderful” is a human concept. The universe ‘became wonderful’ because the human race has evolved to include “wonder” in its makeup.

Bill and Deepak – really funny to watch. Two non-atheists can only agree on one thing: Dawkins bad. Bill had a hell of a time trying to fit Deepak into his own god shaped box. Deepak’s sloppy spirituality sloshed around almost beyond Bill’s ability to contain it.

When you can accept that every theology/spirituality on the planet is, within an order of magnitude, equally wise and sensible, then you will be able to appreciate atheism. 

i’d suggest u thoroughly research mormonism 1st, if ur trying to find a cult belief any of us should ridicule or use as an example…. considering the endless pedophilia cover ups in the catholic church, the masses of wealth gathered and bigotry in the mega churches, and the snakes and screaming on the floor in some other churches, i’m always amused when ppl turn to scientology when they’re looking for an example of cult churches to make fun of……there are so many to choose from.

“i’ve experienced god’s presence”

LMAO. i love these samples of what is wrong with our country and society!

just stunning

You cannot understand “HIM” because you are trying to apply a personal God to random events. “Believers” are a very narcissistic group. They have no problem believing that their God chooses to help them but when their Christian friend down the street dies from cancer or is murdered in a robbery they just chalk it up to God working mysteriously.

Kimberly, by defining something to be does not make it be. 

You are asserting that god loves you, has never hurt you, has lied to you, etc as a point of faith. If someone close to you were to be hit by a car and maimed for life, you would redefine this tragedy as a blessing, invoking some sort of god purpose. God could hate you, hurt you, cheat you, as determined by any reasonable test, and you would deny the obvious and blindly redefine it as the opposite. 

Kimberly, the next time you see a man beating his girlfriend, you can reassure her that it is only his way of showing his love. 

such typical ignorance….i’ve yet to meet a fellow atheist who took ir up because it’s cool or in style….

as to who we call in a time of need, that would be 911, a carpet cleaning service, or a tow truck…..depending on what the situation calls for.

any of those mentioned will get here a hellof a lot faster than the spaghetti monster.

“al qaeda” !

drink!

bridge? i don’t see no stinkin’ bridge!

this is what indoctrination looks like. ( for those who aren’t sure if they’ve ever witnessed it before).

enjoy

I’m an agnostic. That means if I’m asked if I think there is a God my answer would be ” I don’t know”. The two reasons I would say that is because
1, I really don’t know and
2, I believe it’s the only intellectually honest answer a person can give.

There is no proof that there is or there isn’t not a God. That’s why people believe. From where I’m sitting, there is two kinds of mainstream beliefs when it comes to God.  There is the kind that believes that there is a God and afterlife and those that believe there is not a God and no afterlife. Theists and Atheists. Theists believe there is a good because they want hope that there is more to life than the one we have. They fear that everything we learned and experienced in life will be for nothing because if there is only an empty void after death, life as a species that can comprehend its existence and its inevitable death will be nothing more than a cruel joke played by nature and evolution.   Atheists believe there is no God because they think that a lack of proof is all the proof they need to show that God is nothing more than something made up by people afraid of their mortality. They may be right or they may be wrong. I however find the word Atheist to be a bit silly. Atheist means “a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.” What I find funny about that is its still about belief for many Atheists. If it’s really about disbelief they would say ” I don’t believe in God” and be done with it. But many take that lack of belief to a place where they feel the need to spread it like it is belief. Some people revolve there entire lives around being an Atheist. That doesn’t make any sense. Why would anybody take a non-religion and make a religion out of it? I feel the reason is because it’s in our history as a spices. Humans, since the beginning of our existence, have been creatures of faith. Our need to believe in something, anything is as great as our need to eat and drink. Atheists don’t know it but they are still the very people that many of them ridicule. They are people of faith. Even I, as an Agnostic, have faith. My belief is in chance. What are the chances that there is a being, that is beyond our comprehension, can exist in our infinite universe? Are the chances greater that there is, or are the chances greater that there is not? My belief , what I personally believe, based on how little we know of the infinite universe,is that the chances are greater that the super being we call God does exist. But I could be wrong.

I guess you’ve missed his guests and comments on the good aspects of Islam then. 

You could also add that facts and O’Reilly are not often friends. I am an athieist for the simple reason that a God or Gods explains nothing . The funny thing is how many times through the years I have been told on my jobsites what a fine Christian example I set. Just say thank you and move on. At the end of the day, religion covers up the fear of death and the death rate will always be one per person.

Actually, he criticized him while he was there too. Most people don’t have problems with atheists. It’s their condescension and lack of tolerance of anyone elses beliefs besides their own that upsets so many people. And I’m agnostic as far as religion goes. 

Live and let live. 

Facts like having evidence to prove the origin of life? Evolution is as much belief as creationism.  

Your second sentence is a great description of O’Reilly in particular and many religious believers but not so much athiests. Basically tou have applied the strong woman is a b——-h reasoning to say an athiest that defends their beliefs is arrogant and condescending , Not so. 

Ever read the Quran?

Evolution doesn’t deal with the origin of life.
Evolution deals with how life changes over time.
Which is a fact, species do change over time.

Knowledge differs from belief . Disbelief differs from an absence of belief .
Atheism does not define what one believes but rather what he doesn’t .

“He died for your sins.” – Kimberly VVVV

The sin he died for was the original sin of Adam and Eve.
How is it just for ALL of humanity to be condemned for the crimes of just two people?

Bill O’Reilly And Deepak Chopra are dishonest, calculating exploiters of society’s mentally challenged.

“It is impossible to calculate the moral mischief, if I may so express it, that mental lying has produced in society. When a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind, as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.”

Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason, Part I (1793).

There are two types of atheist, those that don’t believe in god and those who believe there is no god.
It’s a subtle difference.

Most atheists don’t care what theists believe but they do care when theists are actively trying to convert us or our children in places like school etc.

A secular society is the only fair society and should be something everyone campaigns for.

Deepak Chopra is full of feces. He says “you gotta listen to the heart.” My heart doesn’t make gods exist when they don’t. The god belief is comforting but this universe don’t care about the existence of no human being.  

It’s hard to top alien undead trapped in volcanos.

I agree. Belief in God/ no belief in God/ belief there is no God is something people should keep to themselves, their close friends and their family. History shows when something as personal as faith gets into the global discussion,  bad things usually happen.

96 percent of the Universe is lifeless, cold, empty space.  Much of the other 4 percent is made up of extremely hot balls of hydrogen.  If our planet were the size of a basketball, the region on it that supports life would be about the thickness of aluminum foil wrapped around that basketball.

But I agree, the Universe is wonderful.  Just not for the same reasons you do.

Lets see, talking snakes, burning bushes, unicorns, demons, angels, a god who fathers himself using a human virgin, rising from the dead, drinking blood, eating flesh…

I’d say Christianity is doing quite fine in the wacko department. 

Chopra is a guy who uses elements of all religions in the world to create his own spiritual mishmash which he can sell to naive consumers with different religious backgrounds. That is the source of his wealth.Chopra is a guy who uses elements of all religions in the world to create his own spiritual mishmash which he can sell to naive consumers with different religious backgrounds. That is the source of his wealth.Notice how, in this video, he has difficulties finishing his sentence when he talks about “the great prophets…”. He says: “the great prophets… -stumble stumble-… Jesus… whoever…” (around 3:32 of the video).The reason why he adds “Jesus…” to that sentence is because by “the great prophets” he, as a consequence of the above-mentioned commercially lucrative spiritual mishmash, actually means Mohammed as well. But hey, he’s being interviewed by the biggest evangelical bigot of the most bigoted evangelical TV station, so now he has to assure his bigoted christian viewers / potential buyers that he’s really only talking about the prophets Christians can cope with. But at the same time he realizes that he should not contradict himself and should add a small safety net to his sentence: “Jesus… whoever…”In the end we can say that he managed to avoid his Christian viewers from hearing the name of their antichrist (Mohammed) without having to contradict himself.Did anyone else notice the dollar signs in his eyes at 05:11 too?

“Cogswell Cogs!”   LOL

You know, Spacely’s arch rival across the fly zone?

“Ralfahss recch!”  Rastro

If we are a Christian nation, then why doesn’t our Constitution explicitly say so?

The 1797 Treaty with Tripoli declares UNAMBIGUOUSLY that “the government of the United States is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion.” This was written during Washington’s presidency, and approved by the Senate under John Adams.

Facts aren’t your strength, I see.

Sorry, but you’re trying to lump all nonbelievers together. Even the most vocal of us — like Hitchens — have said repeatedly that if you want to believe in your fairy tales, that’s your right. But keep it away from our government, away from our schools, away from our public institutions and laws. As long as I don’t have to live my life by it or pay for it, I have little interest in converting others. 

You believe in an invisible man in the sky who created the world in seven days and monitors your every action and I’m the one who has to disprove it? 

LOL. 

My compliments Sir, that was well put.  (I will commit such to memory, and add to my Journal)

Have you ever heard of the “Encomienda,” or, “Requierimiento?”

Have you ever heard of the seminal debate at Valadolid Spain, (1550) betweeen a mild and compassionate, Dominican Priest named Bartolme de Las Casas, and The Pope’s representative, Juan Sepulveda?

Look into such…

Purveyor

Are you sure?

Purveyor

I bet deepak was rather miffed when he realized his presence there was required not to promote hs new book but rather serve as a sounding board and cohort in a vitriolic attack against RD. How low can you go? Shame on you Bill. You are a dangerous voice in a position of relative power. Shame on you

Doesn’t “atheism” imply that the the adherent seeks out moral and ethical guidance from somewhere other than a Religion or Deity?  Can pure intellect and/or Philosophy answer the same questions as Religion, yet remain on ‘terra firma’?

Purveyor

Well done Sir.

Purveyor

I am really tired of ignorant know nothing like O’Reilly. Dawkins made him look like the buffoon he is.

Number one, I’m neither a liberal nor a conservative and am not bound to any so-called “mantra.” 

Number two, I’m totally entitled to judge you. If I think you believe in preposterous fairy tales, you’d better believe I’m judging you. 

Number three, you’re the one whose agenda is a lot closer to Al Qaeda’s. You believe in talking snakes and the world being made in seven days and Heaven and Hell. That’s not a lot different from believing in 72 virgins awaiting you on the other side.

Respectfully, I apologize if my first Post sounded flippant, as was not meant too be.  Your comment was excellent.  I just added the three words–”Are you sure?”  Such implies a conscious or intellect, a very mysterious intellect, an ethereal or amorphous intellect.  Where did such come from and where does it go?  Ouch!

Purveyor

“It’s their condescension and lack of tolerance of anyone elses beliefs…”

I’m sorry were you describing atheists or those of the Judeo-Christian faith?

The Bible was a first attempt by ancient peoples to try and make sense of what was at that time unexplainable. But as the centuries have rolled on and science has advanced our understanding of the world exponentially, a great many of the Bible’s assertions have become unsupportable and archaic. We now have a much richer understanding of how the world was made (hint: not in seven days and six thousand years ago) and about the laws of nature and life itself. 

The people who wrote the Bible had no idea what a germ was or that the earth rotated around the sun. To continue to hold up that book as a fount of eternal knowledge is just willfully ignorant. It’s nothing more than a first draft of science.

“The men also agreed that Dawkins (and presumably others of his stripe) often resorts to — highly unscientific — emotional responses to discussions rather than simply relying on fact and logic.”One has to admit – this is really a hilarious statement coming from someone who has nothing but a 2000 year old document to substantiate his claims!

Fortunately, expat, nonbelievers are the fastest growing category in the nation. So there’s still hope. 

I agree with the idea Mr. Dawkings uses atheism to mask something else.  In reality, there is no such thing as an atheist.  Mr. Dawkins knows God exists.  http://atheistlegitimacy.blogspot.com/

Wrong. It annoys them that religionists insist on writing their beliefs into our laws, imposing them in our schools and taking tax breaks for the privilege. It also annoys them that we have to be deferential to your fairy tales. It’s still not politically correct to challenge one’s beliefs except late night on HBO without suffering a huge backlash. Nonbelievers can’t even hold public office in many parts of the country. 

That’s what annoys them. 

“”You have to listen to the heart. The heart has reasons that reason doesn’t know.”

That’s virtually the identical reason Woody Allen gave for sleeping with his step daughter, Soon Yi Previn. It shows how religious tenets can be twisted to justify anything.

While I think Bill is a pompus ass sometimes, it still galls me that every time a Christian wants to put up a cross somewhere an atheists wants to tear it down. I mean if someone believes there is no God, why bother with those who do believe. To me, the one who wants to tear down the cross is having some contrite issues working and therefore wants to tear down the image that works on their heart. To me, however slight, this is proof that the Creator is trying to talk to His child…only he wants to deny it.

Is it me, or are these two individuals extremely irritating in this video? The smiling, condescending and dishonest way they criticise Dawkins is frustrating. The fact that they tried to imply non-believers are over emotional when discussing God! I’m sorry, but tell a Muslim, Evangelical Christian or Orthodox Jew that you believe their holy book is a manmade work and nothing more and see how emotional they get in their response! People of Faith are hardly noted in history or contemporary society as being restrained in their emotions. Need I mention holy wars, religious pogroms/persecution and the killing of witches? All of which happen in today’s world as well as in the past.  Just a few general examples from a rich history of such acts. Furthermore, Chopra’s claims about divinity are simply ambiguous; he offers no specific facts and makes very general points about spirituality and the ‘heart’.  Quite hard to categorically prove someone wrong when they don’t offer you anything factual to disprove, and I think Chopra is well aware of that, to his own discredit. I incidentally am a hopefull Agnostic, who nonetheless values facts over contradictory fiction anyday!

Atheism is not a religion, There is no written doctrine requiring “adherence” to a moral or ethics code . Individuals can be secular humaninst and embrace growth , fullfillment, creativity and well being of humankind free from religion . In fact atheists comprise a proportinally small popuilation  in prison studies
http://www.holysmoke.org/icr-pri.htm

What a vacuous comment. Yeah, I’ve read the bible, and I’ve read a lot about the bible. “Scripture?” How about “nonsense?”

actually, only 10% of men with IQ’s over 140 believe in god.

“Is it me, or are these two individuals extremely irritating in this video?” 
I’d love to say yes, but honestly, I refuse to watch Fox News as a channel – nor will I watch any Fox News clips. My logic goes like this ->  I don’t like olives, therefore I don’t eat olives.

However, every five minutes, every conservative who posts on this site, writes things like “Mediaite is sad”. “Mediate is pathetic”. Mediatie is a leftist, socialist organization”. “I hate this place”.   

Their logic goes like this ->.  We don’t like olives, therefore we’re going to eat them.

But, back on topic.  Who gives a shit what O’Reilly has to say about religion or Atheism? Besides, shouldn’t Billy be talking about more important issues – like the imaginary war on Christmas.  Does he still take on the fight every year?  :)

Oh dear oh dear oh dear. First I’d heard that Richard Dawkins considers himself a genius.

Yeah, ya’ mean that book written by ignorant bronze age sheep herders? I read it- very compelling.

“Based on scripture? That means it’s true, right? Please remind me ’cause I keep forgetting- how do we know that “scripture” is true? It keeps slipping my mind. Please edify me.

Kimberly, you do realize that your last sentence makes you look deeply stupid, right? The entire point of his comment is that there are other faiths than Christianity.

No- but with-out reading everything ever written about leprechauns, I can still dismiss  it confidently But if your the kind of person who claims you can’t dismiss (or even criticize) the Quran with out reading it in it’s entirety (and THEN consider what Muslim scholars tell you how to interpret it!), THEN- YOU can’t dismiss any other fairy tale with-out having totally studied it in depth. So, get crackin’- you have a lot of reading to do! Get back to me when you’re an expert on every religion, spirituality and pseudo-science that’s out there.

Those billboards have nothing to do with conversion. You would understand if you understood the issues facing a persecuted minority. Reality comprehension fail.

Judaism isn’t based on ‘scripture’ or ‘the bible’. Ever heard of knowledge of other cultures?

Hilarious to see O’Reilly ally himself with the number one pedlar of total nonsense, the famous DeepKrap Chopra… not a great tactical move, when you consider that Deepak does not adhere to a belief system that is in ANY WAY similar to Bill’s. I’m not sure even Deepak knows what his belief system is, but it’s definitely not Xtianity…

Maybe you should read more

I’ve enjoyed some of Deepak’s books. Even have a signed one from a book tour. Still, it’s pretty funny for him to criticize Dawkins  when he has turned his “spirituality” into a multimillion dollar tiered business, He doesn’t just sell books and speaking tours. He sells all manner of spiritual aids for the seeker of truth.

Atheism or, spirituality, are both valid ways for humans to believe. I agree with the Bahai who teach that  spiritual truth and scientific truth ultimately cannot be at odds with each other because the truth is the truth.
There’s a lot of traditional poppycock in organized religion that deserves to be challenged, and there are many things science has yet to understand and address. Neither belief nor dis belief are superior in a general sense.

“Dr” (hee-hee) Chopra is a fraud? But I once heard him say something like “If humans weren’t conscious of the cosmos, than the cosmos (literally!!!!!!)  wouldn’t exist”. I hear he makes a shitload of cash selling books with this kind of wisdumb in it. People will pay lots of $ to hear “experts” tell them things that make them feel important. It’s not the facts that really matter, it’s thay gooey, warm inspirational feeling people want. If (a) god that created people really exists- he/she/it must have killed themself from the disappointment of how  things actually turned out!

Seriously? Condescension? Just like those people who “condescendingly” tell people who think the moon landing was staged that they are idiots? Yeah, Atheists are real “know-it-alls”. If an Atheist tells a person that they’re deluded and that they (and the world) would be better of if they shed their delusions that’s condescending? Hell, that’s a valuable public service! We should be PAID for trying to set people straight. Reality is not “what ever someone thinks it is”.

btw- Atheists don’t “know” that gods don’t exist, they just say there is no compelling evidence that any gods do exist, Technically, everyone is an agnostic (except deluded people) because agnostic means we can’t “know” for sure. But you can’t know for sure that you personally are not the devil incarnate, but you’re confident enough to say that you’re not, right? Or do you say that you’re agnostic about whether you’re the devil incarnate?

Ole’ Billy boy never gives anyone enough time to talk. And he (Bill O.) rarely listens enough to his guests to even know what they didn’t say, but almost said, but didn’t because he cut them off. phew

Are there any topics or issues that Bill O’ Reilly doesn’t think he’s an expert on… other than knowing how to stop his wife for leaving him for another man??

Yes, to believe in God makes one stupid, right libs? Yes, let’s name some of these stupid people: Copernicus, Kepler, Newton, Francis Bacon, the scientist who established the “scientific method”, Galileo, Descartes, Mendel,Einstein, etc.

Oh, and Darwin?

““The impossibility of conceiving that this grand and wondrous universe, with our conscious selves, arose through chance, seems to me the chief argument forthe existence of God.”

Thank God only stupid uneducated people believe in God!

Please remind me of one intelligent thing your friend Bill said on the subject, the only clever thing he did was cut Dawkins off to save himself from embarrisment.
Faith and religion is make beleive for adults and even “news” chat show hosts get sucked in by it.
The educationally liberated members of the human race have outgrown talking to these imaginary friends that the religious call gods and our thinking is clearer for it.
Where i live in Australia and many other parts of the world there are lots of people (wouldn’t like to attempt a guess at the figure)who were stolen from thier mothers by the church to live and be brought up with religious families. Often this has had terrible outcomes for them and the affects are still being felt 20-30-40plus down the track. Now you don’t really think a few billboards is a problem for our society do you?Come on , grow up

What’s the future like? ;)

O’Reilly mentioned his book, talked about the basic content and showed the cover a couple times on the highest rated news opinion show on prime time. You don’t think that would boost his book sales? What else should O’Reilly be forced to do on his own show?

Differ in some respects, the Old Testament was an attempt by a Semitic tribe to make their history seem more important than it really was and also using the storys to express as best they could what made for meaning in life. The New Testament is an attempt to do the same for a segment, a cult , of that same religious tradition. The king James version of the Bible is another iteration intended to make the Devine Right of Kings the core of religious experience.The Catholic Bible did the same before except the star was the Pope.

What document do you have that proves God does exist?

How many atheists call out his name during sex?

Didnt this start with someone saying there is no proof he does not exist?

You wanna see condescension and lack of tolerance??   Go to ANY church and express an opinion different from the pastor.  They will kick your arse out of the door faster than you can say the Lord’s prayer!!

Stone, the question is – would they have been believers had they lived with the knowledge we have today?

I’d be happy to go point by point through the YouTube video of their interview and let you make your case to me as to how Dawkins was “toast.” If my memory serves me it was quite the opposite – O’Reilly conceded that he didn’t know if his preferred religion (Catholicism) was true, but that he’d thrown in with Jesus because he was a good guy, and what if it’s true? That’s fine to do if you want to, but it isn’t sincere belief. It’s just hedging your bets, and making an incredibly unlikely statement about the nature of the universe.

As for billboards and lawsuits and the like, so far as I know there’s no legal restriction on what message you post on a billboard, excepting obscenity statutes and whatnot, so I’ll simply say that atheists have every right to display billboards, just like whoever funded the “Are they making a monkey out of you?” billboard in central Oregon that mocks evolution. Wile I don’t know what lawsuits you’re referring to, if they relate to faith displays in public institutions (with taxpayer funding especially) I probably agree with the thrust of the lawsuits, though like any cause not all of the activism is helpful or right-minded.

Einstein was not a theist, this is a misnomer. Newton also believed in Alchemy and dedicated years to unraveling it’s secrets. Because he believed in Alchemy as well as God, that makes them both true right? Your entire post is an appeal to authority, and a mistaken one at that. 

That science can’t explain why the laws of nature exist the way they do (yet) god did it. If there’s an almighty something interfering with our daily lives as these guys believe, shouldn’t it leave some evidence, some data? Instead we get people who say, I saw an angel, I was given a secret something or other, but now they’re both gone, but please believe me and give me some cash. Or god told me the time was right to enter the political race, donate to my PAC. It’s not a coincidence that the more educated and intelligent people get, the less religious they are, those are facts.

Never try to reason with a troll. 

The only god I need is that living, breathing Slackmaster salesman, J.R. “Bob” Dobbs, by gobbs!  Eternal salvation or TRIPLE your money back!

Yeah, but the problem is that the God-nuts think they’re saving you.  It’s an endless cycle.

“But many take that lack of belief to a place where they feel the need to spread it like it is belief. Some people revolve there entire lives around being an Atheist.”

What you’re seeing is a long-overdue push back to the tyranny of religion, which has come to dominate our political and social life in recent years. Most nonbelievers are happy to just let the religious do their thing in private, but it’s the religious who insist on dragging their beliefs into the public square and drive public policy.

By the way, the word is “proud,” not “proug.”

Mr. O’ Riley believes in ratings and money.  It would not surprize me if he was an atheist, but very cynical about it. 

If he was a Christian, what kind of spiritualty advocates killing born babies with lack of medical care and food. 

O Reilly is an arrogant fool, and Mr Dawkins walked all over him. If you did not see this, it is because,  you only see and hear what you want to see / hear. Reality is not of any concern to you. You like your little fantasies too much to bother with reality. 

Prove it.  I heard voices in the sky, they said write a book that people can buy and center their whole life around.  Creationism will not get you a job for your academic or research work, only in fortune telling is this a career advantage.  Do your self a favor, go to a good college, take real cource work, and don’t spell like me.

You really are very ignorant aren’t you? Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life. It is concerned with the evolution of life. There is a clue in the title in case you missed it! Only pig ignorant fools believe in creationism- it is moronic beyond description. It is a soother for ignorant fools to cling to because they are too lazy or too stupid to understand a little science. Science works, if it did not you would not be using a computer, and would be living in a cave, struggling to survive.

I didn’t mean to suggest that that was necessarily the original purpose of the Bible. 

Are you a theist? No? Then you are an atheist. 

Or he might have been saying those words in extreme pain, or in the astonishment of realizing that he feels his body closing down, or it may have been a neurological malfunction in which he hallucinated. People say oh wow while on lsd, acid, weed, ecstasy or any number of other drugs, they say it while at the top of a rollercoaster or maybe during an orgasm. They say it when their spouses file for divorce, when they know they’re being outright lied to- many said just that as they watch the twin towers fall to ashes.
Assign significance as you please- I find the possibility of an extraterrestrial ethereal explorer from across the universe, whispering knowledge into his ear that no man has ever known before to be just as likely, it not moreso, than a god having any hand in such a reaction.

Religious people hate it that atheists think they are full of it, because, well, they are.

Where exactly have you heard that, from other religious fools no doubt? Mr Hitchens has no doubts about his future, and no need to make up fairy stories to deal with it.  As Mr Jobs was not dead when he said this, why would he be seeing anything that can’t be detected by science? Even if there is some other “dimension” waiting for us after death (unlikely), what makes you think that it bares any resemblance at all to the ludicrous fairy tales of Bronze Age goat herders, which you are so fond of?

They did make asses of themselves. What they say is infantile, puerile rubbish and they should be ashamed of themselves. They make a fortune perpetuating meaningless crap, which is lapped up by millions of gullible fools. It is such a shame to see a great country led by fools, slipping downwards into a religious cess pool. Abandon science at your peril, or you will become the next failed empire / 3rd world country.

“based on how little we know of the infinite universe,is that the chances
are greater that the super being we call God does exist. I could be
wrong but..”

ummm, this makes you a Deist,  a dubious Deist but still a deist.  Atheist means “without god”, not “one who denies or disbelieves” and furthermore if you are going to define Agnostic as “not in position to know” then everyone alive is agnostic, including believers and non believers.

i can not speak for others but i suspect that many Atheist/Agnostic/ non religious people are like me, they have noticed that most people of religious conviction were  very lucky, lucky enough to be born into the exact correct religion, all 7 billion of them.  and  we also notice, that there is a direct correlation between the acceptance of odd beliefs and the number of people who hold them. or IOW the more  Mormons or Scientologists there are, the more their basic tenets become more acceptable and believable, but truth is not established by majority vote.

and yes i wish my fellow atheists would  relax some, don’t file suit over every dang Christmas manger

As long as there’s bacon, I need no god, goddess, spirit animals, good vibes from crystals, or old books with rules applicable only to ancient civilizations.

BACON.

…also crawfish, despite what Leviticus says.

List what they believed in about God that has since been disproven.

I’ll wait!

 Einstein’s famous epithet on the “uncertainty principle” was “God does not play dice” – and to him this was a real statement about a God in whom he believed.

Poor thing- Newton – In Principia he stated, “The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”

Newton wrote a number of religious tracts dealing with the literal interpretation of the Bible, as he considered himself to be one of a select group of individuals who were specially chosen by God for the task of understanding Biblical scripture

I will not try to reason with you. Facts scare ya don’t they?

Where in the blue blazes of the cosmos is the proof for the claim below? That comment is as true as if I were to claim that your (Kimberly’s) “ilk” had sex to celebrate Jesus’s birth, or that they turn into blood sucking goats at night and wander the land looking for humans to feed from. Wtf?  Also- let’s not begin mudslinging about sexual perversion and abuse of children in the ring of Christianity; priests sexually abusing altar boys and taking lewd pictures of young girls, a pastor having meth fueled sex with a prostitute…ring any (factual, proven) bells? Some of your most trusted congregational leaders have been exposed as disgusting, sexually abusive filth and you dare to claim that? If you’re taking the oh-so-logical stance that evolution is equated with bestiality, I recommend you open your shriveled mind up and get it some fresh air, though if that’s truly the case you might be of the mind that the scientists who have devoted their lives to understanding the beautiful intricacies and quirks of life are simply out to corrupt you, and so learning anything useful about how mutations in DNA and adaptation occurs over time may make you start growing horns on your head and worshiping Beelzebub. Darn that Satan, he’s a crafty little excuse for blatant, detestable ignorance. As for oral sex, there is a time and place for this; certainly not in elementary school, as children cannot be responsible, consenting adults (something you may want to reiterate to those priests) but when they ARE adults I’d advise it as a way to connect to a loved one physically and emotionally without running the risk of making children which they may be ill prepared to care for, and ill prepared to educate properly about the merits of a logical argument based on proven fact. I certainly hope you are only a skilled troll and do not actually blindly believe these things, because you have an obvious talent for both enraging and exasperating the reasonable.

One of science’s alleged crimes is revealing that our
favorite, most reassuring stories about our place in the universe, and how we
came to be, are delusional. Instead, what science reveals is a universe much
older and much vaster than the tidy, anthropocentric proscenium of our
ancestors. We have found from modern astronomy that we live on a tiny hunk of
rock and metal that circles a humdrum star in the obscure outskirts of an
ordinary galaxy, which contains some four hundred billion other stars, which is
one of about a hundred billion other galaxies that make up the universe, and
according to some current views, a universe that is one among an immense
number, perhaps an infinite number, of other universes. In this perspective,
the idea that our planet is at the center of the universe, much less that human
purpose is central to the existence of the universe, is pathetic.

Carl Sagan

Hi newsjunkie,

You said you’re an agnostic which is “the view that the truth value of certain claims—especially claims about the existence or non-existence of any deity, … is unknown or unknowable” [Wikipedia]

This leaves the key question though! Are you an atheist or a theist, or indeed something else?

Generally with these type of topics, there are two continuums on which you could place yourself: gnosticism — agnosticism and theism — atheism.

Have you heard of Bertrand Russell’s celestial teapot? I don’t think it is possible to know whether it exists and so, in this context, I’m an agnostic regarding celestial teapot. However I don’t think it exists, making me an a-celestial-teapot-ist which is analogous to atheist.

You could be an agnostic theist or an agnostic atheist for example; they are separate issues. The temptation is to put agnosticism on the middle ground between theism and atheism but this often confuses things. Its important because people often seem to think atheists are say that they know there is know god and so accuse us of taking a mirrored faith-based stance.

http://freethinker.co.uk/2009/09/25/8419/

I fail to see how the inviting guests onto a show under the pretense of reasonable discourse, interrupting them and forcing the opinion of the so called interviewer into the forefront constantly, and then promptly ending the interview before anything valuable or unbiased has been uttered can possibly be deemed ‘honest journalism’. Sure, it’s a good formula, but it needs to be actually practiced. Wipe the conservative vs. liberal biased tripe out of your eyes. Until Mr. O’Reilly allows at least an equal amount of his voice both speaking and remaining silent, in large enough intervals, his technique is as far from ‘honest’ or ‘unbiased’.

Really? Prove it….or shut up pookie.

two billion Muslins think he’s an idiot too…

Please, read “Las Mentiras de la Iglesia Católica”. Pepe Sánchez, Spanish Writer. The author explains all the errors contained in the Bible, Old Testament and New Testament. Also all the changes in favor of politicians at that time, and in our time. I hope my english is good enough to be understood. Thank you. 

An absolute red herring and absolutely irrelevant to my question! Therefore attempt to answer that one again.

Secondly – if you can prove a negative show us how. I’m sure you’ll be next in line for a Nobel prize. Start by proving that fairies don’t exist.

Thirdly since you raised the red herring about proof – give us one single shred of evidence to prove that a god does exist!”

l’ll wait!

“Why can’t you live and let live.” Yes. Exactly. I’d rather not live with people using their God as an excuse to tout hate against homosexuality- and while I doubt that describes you personally, until these cretins stop carrying around signs that say ‘God hates f**s’, until I stop having to witness people who have the same right to live and love as anyone else being beaten and killed, I will stand alongside these truly persecuted people and ask the exact same question- and that’s only one of the points on which I would stand and mirror your reply.

Bill O’Reilly IS seriously mentally sick, delusional, psychotic! He displays delusions of grandeur as does ALL who believe in the psychosis commonly called RELIGION. The religious person believes they are SPECIAL which is a symptom of mental sickness. Deepak IS the same.

From Wikipedia

Deepak Chopra (Hindi: दीपक चोपड़ा; born October 22, 1946) is an Indian medical doctor, public speaker, and writer on subjects such as spirituality, Ayurveda and mind-body medicine.[1][2] Chopra began his career as an endocrinologist and later shifted his focus to alternative medicine.[3] Chopra now runs his own medical center, with a focus on mind-body connections. He is also a lecturer at the Update in Internal Medicine event, sponsored by Harvard Medical School’s Department of Continuing Education and the Department of Medicine.

Chopra was a top assistant to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi before launching his own career[4] in the late 1980s by publishing self-help books on New Age spirituality and alternative medicine.[5]

Why did Steve Jobs die? Because he was mentally sick and believed in ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE. Near the end of his life he said that he wished that he had gone ahead with the surgery instead of the ALTERNATIVE MEDICINE.

Both Bill O’Reilly and Deepak claim to have “kicked Dawkins ass” which shows just how DELUSIONAL they are. Both should be locked up in a psychiatric hospital and put on anti-psychotic medications for their own and societies good.

Your point being?

 P.S.-
 Point 1) Christianity is a monotheistic religion.
Point 2) A monotheistic religion, by definition, holds that there is only one real god.
Point 3) Christianity states that the’ one true god’ takes the form of the Holy Trinity.
Point 4) If there is only one real god, any other proposed gods do not actually exist.
Point 5) If something does not exist, it is nothing.
Point 6) In a very loose definition, Atheism is the lack of belief in a god.
Point 7) By the viewpoint of a Christian, (insert any god besides the Holy Trinity here) is not a real god, therefore is nothing.
Conclusion) By the viewpoint of a Christian, (insert any other religious follower here) does not believe in ‘the real god’, so (s)he believes in nothing, so (s)he is an Atheist, by loose definition.
I believe this is the argument Joeschmoe was trying to make. Being an Atheist, I’d say that from the atheism point of view, this logical form doesn’t work. However for all intents and purposes we are to assume that anyone of any monotheistic belief could use this argument.

How can anyone call “Christianity” a factual religion? Not only is it based/stolen partly from Jewish mythology, but then you expect people to believe that a rib woman was misled by a talking snake into eating fruit from a magical tree??? How does that make any freakin sense???
No amount of “faith” can plug those holes in logic. And let’s face it…those are just a few examples of how ridiculous the Christian faith truly is.

No surprise there.

It would be difficult for anyone to get a word in when O’Reilly vomits his false statements so fast and furiously. It’s his show and he won’t be put down even by the truth. He should get an Emmy for being the most obnoxious asshole on TV.

We need more people like you in this country.

Kimberly– Why bother asking?  The Declaration of Independence was just a letter, not the foundation of our government.  That’s the Constitution, honey, and it NEVER mentions God because the Founding Fathers didn’t believe in forcing their beliefs on others.  Maybe you should give that a try yourself.

That will be a surprise to Orthodox Jews. They spend all day reading it, and nothing else.

Dawkins is a scientist, not a debater. It’s the truth he speaks not the way he presents it. O’Reilly is a loud mouthed bigot with a huge arrogance problem. He will one day poop in his own nest and I hope I’m around to see it.

Translation: “i personally, without researching any of it, can not figure this out, therefore god did it”

Appreciate that, just trying to add a little more context. Being civil may get us tossed.

In the heat of the moment, “god” is much faster and easier to say than “the flying spaghetti monster,” so … probably a lot of us!

When you “experience God’s presence,” you’re experiencing a variety of hormones like endorphins, serotonin, and oxytocin.  Enjoy your drugs, honey, and be happy your body makes so much of them.  And belief whatever gives you your next fix if it makes your life easier!

To all you theists who think atheists should “live and let live”, that is fine, but certainly reflect on the last few thousand years(up to this present day) of religious believers and institutions, and their disregard for this “live and let live” philosophy, had they adhered to it, we wouldn’t have had the inquistion, witch burnings, 9/11, the crusades, most of the wars for the last 2000 years and beyond, we wouldn’t have had the Bosnian Genocide, we wouldn’t Catholic Priests lying about the effectiveness of Condoms on HIV prevention, no two millenia persecution of the Jews, no Israeli-Palestinian conflict, just to name a few. 

So perhaps next time you wish to repeat the “live and let live” mantra, you should be repeating it to your local Pastor/Priest/Rabbi/Mullah/Voodoo Witch Doctor.

Stonepark:

(Albert Einstein, 1954)I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

 Or Darwin, from his biography:

“….During these two years (March 1837 – January 1839) I was led to think much about religion. Whilst on board the Beagle I was quite orthodox, and I remember being heartily laughed at by several officers (though themselves orthodox) for quoting the Bible as an unanswerable authority on some point of morality. I suppose it was the novelty of the argument that amused them. But I had gradually come by this time (i.e. 1836 to 1839) to see the Old Testament, from its manifestly false history of the world, with the Tower of Babel, the rain-bow as a sign, &c., &c., and from its attributing to God the feelings of a revengeful tyrant, was no more to be trusted than the sacred books of the Hindoos, or the beliefs of any barbarian….  ….Thus disbelief crept over me at a very slow rate, but was at last complete. The rate was so slow that I felt no distress, and have never since doubted for a single second that my conclusion was correct. I can indeed hardly see how anyone ought to wish Christianity to be true; for if so, the plain language of the text seems to show that the men who do not believe, and this would include my Father, Brother, and almost all my best friends, will be everlastingly punished.  And this is a damnable doctrine….”

There’s just one problem with that:  when they say “live and let live,” what they really mean is “let me live however I want and I’ll let you live like me.”

No ma’am, you and I, we are stubborn. If it is so easy for you to admit that you don’t understand why an omnipotent and benevolent God would allow evil to happen, why is it so hard for you and others to admit that you might not know how we got here just as much as Atheists don’t? At the very least, science has made enormous advances in the direction of obtaining that knowledge, but complacency in the creation story has only held these advances back- much in the same way scientists were shunned for claiming Earth revolves around the Sun by the religious community (why would God not put his greatest creation at the heart of the universe?). I have never physically seen God either. He has never hurt me, lied to me, or abandoned me- due to the fact that I cannot be hurt, lied to, or abandoned by something that isn’t there. Love gained from the real people in my life here and now, love given back to them and love of the eradication of ignorance is what makes me stubborn.

Oh my, heavily indoctrinated radical conservative conspiracy theorist alert! Someone get me a bucket, I’m getting queasy…

YRRALIS,

I am sorry, but I did NOT imply that “Atheism” is a religion.  Perhaps you did not read my comment thoroughly, or, you did not comprehend such?

Regardless, I was suggesting that morality and ethics, usually offered by religious study, could, also, be found in the study of the great philosophers even, coincidentally, religious philosophers?  After all, even Atheists need morals and ethics to interact appropriately, in our modern world.  

Unfortunately, you wandered off on a dogmatic/boilerplate journey of “Atheism” and their part of the population.  A more interesting foray would have been to study if and how Atheists learn and acquire a rational, humanistic code of conduct, if not by way of religion, as has been the process throughout human history, then how, or, why?  

Furthermore, even though our Founding Fathers were religious men, could they have acquired much of their morals, and/or ethics by way of an intellectual study of philosophy?Sadly, you missed the most entertaining intellectual exercise.

Purveyor

One word: exactly.

LEEDOG,

Regarding my conversation yesterday, with CANADIAN:  Are you aware of the final resolution of our dialogue?

Do go back and re-read, you will find that he was mad that I questioned Canada’s stance on free speech.  Then he said that dangerous American’s, like myself and Ann Coulter SHOULD have our freedom of speech curtailed. Ouch!  

Touche’  He walked himself right into the “trap door spider’s” trap.  That was the whole point of my original attack: That for Canadian’s, (and the Human Rights Commission) freedom of speech is fine, as long as they approve of it!  Which really isn’t free speech at all, is it?

Case in point! 

It’s Mr. Clovis4 to you Tex.

7 billion people on this planet share over 99% of all their DNA with each other. If you want to know why the other minuscule percentage is different in everyone, google ‘meiosis’ or ‘recombination’- preferably both, as both were supposed to be conveyed to you correctly in high school at the latest. By the way, identical twins, triplets, etc. share the exact same DNA. “Humans and Neanderthals also share the FOXP2
gene variant associated with brain development and with speech in
humans, indicating that Neanderthals may have been able to speak. Chimps
have two amino acid differences in FOXP2 compared with human and
Neanderthal FOXP2.” I wikipedia’d that, btw. Genetic variation. The fact that the human species is the only species to have the brain power we have is lost on you, as you are happy to argue that you don’t know, and why bother trying to find out because you’d been raised to believe someone you can’t converse with has all the answers anyway. The fact that our planet is the only one we know of right now that has just the right environment for life (as we know it) may not remain a fact for very long- or it may be possible that there are forms of life which dwarf our collective intelligence and would rather stay the eff away from us because we’re so backwards, and haven’t had enough time to stop being silly and fighting each other over what our imaginary friends told us. I’m not purporting to believe this, but I’d honestly stay away too, if such beings exist. There is an almost incomprehensible amount of space to traverse, and we are only able to survive for now on this tiny point in such a great expanse. Claiming that we are the only ones here is a bit like a piece of plankton in an isolated lake thinking it must be the only life form on earth- our frame of reference is much too small.
Atheists have no faith. Atheists trust facts. Trust does not equate to faith. Trust is the woman who walks away when her man hits her once. Faith is the woman who hopes her man will stop even though he’s hit her time and time again.

I can relate to your “upstanding Christian” example. I don’t go around touting my lack of, and anti-, theism. I suppose, as a result of my mild manner, people assume I am what they are also. A christian, in that case. Many Christians, within the context of the general area I call home, apparently don’t think that anyone could, or would, be anything but what they are. This is a weak form of solipsism. From a developmental point of view, we (humans) usually outgrow this (at least in part) by about age 6. By age 24 we have, essentially, no excuse not to be utilizing our fully developed faculties. Of course, by then it may be too late. Indoctrination may have already done too much lasting damage. It’s a very sad thing. I am of those who believe that the indoctrination of children, using any superstitious nonsense (e.g., religion) as a foundation, is akin to child abuse. I, like others, wonder what our kind will be thinking when they look back at our history. I am truly ashamed, with what knowledge we have available, that we are so seemingly destitute in our critical faculties (as a whole).

 I am agnostic by  way. I was just trying to remind him that because a religion is based on scriptures it doesn’t necessarily make it special or believable. For what i know… any book that suggests that senior citizen built a boat big enough to fit every living creature of this planet in it. Should be classified in the  fairy tales section. Don’t get me even started on the Quran, all i got to do is say Muhammed’s mom was a whore and give out my name and address and i will dead by tomorrow. Organized religion… pathetic

The father is the son….Oh no… the son is the father and he sent the son(or the father himself) on a suicide mission to save humanity. So… When the Romans beat the crap out of him and killed him… Did they kill both the father and son? Or just the son…or just the father? Damn… it must have been nice to have 3 days without a god lol. Satan should have taken over then lol

I adore listening to theists talk. Always dismantling atheists, all while making claims that they can’t back up with a shred of proof. Just because science cannot contradict the concept of a god, it doesn’t validate one, either. So why bother placing faith and hope in something that you have no reason to believe in? The fact is that while the idea of a god can make you feel all warm and fuzzy, and certainly a fair number of people who believe are good people, the resting of your morals, ideas, and plans on such a thing has dangerous consequences. We see this all the time: excluding gay rights, controlling the education system by trying to cram in an idea no more provable than what Raëlists believe, blurring the line between church and state, etc. They mean well, but actions have consequences, so again, why base them on something you can’t prove any more than any other religion? Theist can try to play the logic card, but when that’s exhausted, they fall back on faith. Then you have to ask the question: how did you come to believe in this outrageous claim over the others? People fall into their faiths either through indoctrination or by an overwhelming emotion.

Here is my favorite part of the Bible. You know after Cain kills his brother… he is banished and he goes away to a far far away land and marries a woman. Oh wait… up to that point there were only Adam, Eve, Cain, Abel (who gets killed) and then later on Adam and Eve gave birth to Seth. Where did Cain’s wife come from? They even gave her genealogy!!  hahaha 

Have No Fear of God? http://www.squidoo.com/fear-of-god

So you can’t scare anyone then, can you?

Believers seem to forget that their own list of morals and ethics have changed over the centuries. This means they are not absolute and static. In fact they get their morals in the same way as atheists, by listening to others and finding an emotional and intellectually satisfactory way of living. The main difference is that believers deny this in the face of all evidence.

There’s a very old and tired rebuttal from theists that, essentially, expresses: “We do not believe in our god simply because we are fearful of death (we have an afterlife awaiting us), we do not believe in our god simply because we are afraid of it (‘Him’; because he loves us and cares for us, absolutely), we do not believe in our god simply because we fear a hellish afterlife (he has forgiven us of our sins, or will if we recant our misgivings and ask for forgiveness), and we do not believe in our god simply because we are commanded to do so (even thought the Ten Commandments requires this of us), we believe in our god simply because we feel that ancient pull to do so and are compelled to do so. This is how we know our god is real. And it also says so in our inspired-by-god book to.”

It think it’s clear that people, in general, are deathly afraid of… death. People fear the unknown, although some revel in it. People fear that when they die they will be no more than the dust from which they once walked upon. People are infatuated with immortality. And many have a strong craving for belief. It’s a shame that many reject the vast evidences for evolution. It would allow them to understand their nature much better.

Lastly, simply because something is not favorable to our interests and simply because we desire either abstract or concrete projections from the mind (a consequence of the brain) does not lend these to an existence. Put another way, just because we want or believe something to be true, does not give it existence in reality. We must accept reality on reality’s terms. And we need a science to get us to this truth. It’s true that Science is not a perfect process, but it is the best that this race of beings has produced. And it works well. Very well. Where are all the monuments to Science? Without it, where would we be?

No argument here. 

Facts don’t scare me because they can’t help you make your point at all. 

Our reason allows us to hold what happened in the New Testament as truth, because those who would have known whether it was true or not died for it.  Sounds pretty good to me.

O, and there are Roman (more than objective 3rd party) records that parallel the history of the New Testament.

Faith is something completely different, but Faith and Reason must be used together.

How could it be that the existence of an eternal creator explains nothing…?

The last line of your comment just might be the best sentence on this whole thread. 

With that in mind, in seems that in some instances, reality and what people say lineup.  How do we ensure that happens more regularly?

At first use your brain– before talking to prostotute christian, you have to drink teqila or vodka

Well we can’t both be right can we?

Can you suggest a good way to figure out exactly if we are both wrong or which one of us is right?

bible –book of devil or god or maybe member of ugly sect ?Nobody can prove it..

The point about condescending speech must be made with the following filter, “Is it condescending to tell you peers that a square has four sides when they believe it has five?”

I don’t think so.  But, it condescension has a lot to do with how you say it.  Doesn’t it CountryCrock!!!???

The wise and virtuous need not (and do not) fear death.  But sometimes we are not as wise and virtuous as we hope to be.

That’s the trick. the existence of an eternal creator can explain absolutely anything – not just the universe the way it is, but any other universe your could or couldn’t imagine. So it has no power whatever to explain why the universe is the way it is and not some other way. It’s the answer you have when you haven’t got an answer. (Creationist detective at crime scene: “Beats me. God did it. Case closed.”) A short name for all this is “a cop-out”.

Why did you leave out Muslims? (For fear of a fatwa?)

ACLERON,

Well done!  You mange to further delineate the origin, and dare I say, credibility? Allow me to further add: Morals and ethics, born of the capricious and arbitrary, tend to invite mischief. Yet human beings are “impelled” to believe in something omnipresent, thus responsible for life and human “self awareness.”  

I’ve concluded that many of the Founding Father’s saw the historical perversion of what should have been a thing of beauty i.e. God’s creation and human beings place within it,  But, the , Theocratic Monarchies of Europe, used religion as weapon to extort and control.

Hence, I believe those Founder’s established intellectual Governance, (NOT necessarily Atheism, but a belief system independent of God) that consequently, satisfied the religiously inclined.  The original Constitutional drafts mentioned Life, liberty and property.  To deprive a man of any would offend the human intellect while, so too, offending God?   

I guess the next question is: What is the difference between morals and ethics?

Purveyor

Jesus Loves You….Lambchop!!

Pretty much the same as you except with a more sensible ideology.

I just found it odd that you attacked the country of Canada in the way that you did!! Usually you’re calm, cool and collected!!

Christianity has pretty much had it’s way in America since it’s founding. Christians could get away with all kinds of non Christ like acts because they were the majority by such a wide margin. In the last couple of decades people are having the courage to stand up and challenge them. Organized religion deserves to be challenged. No religion has dibs on the United States and we weren’t founded on Christian principles despite popular rumors. There are some obnoxious over the top atheists just as there are Christian extremists.but most non religious folks just want people to keep their religion to themselves. If believers can’t resist the urge and want to whip out their faith in public then they should expect to be challenged.

No it certainly isn’t , if you’d bother to actually learn about it. Gus is right. 

You pathetic excuses for humans.

Hey, way to stick up for Jesus and Christianity! You’ve just restored my faith.

What’s really stupid is referring to atheism as “believing in nothing”

Most atheists don’t care what others believe except for the fact that Christians actively seek to push their beliefs on others and have them written into the laws of a diverse society. 

LEEDOG,

First, Did you enjoy John Milton’s Poem: “Areopagitica?”

“Pretend inferiority, thus,encourage your enemies arrogance”

I think you are missing the point? I have played chess most of life. The game involves deception and the setting traps by dangling baubles in front of one’s opponent. As I had intended, CANADIAN, in his anger simply made my point for me. I suggested that he and “Canada” were inferior to America and American’s. His temper only affirmed my assertion. Ouch!

“Invincibility lies in the defence; the possibility of victory in the attack”

Why would assume that I am merely a one dimensional warrior, in three dimensional battlefield? A good General always retains adequate reserves…

Purveyor

Only in the sense that more of the population is Christian and a whole lot of those Christians don’t see eye to eye.  No religion has any more authority than any other or those citizens with no religion.
That’s the beauty of our Constitution.

A lot of the recent atheism activity is to get people to be openly and proudly atheist without being intimidated by the Christian majority. What Christians, especially the fundamentalists, need to understand is that their personal belief  referencing God and the Bible doesn’t give their opinion any more weight when it comes to governing. You’re not “more right” because you mentioned God and quoted the Bible. It’s still just your opinion.

Quote:  ”Atheism or, spirituality, are both valid ways for humans to believe.”

WOW!  I am glad thats settled.  I guess all the terrorists will go back to doing whatever it was they did before they started murdering people?

Purveyor

Jews have an extensive historical and cultural tradition, poorly plagiarised by Christianity (and even more poorly plagiarised by Islam). To say Jews read the Bible is a bit like saying that Nobel winning biologists base their knowledge on the Discovery Channel.

You specifically chose the word “adherence” and even raise the question  of ” Atheists learn and acquire a rational, humanistic code of conduct, if not by way of religion, as has been the process throughout human history, then how, or, why? ”

Religious philosohy iwhich is written by men  s present yet to draw the conclusion that it has been the “process” which defines human conduct is a conclusion that you are drawing on an invalid argument . In fact one can cite positive influence arising from religion but he can also point to atrocity .

It amazes me that you can’t imagine that someone can actually be a decent person unless it’s written by someone else in a book touting moral justice on a cosmic scale.

Yes, condescension is everything to do with attitude and how you present it.  When you think you have a direct line with the creator, when you think you are channeling God through prayer and personally receiving impressions from the Holy Spirit, then you get the idea that any thought you have, any idea you conjure up comes from God himself through your direct hot-line to God. With that attitude, of course you are superior.  After all, Jesus himself eliminated any other philosophy or religious system as being of any benefit at all in reaching eternal life.  It is a most exclusive system and you have a direct line to the architect.  So anyone who disagrees with you is wrong and bound for eternal torment. In most cases, the result is a smug, spiritual self-righteousness in spiritual matters.  Hey man, I have worked with churches for over 30 years and come across it every day.  Yes, condescension and lack of tolerance, just express an opinion in church that goes even slightly varies from the status quo.

And BTW, although the Romans were meticulous record keepers, there are actually NO secular Roman records from the era of Christ that mention anything about him or his life specifically, nothing about his resurrection, nothing about the graves being opened and zombies walking around (Matt.27:52), nothing about his miracles, nothing about his birth or ascension to heaven, etc. Nazareth did not even exist, there was no required census as the Bible claims, etc.  I can list more if you need them.

And finally dying for a cause doesn’t prove your cause to be true. All through history, people have died for wrong causes thinking they are dying for the truth.  Sincere men flew airplanes into the World Trade Center for a cause, but that doesn’t make their beliefs any more true than being crucified for your beliefs make your beliefs true.   Does it, Will?

The headline should be a couple of tools babbling. Just need to watch how Sam Harris annihilates and rapes Deepak Chopra in a debate, look it up. Depaak Chopra takes the god of the gaps, pseudoscience and things he doesn’t understand like quantum physics and turns them into shitty self help books stealing people’s moneys. He is scum.

21 CENTURY ALREADY, BUT SOME CREATURE STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW
UGLY RELIGION IS. IF CHRISTIAN TRASH SO GOOD, WHY IT HAS TO MANY DOMINATIONS & NON, THEY ARE DO NOT LIKE EACH OTHER— NON PROGRESSIVE, NON CREATIVE–
BACTERIA ON BODY OF HUMANITY

21 CENTURY ALREADY, BUT SOME CREATURE STILL DO NOT UNDERSTAND HOW UGLY
ANY RELIGION IS.IT CREATE NOTHING ,BUT USE PRODUCT OF PROGRESSIVE PEOPLE.
MANY DOMINATIONS & NON, THEY ARE DO NOT LIKE EACH OTHER. SO ,WHO IS RIGHT?

You specifically chose the word “adherence” and even raise the question of ” Atheists learn and acquire a rational, humanistic code of conduct, if not by way of religion, as has been the process throughout human history, then how, or, why? ”

Religious philosohy iwhich is written by men s present yet to draw the conclusion that it has been the “process” which defines human conduct is a conclusion that you are drawing on an invalid argument . In fact one can cite positive influence arising from religion but he can also point to atrocity .

It amazes me that you can’t imagine that someone can actually be a decent person unless it’s written by someone else in a book touting moral justice on a cosmic scale

Faith and reason can’t walk hand in hand. If you use reason then you would reject faith.

I think I hear a thump!  Oh it’s just that bible again.

No, i’m actually here for the name calling! ;-D I’ll leave the diplomatic arguments to Dawkins, Harris, Dennet, Hitchins and Dillahunty, et al. btw…Bill-O The Bully didn’t make a point. He just jumps to extraordinary, supernatural and superstitious conclusions without a shred of reality or evidence.

REMEMBER…Bill-O-Idiot was the guy who was mystified by tides and smugly appealed to the world for an explanation. All the while any average 7th grader could have explained it to him.

You wouldn’t know a FACT if it bit you on the ass.
God exists and no mater how hard you try to deny it…you can’t change it and that’s what pisses you off.
He is in a dimension you can’t reach because you have closed your small mind to it.
You claim that He is an “imagination” but if you use your pea-brain….you will realize that “imagination” is also a different dimension….and it’s one you believe in.
Selective dimensions?
God is real…You are not.
He loves you whether you like it or not.
:)

RESPONSE #1

Respectfully, I used the word “adherent,” not “adherence.”  The two words have different uses in a sentence structure.  Also, the two words have different connotations.  I am very careful with my words.  

Moreover, I guess it is time to be candid.  You have poor reading comprehension.  The concept(s) I proposed in my comments, were not so elevated as to be beyond the understanding of mere mortals?  In fact, if you would carefully re-read my comments, you SHOULD conclude we (you and I) are in agreement!

Quote:  ”I was suggesting that morality and ethics usually offered by religious study, could also, be found in the study of the great philosophers.”

Respectfully, how could you misconstrue my intellectual or academic inclinations, having read (and comprehended) the previous quote/statement?  Isn’t that consistent with your position?  

YRRALIS, I am a Philosopher, I simply extended the parameters of the dialogue because that is what Philosopher’s do. Ergo, where do “Atheists,” find their morals and ethics, if not by way of religion?  Are there other sources for moral and ethical guidance?

How does that “amaze” you, as it is consistent with your position?

Purveyor of Rhetoric

RESPONSE #2

NEVERMIND…

@expatreporter:disqus : I literally lol’d.
In either case though, if cults who believed nonsense with every thread of their being were converted to pumpkins, Scientology would win first prize at the fair, but that definitely doesn’t make Christianity, Islam, or any division therefore any less of a big orange fruit.
 

Possible, but by conflicting nature of belief and reason – not mutual exclusivity of Atheism and reason – highly unlikely. I didn’t find reason after concluding there was no God, I concluded there was no God after being intimate with reason.

whatever, Bill O’ Reilly pretends he wins every debate he’s ever had. And Chopra has been conniving money from depressed idiots for years. Their claims are just more of the same, and only hold water with the gullible fools who buy into their carefully constructed personas.

  All of science is based on an assumption even Einstein and Hawking acknowledged this and that is the human brain shows us reality as it actually is and they both acknowledge there is no proof that it does. Kant said it best we can only know reality throuogh our perceptions of it how are brain interprets it we cannot know how it actually is, this is beyond the realm of science, this is the realm of faith.

Sure. But since the human brain shows us this, there is little point in deviating except in conjecture.

Nope, no way to prove who’s right or wrong. I have my opinions, you have yours. Best any of us can do is to back off and let others have their opinions as well. That way no one’s trampling on the other.

I’m not particularly pissed off, I just feel sad people that can’t appreciate the world for what it is. Why do you need imaginary things to make life meaningful? Life’s what you make it, live in the now, treat others how you like to be treated. Use your brain.
I’m also highly skeptical of multiverse theory and other dimensions even when spouted as real by current top scientists, so if they can’t convince me I doubt you can. I am real, and I can prove it, you have no evidence of god (nor any other paranormal stuff).

God exists because we are here, all of science is based on the assumpton that the human brain is reliable which even Hawking and Einstein say is not provable, it is an assumption. Theology tells us that the human brain is reliable but it is based on faith. Science has no answer to the reliability of the human brain it has to assume it is reliable. Hawking talks about this extensively. So did a bunch of random purposeless material events lead to a reliable human brain, atheists think so, I say prove it, you cant, you can never say the human brain shows us reality as it actually is, only theology says it doesbut that is based on faith. The bible calls atheists fools, they rail about proof for God when they know they have no proof for the reliability of the human brain. Somebody please break out philosophy 101 to the atheists they continue to make fools of themselves.

black, white…

 All of science is based on an assumption, even Einstein and Hawking acknowledge this and that assumption is that the human brain is able to show us reality as it actually  is, and there is no proof that it does that. Kant said it best we can never know reality as it actually is we can only know it through the prism of our human brain,  through how are brain perceives it. this reality is beyond science this is the realm of faith. Only foolish atheists would beleive a purposeless chain of material events would lead to a reliable human brain.

I hate it when Theists and Atheists get Agnostics confuses as being a part of one group or the other.  It is not a binary choice to be Theist or Atheist.  A permanent Agnostic is a discreet third option and their are shades of gray when you include Agnosticism.  A true agnostic is capable of pointing out that the Atheist is basing his reasoning on faith as much as the Theist is.  An very very few are Gnostic.  Gnostics were one of the 3 Original branches of Christianity that for the most part were wiped out.  They claimed to have “Secret” knowledge only known to them about how to come to salvation.  Agnostic was coined to basically say I don’t know any or have any secret knowledge about what is or what isn’t.

I understand your point but for scientists and or atheists  to want proof for everything when what they base all their knowledge on is a scientifically unreliable entity like the human brain is hypocritical. I beleive the human brain is reliable but through faith, scientifically it is unknowable. There are many concepts that are not true scientifically the prescence of good and evil and free will. Science says we are evolved molecules, molecules are not bad or good they are purposeless therefore evil and good do not scientifically exist and even with quantum mechnics scientists mostly are in agreement free will is an illusion. I beleive good and evil exist as well as free will. I beleive the 5 proofs for God are still relevant though I beleive faith is most   important. To make a specific claim that an atheist or materialist will disagree with is jesus’s body and blood being literally present at communion, its presence is not peceivable by the human brain yet it is there especially as a matter of faith. If someone stabs and kills a baby it is evil but not scientifically, that is one group of molecules stabbing another, it is obvious God exists. I love O’Reilly and yes atheists are marginalized in the USA as they should be, go to Europe atheists you will fit in. No atheist beleives in the declaration of independence since they dont beleive in a creator and the rights he provides. Hopefully most atheists will see the light. Read the story of Howard Storm and don’t drive on icy roads.

“America was founded on judeo/xian values and the ten commandments.” Why do these people think they can get away with such horse manure. let’s take a look at that by compareing the first commandment to the first amendment.
Exodus 20:3
   “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.”
First sentence of the First Amendment to the U.S. Bill of Right
  “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”
      There, you see, we are already in direct conflict with each other
Secondly. The arrogance of these evangelical xians thinking they have a monopoly on morality when 90% of them don’t have a moral bone in there body.Besides their were thriving civilizations (which would require a moral code of conduct.) long before the monotheistic god Yehway was ever conceived of.

Deuteronomy 22:28–29
28 “If a man finds a young woman who is a virgin, who is not betrothed, and he seizes her and lies with her, and they are found out, 29 then the man who lay with her shall give to the young woman’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife because he has humbled her; he shall not be permitted to divorce her all his days”
Their is NO moral truth in a book that condones rape!

GREAT reference! Just to add an exclamation point to it for those not in the know…the The Treaty With Tripoli was approved UNANIMOUSLY

“Why do these people think they can get away with such horse manure.”

Because they have been for years.

A fine comment CHRISTINA, well done.Governance

Hidden within my philosophical musings is the suggestion that through reason, the religiously inclined can be satisfied, which is counter intuitive, of course.   As is so often the case, law and morality come into conflict.  Call it legerdemain or a “trick of the tail,” but we start with reason when legislating or adjudicating our laws, thus satisfying morality?   Murder is unethical, but, is also, immoral?

Where would you prefer our laws emanate from, our reason, or emotion?

Furthermore, take note, history is replete with many examples of morally spawned laws run amok!  Ergo, I too desire my Governance to be based on reason, (ethics) not morals.

Purveyor  

The punishment for violating even one of the Ten Commandments is DEATH. Thou shalt not kill…BUT if you work on the Sabbath, Saturday OR Sunday, depending on your flavor of superstition, then you should be KILLED!

Disobeying mom and dad…AN EARLY GRAVE

Coveting your neighbors belongings…LIGHTS OUT

Adultery…STONED TO DEATH

Lying…DEATH

Stealing…DEAD

DEAD DEAD DEAD. The death penalty for even the most trivial of violations!

I have just one question:
When is god to write the new version? maybe the iPad version? because the old book is plenty of mistakes and talk about cities and stories in which nobody is interested in…

Wat’s wrong with christian,why they are no better of atheist? Through prayer, confess that jesus  is the only way to hell,darkness
& stupidity 

lol  I agree the Old Testament is rather boring.

But I think some people in the Middle East would disagree about nobody having interest ANY of the cities in the Bible …

And Faith and Reason do walk hand in hand.  Faith is not the presence of irrationality, it is simply different than Reason.

It seems to me you are summarizing a theists argument as: “what ever created the universe is simply attributed the name God.”  

And so what, then?

Jeremy, you cannot say “there is no way to know either way” and then say “if a person does xyz they are dishonest.”  Hold yourself to some kind of intellectual responsibility.

Can we know things or not?

1. the first paragraph lacks a logical deduction of someone praying and the next thing your readers know every thought they have is divine.  Prove that for me please.

2. The Romans DO have records of the apostles being crucified for what they saw with their own two eyes.

3. Were those people who flew airplanes into the World Trade Center witnesses of someone both fully human and fully divine?  I think not.

The most worrying thing I find about it all is how lacking people’s basic understanding of reality is. I’m amazed at how poor some education systems can be where they produce an intellect so incapable of expressing a logical argument. 

Being an atheist is the most logical place to be, it’s where everyone starts. The existence of a divine creator does not even solve the question of our origin, it is merely a tool to try and answer what appears to be unexplainable. Faith is merely a substitute for knowledge. No one needs faith to understand that 2 + 2 = 4, faith is only ever attributable to problems where you only know the answer. X + Y = Us sounds like a simple solution but it’s far more complicated and just ends up with a regression; if I am solved by being made by someone than all I do in answering that is take it a stage backwards and repeat and I’m exactly where I started.

Every religion is a construct of man, of a tiny mind trying to order the world around it in a way it understands and can function. The point that we can only perceive through our own mind; that of a human is largely irrelevant, because we are capable of actually testing in an objective matter and that is what we define as reality.

We have come so far since reason began to spread, since a general and constantly updating understanding of the reality we exist within. I do not blame those who started these religions, those who did their best to further ourselves but it is time to shed off our woolly and wholly unsatisfying hypothesis’ and actually work towards the creation of actual theories, advancing our understanding and making these lives we share together as best they can possibly be for this spec of dust stuck in a gravity well we inhabit.

I do not know we were not made by an intellect greater than our own, though I have seen not a single piece of evidence to suggest we were and there is plenty to suggest where we have come from. It’s not impossible that it was all an incredibly elaborate plan to create mankind or perhaps that which we will one day become by the most bizarre method imaginable, in the vastest expanse conceivable orbiting a giant nuclear explosion orbiting other even more massive objects.

I don’t know everything, I never will but my children and my children’s children and their children’s children will stand on the shoulders of giants and see further than any of us ever will. I do not care to see the end of a divine creator hypothesis but if nothing else I truly hope that the pomp,tradition and all the bigotry that comes with it, all the tribalism it represents disappears.

We waste so much time and arguing over who needs to cover their hair or dress in a certain way, who needs eat certain things, who needs to spend x amount of money building an even bigger building when lets face it, even if we are the grand design of a ‘power’ far greater than our own it would care nothing for these incredibly human values.

Anyway, love each other, love life, grow old and be happy.

- Tim

   
It is unique that two angry men who claim to be the smartest men around
are railing at the arrogance that Richard Dawkins has in presenting his
children’s book to the public. The men who in order to maintain their
faith must deny reality supported by solid evidence, impugn the
reputation of the messenger and criticize the idea that this book could
be a tool that could help families educate their children.
   
No amount of derision by these two men can hide the fact that this in a
very important book; a book that allows the reader to have a special
understanding of how the world works.  Children as well as adults will
learn that the Magic of Reality need not be feared.

I clearly underrstood but I missed the entire point .FYI — an “adherent” is one who aheres .
I thought that the earlier post by ‘gus” explained the different reference points of atheistic views. Even my first post of two sentences clarrified it .

I will be short and simple . “Illusion man” used a definition of atheim from Webster . It narrows atheistic views to “disblief” .
 That defintion is flawed and that’s why an “adherent ” (one who aheres ) is not possible .I stand ny my use of the word “adheence” .

The Webster defintion cites a refrence point of a disbeliever ” but that is not the same as an absense of belief , apatheic non belief , incohrrent non belief (one who can not define consitutes a “god” ) or incoorporating gnosticsm into ones refrence .

In short .  atheism is a somewhat vague term  (A non definition)   I said this my first reply .
 
That is as far as I wish to post because I feel its useless to discuss any of the sub topics which you raised as questions . I see no sense to fusing other topics into the discussion

“Moreover, I guess it is time to be candid. You have poor reading comprehension. The concept(s) I proposed in my comments, were not so elevated as to be beyond the understanding of mere mortals? In fact, if you would carefully re-read my comments, you SHOULD conclude we (you and I) are in agreement! ”

“Respectfully, how could you misconstrue my intellectual or academic inclinations, having read (and comprehended) the previous quote/statement? Isn’t that consistent with your position?
YRRALIS, I am a Philosopher, I simply extended the parameters of the dialogue because that is what Philosopher’s do ”

I post in other forums and despite reading numerous posts have never read one which reveals this much ego. . I missed one point .. I was under the impression  that you understood the  concept of atheism .

I couldn’t disagree with Mr Russell more. Faith needs no evidence at all, and as most people know, just to say i believe this or i believe that doesn’t make it real

The difference between religion and science is this: Admitting mistakes. You don’t hear anyone from political offices or religions saying they’ve made a mistake, then fixes it. This is what science is all about. Creating hypotheses, conducting experiments (an important step), and inquiry from fellow peers. Philosophy killed religion. Science killed philosophy. Welcome to the 21st century.

Sir, or Madam,

YOU, misquoted me, on a rather salient portion of my reasoning. The fact that you proceeded to misunderstand my point(s) is indicative of the import that “misquote.”

Apparently you lack the humility and/or capacity to acknowledge, thus, apologize for such, offers insight into your character? (Ego? LOL) Your subsequent, circuitous wanderings attempt to justify your error without appropriate contrition.

Everything else is academic.

(Note: please do not presume that YOU, make the decision as to if and when the exchange ends.)

If you feel the need to further aggrandize and tout more self perceived superiority on this topic then you have an entire forum of others who might wish to reply.

I “respectfully”  wish you the best .
Good luck.

“Deepak Chopra is full of shit.”  –Julia Sweeney, “Letting Go of God.” Amen.

I loved your comment…….. I laughed so hard…….. you made my day !!!

You first learn how to write in English……. so we can understand what you try to say

Why don’t you write comments more often?   I wish I coul’d write in English like you.   My first language is Spanish, and I am not very good writting in English.  I think people who understand how life is and understand evolution, become not affraid of dying and don’t need religion in their lives.  My experience is that life is much better in every single way, and we respect and admire all kind of animals so much better. You can be a good person without the believe in god or religion and have more peace in your mind and with other people and as you understand evolution,   You will not be not be racist either.    

It seems that there might be multiple definitions for faith.  I am discussing the one spelled Faith.  And my argument does not say that believing something makes it true but rather that you can have Faith in something that is true while employing reason.

Also, I think I caused a mix up when I said hand in hand.  Reason can only take us so far, but based us those reasonable conclusions, one can use Faith to attain the next level.

http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/Gensler/RE/r-a4–00.htm

I think you are a fine writer, although I’m not sure if my lack of understanding of your last sentence is grammar-related or if I am simply missing a step.

There are plenty of good people that do not know a thing about religion, I completely agree.

But, 1. it seems religion is a way to ensure you are a good person and 2. those good people might become better.

But, the Himalayan hunter gatherer who has not heard of the Bible (or other sacred texts) but who is still loving, courageous, prudent, and moderate may still have a place in heaven.

it took 60 million years of evolution and not working “reliably” to get to us, we are relatively new, duhrrrrr. i guess god likes making it look like he didnt do it with a billion years of making the wrong thing, please, think about it

@7d017e747190cda46a231930cd21e123:disqus  Reason, lack there of.

A lot of people have died throughout history for their delusions, even Joseph Smith died for his Mormonism, by your logic, Mormonism is true.

“Lincoln read the Bible everyday”. 
Get you’re facts right Billo. Lincoln was an atheist and the constitution was founded on a separation of church and state. 

Yes, that is exactly why I think it is crazy, and I read the bible twice, and those books were written by men many, many years ago………. religious people beleive they were written by god.   prove it to me !
People don’t need religion to be good, if they just follow the rule:  DON’T DO TO OTHERS WHAT YOU DON’T WANT TO BE DONE TO YOU.     We live in society so we should behave according to this rule.
By the way…….. English is my second language……. I realize I don’t write very well in English.   I hope you understand what I want to say.

I loved your comment……. please write more.  lol

You are the one that first have to learn to write in English because nobody can understand your comment What are you trying to say ?

You should listen harder to the Vatican.  Apologies for Galileo, the Crusades, and not doing enough during WWII

Ian Barbour “When Sciend Meets Religion.”  If you are actually curious you will spend time looking for answers.

Also, your conclusion is derived by incomplete logic.

What makes you say (your premise of) God had been attempting to make humans for 60 million years?  Judeo-Christian theology says he made human beings when he made human beings.

What faith you have! …in Darwin.

Do you mean that you are unsure if there is a definition of “devil incarnate” or that you are unsure of the definition of “you” or both?

I agree with your first sentence very strongly.  I am just confused about how we don’t know what we are. Could I be unsure of whether I am a platypus?

You go on to discuss how good and evil exist and that they are not true concepts. I’d like to see how you resolve the problem of evil. If everything is created by god, then why does evil exist in the world like you said. Why would such a perfect god allow evil to exist in his world. If he is perfect, why not create a perfect world. Is it because he can’t? because he chooses not to and is a sadist?

But what we don’t want to be done to us is sometimes necessary to do to others.

My drug-addict alter ego does not want to be the subject of an intervention.  But sometimes other people need interventions.

read a book

Levon,
     “Perfect” would not include free will.  If I force you to help the poor, are you helping the poor?

what if Zeus’ fart was that singular moment?  or the Flying Spaghetti Monster’s belch? OR…

WTF???

god sucks

Most of the new testament “History” is not backed up by any contemporary scholars or historians of the day, its either not recorded because it didnt happen or its a wild variation of what did happen, even varying passages in the new testament contradicts itself. Surely if Jesus existed, and events like the sermon on the mount took place, it would have been widely recorded  by multiple scholars, not just in a vacuous document like the new testament.

More like Religion created Philosophy, Philosophy created Science, and Science killed Religion.

Does Bill realize that Deepak is Hindu, and has a very different concept of a deity than Bill and the Judeo-Christian traditions do?

When Bill talks about the atheist agenda, is he implying that Christians don’t have one?

I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together.
I am the eggman, they are the eggmen.
I am the walrus, goo goo g’joob.