Readers’ Responses to Our Question (545)

He is right when he refers to almost all religion. He is wrong when it comes to "true" Christianity.

Hilarious. Truly hilarious.

All the arguments the religious haul out, have been refuted over and over and over again. In countless books. It isn't my duty to remedy your ignorance or disabuse you of your myths. You, not I, are the one who asserts the truth of your worldview without any evidence whatsoever to back it up. It is not my burden to prove it, but yours. I simply reject your beliefs for their absurdity, based on the utter lack of proof.

Islamaphobes,

Here is a good article that highlights what should be the focus of the Islamaphobes: the Israeli Lobby that is pushing us over the edge of the abyss. Here are some excerpts:

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=26308§ionid=3510302

‘In my analysis, which is shared, for example, by Ilan Pappe, Israel's leading “revisionist” (which means honest) historian, the answer is that it's mainly the Zionist tail that wags the American dog. As I demonstrate in my epic, two-volume book, Zionism: The Real Enemy of The Jews, it is a fact that, with the arguable exception of Lyndon Johnson, every American President, including the idiot in the White House at present, tried to draw red lines that Israel should not cross; and on most occasions Israel put two fingers up and crossed them. There is no mystery about why the Zionist lobby (AIPAC plus) has such power. What passes for democracy in America is for sale to the highest bidder, and one of the highest bidders, and certainly the best organized and the most effective, is the Zionist lobby, now in association with Christian evangelical fundamentalism and parts if not all of the MIC (Military Industrial Complex). The Zionist lobby has three main weapons of influence:

- money, apparently unlimited, to fund election campaigns (candidates who offend Zionism can be and are destroyed - outspent);

- the organized Jewish vote in close election races (in half a dozen critical constituencies); and

- the use of the obscenity of the Nazi Holocaust as a blackmail card to silence criticism of Israel and suppress informed and honest debate. (On this front the Zionist lobby is assisted by the fact that, out of fear of offending Zionism, the mainstream media in America and throughout the mainly Gentile Judeo-Christian or Western world is complicit in Zionism's suppression of the truth of history. What, really, does the media fear? Punishment by the withdrawal of advertising revenue).’

well, i imagine it is unbelievabe to some and unprovable- my own proof is so esoteric and intangible that i hesitate to opine how it works for others-

ive never said on these boards anything about how i came to be muslim- but the start of it was saying a prayer i made up that worked for me- but i had to say it for almost 2 years before i got what i considered an answer-

i asked god to lead me to worship her in the way that he wanted, not the form i was comfortable in.

well it worked for me but of course its highly individualized, isnt it?

i havent (and wont right now) given the impetus, as i dont want to feed the trolls the delicate feast of my own fragile inner life-

i have to admit my doubting days are behind me-

i try to avoid the annoying flaunting because i feel like im eating food in the face of the hungry-

poor people are simply regular people in dire and desparate situations.
there is no nobility in it, just want and neediness- and most people react badly to those things.

when youre in the middle of trying to help needy people, it means you have some access to something they dont- and even your energy becomes fodder for the needy-
theres also no beauty in giving until you have been vampirized-
if you love others selflessly you have to start with your own self, and allowing yourself to be eaten alive by others is not giving the same respect to yourself that you are givbing to a stranger.

st francis died very young and sick- he allowed himself to waste away- st therese of liseux did likewise and died young and ill.

i never took them as templates for my own behavior, but examples and warnings of what extremem behavior and lack of self love an do to one.

years ago i was sitting somewhere and a mosquito was sucking my blood eating happily away.

a friend who knew my mindset came up and asked me why i continued to let it feed (he knew killing it was out of the question for me)
i replied that it needed it to survive.

my friend gently responded that i also needed my own blood to survive, and i must have the same amount of compassion for myself as i do for that mosquito.

well that was a new one on me, and it really impacted my own frail reasoning processes.

i actually forgot that i also have the same needs and rights as everyone else- one of the dangers of spiritual pride- one imagines they are special and can withstand more - even revelling in such tests-
in st john of the cross' dark night of the soul, spiritual pride is the last and hardest hurdle to god consciousness.

oops gotta go watch pinky and the brain\peace

Hi Victoria,

Thanks for trying to help me see the true path. I really do appreciate your concern for me. You know that you are one of my favorites on these boards.

Yes, I don’t like being relegated to hell without reason.

You say: ‘rick- i am extremely limited in my ability to show compassion to my fellow humans- i got kicked out of a bible study at 12 when i decalred that i wasnt going to heaven until hitler was let in-’

You say: ‘i do nto see anywhere in the qu'ran- or the philosophy of islam that people are discouraged from seeking-’

I don’t doubt that, but that’s not the issue. It’s not that I can’t seek truth; it’s that I’m banished to hell, or the river of fire, if I don’t arrive at what you believe to be truth based on no supporting evidence.

You say: ‘it is the conclusion one reaches i guess that is the problem.’

Exactly, if I don’t arrive at the same conclusion that you do, I am banished to hell, or the river of fire.

You say: ‘to me the elgeant string theory (which actually raises tenfold every question it attempts to answer) is further evidence of the densely complicated yet seamlessly well,,, elegant , construction of all that is.’

I agree, but that does not prove for me the existence of the Abrahamic god, or any other god.

You say: ‘ALLAH (the god) remembers you as much as you remember her.’

OK, but I don’t remember her. So I guess that means I will burn in eternal hell, or the river of fire.

You say: ‘if i compare my crude attempts to create any thing in this world to the creative capacity of the god- and compare my poor ability to love and forgive next to the god-
this is my greatest comfort and guide, as i know at least what my own forgivness efforts are-’

Well, it seems like the god’s capacity isn’t too great either, if she only forgives those who believe the unbelievable, or the unprovable. And those who don’t believe the unbelievable will be banished to hell or the river of fire for no good reason.

You say: ‘very inept i know and nsufficient to your big points-’

Yes, but I appreciate your attempt. I know that it’s because you love me and all your brothers and sisters. I love you too.

You say: ‘but i know youve come to expect this form me.’

You know better than that. You are anything but inept. But you are attempting to convince me to believe the unbelievable. I know that you and all believers must have grave doubts of your own, as even Mother Theresa had to admit.

Excellent, Excellent Words That Must Be Heard. Thank you CHRIS HITCHENS..

THE PRICE OF FREEDOM

If the Dutch government abandons Ayaan Hirsi Ali, America should welcome her.

By Christopher Hitchens

Posted Monday, Oct. 8, 2007, at 11:28 AM ET

http://www.slate.com/id/2175458/fr/rss/

rick, your basic turn off with the abrahamic god seems to be the judgement and relegation to hell of non believers then?

rick- i am extremely limited in my ability to show compassion to my fellow humans-
i got kicked out of a bible study at 12 when i decalred that i wasnt going to heaven until hitler was let in-

(i was arrogant enough to imagine that my boycotting of heaven would push god into forgiving all of humanity- either that or my belief in the absoluteness of the compassion and forgiveness fo god was so extreme it was hard for my little brain to conceive of such a contradiction)

ive never been a middle of the road type

i do nto see anywhere in the qu'ran- or the philosophy of islam that people are discouraged from seeking-

it is the conclusion one reaches i guess that is the problem

to me the elgeant string theory (which actually raises tenfold every question it attempts to answer)
is further evidence of the densely complicated yet seamlessly well,,, elegant , construction of all that is.

ALLAH (the god) remembers you as much as you remember her.

if i compare my crude attempts to create any thing in this world to the creative capacity of the god- and compare my poor ability to love and forgive next to the god-
this is my greatest comfort and guide, as i know at least what my own forgivness efforts are-

very inept i know and nsufficient to your big points-
but i know youve come to expect this form me
now peace

Women status in Quran & Bibles - Truthful Comparison

http://youtube.com/watch?v=L37ntR-9MI0

Status of Women in Islam Part 1
http://youtube.com/watch?v=wn0jJJ4qFuE

Status of Women in Islam Part 2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-LKgCvXCNHQ

Dear Humans,

Can you show me the word Judaism in the OT?
Can you show me the word Christianity in the OT/NT?

Why follow a religion whose name is absent from its own holly text?!

There is only one true religion: Islam.

Just follow the Holly Bible and it will show you the way.
Go back to the original text (bypassing the Evangelists!)

Here is my proof:

See Verse 16 in Ch 5 of Song of Songs at this location
http://www.mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt3005.htm

Look at the Hebrew text. You will see the Name Mohammad (מַחֲמַדִּים) there! Just remove the "i" (י) and "m" (ם) used for making a noun plural.

Follow Mohammad (in Hebrew מַחֲמַד )

For more, http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Muhammad-and-Judaism/the-Jewish-Bible/Muhammad-in-Songs.htm

And now, we return to today's "Lovely Talmud" episode. Enjoy!

A Jewish man is obligated to say the following prayer every day: Thank you God for not making me a Gentile, a woman or a slave. Shabbath 86a-86b.

Besides the Talmud being a book promoting hate towards non-Jews, it also promotes violence and self torment on the Jews as well;

Erubin 21b. Whosoever disobeys the rabbis deserves death and will be punished by being boiled in hot excrement in hell.

Insults Against Mary the Jew, Sanhedrin 106a . Says Jesus' mother was a who*e: "She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters." Also in footnote #2 to Shabbath 104b it is stated that in the "uncensored" text of the Talmud it is written that Jesus mother, "Mary the hairdresser," had s*x with many men.

Thomas Carlyle in 'Heroes and Hero Worship and the Heroic in History,' 1840

"The lies (Western slander) which well-meaning zeal has heaped round this man (Muhammad) are disgraceful to ourselves only."

"A silent great soul, one of that who cannot but be earnest. He was to kindle the world, the world’s Maker had ordered so."

A. S. Tritton in 'Islam,' 1951

The picture of the Muslim soldier advancing with a sword in one hand and the Qur'an in the other is quite false.

---------------------------------
De Lacy O'Leary in 'Islam at the Crossroads,' London, 1923.

History makes it clear, however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myths that historians have ever repeated.

---------------------------------
Gibbon in 'The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire' 1823

The good sense of Muhammad despised the pomp of royalty. The Apostle of God submitted to the menial offices of the family; he kindled the fire; swept the floor; milked the ewes; and mended with his own hands his shoes and garments. Disdaining the penance and merit of a hermit, he observed without effort of vanity the abstemious diet of an Arab.

-------------------------------------

Edward Gibbon and Simon Oakley in ‘History of the Saracen Empire,’ London, 1870

"The greatest success of Mohammad’s life was effected by sheer moral force."

“It is not the propagation but the permanency of his religion that deserves our wonder, the same pure and perfect impression which he engraved at Mecca and Medina is preserved after the revolutions of twelve centuries by the Indian, the African and the Turkish proselytes of the Koran....The Mahometans have uniformly withstood the temptation of reducing the object of their faith and devotion to a level with the senses and imagination of man. ‘I believe in One God and Mahomet the Apostle of God’ is the simple and invariable profession of Islam. The intellectual image of the Deity has never been degraded by any visible idol; the honors of the prophet have never transgressed the measure of human virtue, and his living precepts have restrained the gratitude of his disciples within the bounds of reason and religion.”

--------------------------------------------
Lane-Poole in 'Speeches and Table Talk of the Prophet Muhammad'

He was the most faithful protector of those he protected, the sweetest and most agreeable in conversation. Those who saw him were suddenly filled with reverence; those who came near him loved him; they who described him would say, "I have never seen his like either before or after." He was of great taciturnity, but when he spoke it was with emphasis and deliberation, and no one could forget what he said...

-------------------------------
Annie Besant in 'The Life and Teachings of Mohammad,' Madras, 1932.

It is impossible for anyone who studies the life and character of the great Prophet of Arabia, who knew how he taught and how he lived, to feel anything but reverence for that mighty Prophet, one of the great messengers of the Supreme. And although in what I put to you I shall say many things which may be familiar to many, yet I myself feel, whenever I reread them, a new way of admiration, a new sense of reverence for that mighty Arabian teacher.

-----------------------------------------
W.C. Taylor in 'The History of Muhammadanism and its Sects'

So great was his liberality to the poor that he often left his household unprovided, nor did he content himself with relieving their wants, he entered into conversation with them, and expressed a warm sympathy for their sufferings. He was a firm friend and a faithful ally.

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Why-Believe-in-Allah/What-non-Muslims-sayabout-Muhammad.htm

Reverend Bosworth Smith in 'Muhammad and Muhammadanism,' London, 1874.

"Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life."

"In Mohammadanism every thing is different here. Instead of the shadowy and the mysterious, we have history....We know of the external history of Muhammad....while for his internal history after his mission had been proclaimed, we have a book absolutely unique in its origin, in its preservation....on the Substantial authority of which no one has ever been able to cast a serious doubt."

Edward Montet, 'La Propagande Chretienne et ses Adversaries Musulmans,' Paris 1890. (Also in T.W. Arnold in 'The Preaching of Islam,' London 1913.)

"Islam is a religion that is essentially rationalistic in the widest sense of this term considered etymologically and historically....the teachings of the Prophet, the Qur'an has invariably kept its place as the fundamental starting point, and the dogma of unity of God has always been proclaimed therein with a grandeur a majesty, an invariable purity and with a note of sure conviction, which it is hard to find surpassed outside the pale of Islam....A creed so precise, so stripped of all theological complexities and consequently so accessible to the ordinary understanding might be expected to possess and does indeed possess a marvelous power of winning its way into the consciences of men."

Dr. Gustav Weil in 'History of the Islamic Peoples'

Muhammad was a shining example to his people. His character was pure and stainless. His house, his dress, his food - they were characterized by a rare simplicity. So unpretentious was he that he would receive from his companions no special mark of reverence, nor would he accept any service from his slave which he could do for himself. He was accessible to all and at all times. He visited the sick and was full of sympathy for all. Unlimited was his benevolence and generosity as also was his anxious care for the welfare of the community.

Alphonse de LaMartaine in 'Historie de la Turquie,' Paris, 1854.

"Never has a man set for himself, voluntarily or involuntarily, a more sublime aim, since this aim was superhuman; to subvert superstitions which had been imposed between man and his Creator, to render God unto man and man unto God; to restore the rational and sacred idea of divinity amidst the chaos of the material and disfigured gods of idolatry, then existing. Never has a man undertaken a work so far beyond human power with so feeble means, for he (Muhammad) had in the conception as well as in the execution of such a great design, no other instrument than himself and no other aid except a handful of men living in a corner of the desert. Finally, never has a man accomplished such a huge and lasting revolution in the world, because in less than two centuries after its appearance, Islam, in faith and in arms, reigned over the whole of Arabia, and conquered, in God's name, Persia Khorasan, Transoxania, Western India, Syria, Egypt, Abyssinia, all the known continent of Northern Africa, numerous islands of the Mediterranean Sea, Spain, and part of Gaul.

"If greatness of purpose, smallness of means, and astonishing results are the three criteria of a human genius, who could dare compare any great man in history with Muhammad? The most famous men created arms, laws, and empires only. They founded, if anything at all, no more than material powers which often crumbled away before their eyes. This man moved not only armies, legislations, empires, peoples, dynasties, but millions of men in one-third of the then inhabited world; and more than that, he moved the altars, the gods, the religions, the ideas, the beliefs and the souls.

"On the basis of a Book, every letter which has become law, he created a spiritual nationality which blend together peoples of every tongue and race. He has left the indelible characteristic of this Muslim nationality the hatred of false gods and the passion for the One and Immaterial God. This avenging patriotism against the profanation of Heaven formed the virtue of the followers of Muhammad; the conquest of one-third the earth to the dogma was his miracle; or rather it was not the miracle of man but that of reason.

"The idea of the unity of God, proclaimed amidst the exhaustion of the fabulous theogonies, was in itself such a miracle that upon it's utterance from his lips it destroyed all the ancient temples of idols and set on fire one-third of the world. His life, his meditations, his heroic revelings against the superstitions of his country, and his boldness in defying the furies of idolatry, his firmness in enduring them for fifteen years in Mecca, his acceptance of the role of public scorn and almost of being a victim of his fellow countrymen: all these and finally, his flight his incessant preaching, his wars against odds, his faith in his success and his superhuman security in misfortune, his forbearance in victory, his ambition, which was entirely devoted to one idea and in no manner striving for an empire; his endless prayers, his mystic conversations with God, his death and his triumph after death; all these attest not to an imposture but to a firm conviction which gave him the power to restore a dogma. This dogma was twofold the unity of God and the immateriality of God: the former telling what God is, the latter telling what God is not; the one overthrowing false gods with the sword, the other starting an idea with words.

"Philosopher, Orator, Apostle, Legislator, Conqueror of Ideas, Restorer of Rational beliefs.... The founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire that is Muhammad. As regards all standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask, is there any man greater than he?"

Mahatma Gandhi, statement published in 'Young India,'1924.

I wanted to know the best of the life of one who holds today an undisputed sway over the hearts of millions of mankind.... I became more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days in the scheme of life. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers, his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle. When I closed the second volume (of the Prophet's biography), I was sorry there was not more for me to read of that great life.

Sir George Bernard Shaw in 'The Genuine Islam,' Vol. 1, No. 8, 1936.

"If any religion had the chance of ruling over England, nay Europe within the next hundred years, it could be Islam."

“I have always held the religion of Muhammad in high estimation because of its wonderful vitality. It is the only religion which appears to me to possess that assimilating capacity to the changing phase of existence which can make itself appeal to every age. I have studied him - the wonderful man and in my opinion for from being an anti-Christ, he must be called the Savior of Humanity."

"I believe that if a man like him were to assume the dictatorship of the modern world he would succeed in solving its problems in a way that would bring it the much needed peace and happiness: I have prophesied about the faith of Muhammad that it would be acceptable to the Europe of tomorrow as it is beginning to be acceptable to the Europe of today.

I Am speechless!!!!

Jewish Racism towards Non-Jews as expressed in the Talmud

"The modern Jew is the product of the Talmud..."
"Babylonian Talmud", published by the Boston Talmud Society, p. XII

The Jews refer to the remainder of Earths inhabitants, the non-Jewish peoples, as "Gentiles", "Goyim". Let's see what the Jewish Talmud teaches the Jews concerning the non-Jewish majority, i.e. those who are not part of Jahve's "Chosen People":

O My GOD!!!

"The Jews are called human beings, but the non-Jews are not humans. They are beasts."

Talmud: Baba mezia, 114b

"The Akum (non-Jew) is like a dog. Yes, the scripture teaches to honor the the dog more than the non-Jew."

Ereget Raschi Erod. 22 30

"Even though God created the non-Jew they are still animals in human form. It is not becoming for a Jew to be served by an animal. Therfore he will be served by animals in human form."

Midrasch Talpioth, p. 255, Warsaw 1855

"A pregnant non-Jew is no better than a pregnant animal."

Coschen hamischpat 405

"The souls of non-Jews come from impure sprits and are called pigs."

Jalkut Rubeni gadol 12b

"Although the non-Jew has the same body structure as the Jew, they compare with the Jew like a monkey to a human."

Schene luchoth haberith, p. 250 b

"If you eat with a Gentile, it is the same as eating with a dog."

Tosapoth, Jebamoth 94b

"If a Jew has a non-Jewish servant or maid who dies, one should not express sympathy to the Jew. You should tell the Jew: "God will replace 'your loss', just as if one of his oxen or asses had died"."

Jore dea 377, 1

"Sexual intercourse between Gentiles is like intercourse between animals."

Talmud Sanhedrin 74b

"It is permitted to take the body and the life of a Gentile."

Sepher ikkarim III c 25

"It is the law to kill anyone who denies the Torah. The Christians belong to the denying ones of the Torah."

Coschen hamischpat 425 Hagah 425. 5

"A heretic Gentile you may kill outright with your own hands."

Talmud, Abodah Zara, 4b

"Every Jew, who spills the blood of the godless (non-Jews), is doing the same as making a sacrifice to God."

Talmud: Bammidber raba c 21 & Jalkut 772

Jewish children send 'love' messages
to Lebanese children
Pictures!!!

look at the real terrorists!

http://www.radioislam.org/jewish-photos/index.htm

Women. Judaism, and Islam

http://www.jews-for-allah.org/women-Judaism-and-Islam/

Listen to this mp3

http://media.snunit.k12.il/kodeshm/mp3/t3005.mp3

recording of a Jewish recital
of their scripture. Seek to time 02:14

Recognize the Name MOHAMMAD?

For more, http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Muhammad-and-Judaism/

Dear Catholic -

Please provide credible statistics to support your claim that atheists don't "do" anything when it comes to volunteering time and donating money. I'm sure you have such info handy.

You'll pardon me if I don't hold my breath.

Rick,

agreed and thank you...

i believe we often get so lost in the meaning of words we forget theyr intention of ease of communication

and no i havnt seen it yet im on it tho....

just finished with the Marines (was an infantrymen and martial arts instructor, i found it amusing that there was uncertainty to my gender, i rarely enounter that lol) gonna start school soon, always schooled myself but the reality of our world
is a formal education goes a long way in terms of future stability......... but have fed my own desire for knoweldge wherever possible so if any more insightful information is available, i would surely appreciate guidance in its direction

Interesting that if you look at the very subtlest level of matter and consciousness they are virtually indistinguishable, both are potent, both full of the same inherent energy
as you break matter down there is more energy
likewise as you break down consciousness it is more powerful, and contains more energy

it seems that if our universe was created by God, default or what have you, and we are made of the same elements that make up our universe,

well galaxies are so far away, for insights to our begining maybe we should spend as much time studying the inside as the out........

similarly
since to create there must exist a frame of reference, then shucks hell is what you imagine it to be hmm? i mean if it existed we all know what wed have to do to get there....
the Bible and Koran and what not, at the very least present a great frame of reference and a great idea of why not to do what we all already know is wrong haha scary thought

introspection perhaps?

good day believers
because no matter what belief it is, you believe somethin
that makes us all believers does it not? we arent that different after all! lol

HinduAthieUslimAnityhussim? beliefism? Idont know the answer to it but it existism? no? lol

And from the post from the Catholic, you will catch more flies with honey friend

beers on the house

peace, on to pbs

It's interesting that the major involvement of Atheists like Hitchens, Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins, in the moral, ethical, and educational problems of our society, consists of Criticism. That is, they don't really DO something, like volunteering, or donating time or money, or helping out. What they like to do is Criticize those who actually engage in solving these problems. For example, there are approximately 2 million parochial school kids in the US. Most of these children will graduate, be literate, and a high percentage will go on to a College Education. This education requires that Catholic parents pay tuition, thus relieving other taxpayers of the burden. What Hitchens and Harris like to do, is to talk about those students who were molested by Priests, and present this as a paradigm of the Catholic religion. This ignorant one sided picture complements the inactivity of Atheists in actual problem solving. Christians are often those who work to solve messy problems like educating the young, and poverty, and yes, their hands sometimes get dirty in the realities of human life. Atheists are often those who don't work, strike a nice pose on the podium, and criticize, criticize, criticize. Let's have a little more work, and a little less talking, Atheists...

Kavon,

Thank you for your patience and considerate reply. Now I see that part of our apparent disagreement may be just a matter of semantics.

You say: ‘God, the theory of everything, what ever you call it, the existence means far less than the implications’.

In that context, we can agree, I think. Have you seen the great PBS show, The Elegant Universe? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

They use that very term, ‘the theory of everything’, to refer to the latest String Theory and its derivative M-Theory that modern physics uses to try to explain the universe that we observe around us. These theories are brand new by the way and nowhere near complete. So don’t think that we are about to stop work on them at this point.

If that’s what you mean by god, then we are not far apart. However, if you include the Abrahamic god of the OT/NT and Qur’an, that most people (half the world’s population) think of as god then we disagree. Don’t ask me to accept that god that wants to send me to hell to dwell forever or the river of fire.

first thank you for the thought provoking reply,

second, apologize, it seems my wording was insufficient to convey the true meaning

i write in a disjointed manner the very manner in which i think

please bear with me and you will see what i mean

from the conception until the formation of the senses, developes a subtle level of consciousness which resides in a state of neutrality
from the developement of the very first sense comes an apprehension of the phenomenon
as either causing pleasure or suffering, to a greater or lesser degree....

from this very first apprehension we strive to increase the pleasurable effect
and likewise diminish the effect of suffering....

for instance imagine the consciouness as a crystal, upon acquisition of the sense spheres, the crystal
is now reflecting the colors of the entities surrounding it.

likewise while the true nature of the conscious is clear, upon further developement, the grosser levels
reflect the stimulus of the surrounding environment.......

from a negative word, to the subtle shifts in your chair, to stretching in the morning,
to buying your coffee,

to a drug addiction, to the building of a international corporation, to a deranged murderer,
to a loving parent

and finally to the very questioning of the true nature of phenomenon as seen in the
inquisitive arts of science, philosophy etc. etc etc

so in seeking to understand our purpose, first it productive to always be mindful of the purpose of what we seek
for every thing we do in life reflects to a greater and more subtle degree a release of suffering
and an increase in happiness

this is something we all know, but are often unaware of
so clear as to be nearly invisible

although in the west we believe that the smallest of organisms are devoid of this mechanism
the very same mechanism is at work, and observable in their every action.....

we as human beings having a higher degree also have a distinct awareness of subjective and objective
and the unique ability to manipulate our surroundings to achieve our own conscious conceptions....

it is important rem. as well in our efforts, that nothing exists in and of itself, but arises in dependance upon
conditions, a chair is dependant upon legs and a surface a creator (human bieng) and a mental conception, the consciousness depenant on mind and body,
everything exists in relation to something else thus it is devoid of having its own inherent power, this
includes our very ability to concieve, even the conception of "I" and "self"

in physics it is said that nothing exists in and of itself but merely in context with an observer

by realizing our limitations of language, physics, mathematics you come to see that studying God in and
of itelf is counter productive in that the phenomenon represents an anomaley in which the very laws of
physics, mathematics, and language completely break down....hence a futile effort in and of itself

similarly to study a vehicle suspended inanimate in space will produce little insight and little release
from the suffering inherent in lack of understanding

it is more productive to study the use of the vehicle in context with the conditions in which it
arises

Like wise to study God will result in a similar affliction

God represents in every religion an explanation an answer a truth, the very limit, regardless of its name, much like the uncomfortable feeling arising from no explanation
for the universe, you cannot study an explanation but study the aggragates in which it depends on.....

God, the theory of everything, what ever you call it, the existance means far less than the implications

The reasoning mind of any human will come to the very logical and real conclusion that we have limits and
will never know everything as long as we stand upon our terrestrial earth alive and on two feet, yet as much as we may initially view this as a limitation that is not the case

in fact by the power of those limitations we are compelled and enabled the ability to continuosly learn,
improve and create indefinently......

So seek the truth, absolutely, but always remember the reason we seek to understand in first place, to alleviate our own condition....
that way we can spend less time arguing the endstate of truth...and more time learning and implementing the
uses of that truth

Religion is "real" only to the rich who can afford to believe in its blessings, and the poor who can't afford not to.

For everyone else, religion is a placebo masquerading as an insurance policy.

Kavon,

Thanks for your delightful and thoughtful post. I must gently disagree with only a couple of your comments:

1. You say: ‘God? proof of God is reading this text right now...
you already know, but you can deny it to yourself....’

I must respectfully disagree. There are only two possibilities: (1) god exists, and (2) it does not. I place this probability at 50/50, and believe me I do know my own mind. I don’t need you to tell me what I believe. There is absolutely zero evidence to support either contention.

It is obviously comforting to humans to believe that god does exist, as evidenced by the fact that the overwhelming majority of us (80-90 percent?) do believe this, or claim to. I have had supposedly devout believers tell me that you may as well believe in god. It costs nothing to do that. However, if you do not believe in god, you may (however unlikely) roast in hell, the river of fire. This hardly sounds like true belief to me.

I am glad at least that you are a Muslim who has given up faith in the hateful god of the OT/NT and Qur’an who wants to cast all nonbelievers who search for truth into hell, or the river of fire.

2. You say: ‘Great? how about dont bother wasting your time trying to understand it completely now and focus your efforts on improving humanity.’

Of course we should focus our efforts on improving humanity, but don’t ask us to give up our search for truth about the universe that we live in. This is futile, for there is no greater urge ingrained in the very fabric of our being, to strive mightily to discover who we are and what we are doing here.

From another thread:

Chip,

Thanks for the great link to Eternal Universe.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html

As you said, it is a great show. In Chapter 6 of 8 in hour 3 of 3, the eggheads get into discussing the Big Bang and origin of the universe. Their discussion parallels ours remarkably well.

David Gross, University of California Santa Barbara, notes that as we run the Big Bang backwards, we reach a point near time zero where the laws of physics completely break down.

Alan Guth says that ‘the classic Big Bang theory says nothing about what banged, what happened before it banged, or what caused it to bang’.

Ed Witten says that ‘most people come at this with the naïve notion that there was a beginning; that the universe emerged into somethingness from nothingness’.

Ed Ovrut, University of Pennsylvania, says ‘I don’t like nothing; do I really believe that the universe emerged from nothing? I’m not a philosopher, but I imagine that to a philosopher, that would be a problem. To a physicist, that also is a problem’.

Alan Guth says ‘I actually find it rather unattractive to think of a universe without a beginning. I find that a universe without a beginning is also a universe without an explanation’.

So we are in good company. No one has a clue how we got here.

However, one thing that we can be absolutely sure of, and take comfort from, is the fact that Maria’s hateful god of the OT and the Qur’an (sorry Victoria and Moody), that wants all of us nonbelievers who are honestly searching for truth, to roast in everlasting hell, the river of fire, does not exist. The likelihood of existence for this god is obviously vanishingly small.

now THAT is an example of some harmonious overview

from macro to micro to macro to...

it was a pleasure following your stream of consciousness sir or madam

i must admit i am a critic of science in its modern manifestation. The end state in which it seeks (when correctly applied) is a marvel of the human mind. But to base your life on science and to believe in it solely and in its entirety is counterproductive. Consider of our observed universe (i emphasize observed) only 4 % is constituted of matter, 22% dark matter, and 74% dark energy (please verify for yourselfs) Dark matter, and dark energy are hypothetical in nature. The names alone point to our complete ignorance of them. This from the mouths of the very scientists who discovered (or inferred) the existance of them...

Now keep in mind as well, the hard sciences, those that people learn and quote as factual, as a matter of fact, the very science that has produced over 98% of the technology you currently can observe on earth, is based on objective observation, empirical analysis of MATTER derived from the input of our SENSE SPHERES which as aknowledged can only interact with matter in the first place. now of that four percent known to exist, how much of even matter do whe know of, a fraction of a fraction ad infinitum perhaps....?

The spirit of scientific endeavor is great, its current manifestation tho, is a very limiting factor......

God? proof of God is reading this text right now...
you already know, but you can deny it to yourself....

And by the way, i get the impression God doesnt care much for titles....or attempts at quantification...
It or he or what have you permeates the most miniscule quanta and qualia of everything that is known and unkown......infinite.... whether you believe in him or not is also arbitrary, how you live your (Gods) life, and treat the lives of those (God) around you is what is most important.

Great? how about dont bother wasting your time trying to understand it completely now and focus your efforts on improving humanity. you will eventually understand, and when you do you will be like "shucks i knew that all along" , great and wise is false in that the very limiting nature of language keeps the meaning elusive.

I once heard a man say evolution proves God doesnt exist. Again our attachment to the quantifiable world in which we live and base our physical lifespan on limits us. Evolution? your thinking far far to small my friend.
Think epigenetics, and quantumn physics, biology etc. etc. trust in our wisdom, and i assure you the most modern scientific understandings we currently hold dear continue to show you the answer.
but first know that by the only way this can be done in a manner that can convince the staunchest skeptic is to unify
the sciences, and the reasoning philosophy (for many a question will forever remain beyond our limited grasp)
you see as we delve deeper into any field, we discover new truths and new mysteries, this is constant
Yes he knows your heart and your thoughts because it/he is your heart and your thoughts, you can look at yourself in the mirror all day long and convince yourself that your not looking at yourself and you know what? that doesnt change the fact in the slightest....but you already knew that...

I dont believe in a particular religion myself although i was born to a muslim family, but if practicing it makes a person more caring and compassionate towards those that lives are shared with i could not be happier.... in my personal belief, religion can often cause division, with devision can arise hatred

God represents the opposites......

Evolution? look outside, get out of the laboratory, in nature you will find not a battle for survival but a constant search for cooperation....
in the very cells in which your body is made up of, ultimatley, this is a symbol of cooperation, not a symbol of a cellular pissing contest, cooperation and compassion is the essence of life itself. All of this towards the goal of creating and enhancing life hence if you model your society off of a fictitous belief the fruit will bear themselves.....

for instance take any classroom in America and have the students of whatever age group utilize the Darwinian principal of survival of the fittest (which is by and large reflects the modus operandi of our educational system as a whole )and compare it to a classroom that promotes cooperation and mutual support towards a common goal, as individuals and as a whole who will achieve the highest attainment of that goal?.....im sure the answer is self evident.....

look around you, maybe a pen, maybe an eraser, a tv, your computer perhaps? Every piece of technology from the simplest to the most complex, from two feet to a bmw m5, from a chinese calculator to a pentium processor, from the very sceintific methodology we utilize is a result of the minds ability to conceptualze.....ie creativity... EVERYTHING..towards the goal of improving something that already existed.....think for a moment about this, visualize it, and you will see the truth behind it.....
each object was born of creativity and through our physical effort to manipulate our physical environment the mental concept was in a very litterall sense made into a physical "reality"

Im sorry friend, mister neurobiology, neurons are not thoughts, they are merely the mechanism of synchronization between the mind and body
again the form changes, but the unity is constant

strange thing tho, if you look at nature from a single celled organism to a walking, talking human bieng the same process of improvement is evident, funny how the obvious truth behind it some how rings clear.....

I hear in Christianity there is a phrase along the lines of God created man in his image.....

Ofcourse, if you didnt suffer, you had limitless ability, you were perfection incarnate, why would you create?
You see in life the need to create more life, the need to perserve life, that is the nature of life itself. because simply life is fragile and fleeting...
think of the natural human urge towards compassion and love for instance....the nurturing and creating of life,

u see by limiting us, he forces us to create not only life, but that which will enhance and sustain life
creating from the physical in which he brought upon us, creations of our own, hence a reality that is constantly in a state of
growth, alike in respect to life itself....again if we are intimately aware of our infinite nature there is no impetus to
utilize our creativity to improve anything

ofcourse our will is free? ive heard the argument, free will and how can God know our future?
again we see ourselves in our reference to time, a distinctly human trait....

every moment the billions of humans on this earth make choices at the moment of manifest fruition of the choice the
future is evident, yet as humans choose otherwise so our futures change

keep in mind the fact that the present does not exist but is merely a state of transition with no definite point
which binds two seemless entities, past and future

constance...

we love our children, with all our hearts yet we bring them into a world with a guarantee of suffering?
il bet you came to the same conclusion as me....

preservation

that is the nature of life, and God, to create and preserve im sure you can see not the common, but the identical theme,

hidden in plain sight eh? so obvious you couldnt see it?

in our quest for understanding, by our universes limit defying nature, to garner insights into its secrets, we have divided the pursuit
and in doing so lost sight of the goal itself...

aritificial intelligence? now why would man attempt to create life?
i imagine it would be a form of life devoid of the physical restraints of pain yes, in cyberspace?
imbued with all the knowledge that man henceforth has accumulated perhaps? initially at least?

similarly i imagine, we might even develop compassion towards our own creation seeing as
he is a reflection of all of us. and where might that lead?

funny how we attempt (and should eventually succeed) to mimick the creation of the creator himself......

you see? creation IS.....

ah this beautiful flower, its blossoming you know, it has reached maturity and is spreading its pollen so that life may spring up elsewhere....pricelesss...

by the way i was viewing a still photo of earth from outerspace and i was wondering when our attempts to send out men to colonize other planets would bear fruition

mirror images?

life replicating life, so obvious its hard to see sometimes......

so long as there is life, there will be life and so on and so forth ad infinitum
beginingless and endless, but you new this deep down didint you....

one life ladies and gentlemen, all is one....

you want to see what sunshine looks like? take off the shades.....

if anyone feels the need for elaboration or communication unus_supra@yahoo.com, id luv to hear from you...

have a good day and i mean that

People can be violent, intolerant, irrational, and racist. Some of these people use religious ideas to justify their behavior; some use other ideological rationales. People can be compassionate and loving, serving humanity and the planet. Some of these people use religious ideas to fuel their behavior; others use other ideological rationales, including humanism. I think an anti-religious approach is misguided and inaccurate.

Silly me, I forgot to give the link to the Lou WMS post at 2:01 PM. It’s on the Hitchens Subtle, Lethal Poison of Religion thread.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/guestvoices/2007/09/hitchens_1/allcomments.html

Victoria,

Check out this thread, the Lou WMS post at 2:01 PM, 10/5/07.

Jay S,

To further clarify, here is a paste from another thread, where I am having a similar conversation with the Duck:

I think that any, or all, or some combination of your many ‘universes’ can fit within my ‘the universe’. If it is an infinite sequence of cascading black holes (or a multi-verse), the sum total is what I refer to as ‘the universe’.

I think that you are concerned that I am trying to make a case for this god: ‘an infinitely complex, invisible, magical sky-fairy who always existed and always will exist suddenly decided to poof a universe into existence so that he could create life on one small planet among trillions of others, in order to torment the inhabitants and become intimately concerned about their sex-lives.’

Relax, that’s not the case. For now, I’m just trying to establish the relative likelihood that either: (1) the universe was created, or (2) it has existed forever.

Let me change my description of the creator to be sentient, just to make things more interesting. The idea that the universe spontaneously materialized from nothing does not seem likely enough to merit consideration. I don’t consider your spontaneous particles appearing near a black whole to be a valid case, because the presence of the black hole can hardly be considered nothing. The big band doesn’t qualify, because something must have existed prior to the big bang, although we have no information on it.

Thanks for your patience; this is helping me immensely to sort things out in my own mind. If I get on your nerves, just tune me out.

Jay S,

You are correct. Let me delete: ‘It would be rather odd if it was some non-sentient creator; and might be considered the same as the universe spontaneously springing into existence from nothing.’ from my previous post.

Now it becomes:

‘I postulate that there only two possibilities: (1) the universe was created, or (2) it has existed forever. The first possibility is what I call a god concept, saying nothing about the nature of the creator.’

This discussion is helping me to sort things out in my own mind. Thank you for being patient!

Rick said: "It would be rather odd if it were some non-sentient creator, and might be considered the same as the universe spontaneously springing into existence from nothing."

Odd compared to what? And does it necessarily have to come from nothing? The origin of the universe might be very odd indeed, but it could still be natural in the sense that it fits within natural events and processes which we do not (yet) understand. We may never understand it.

If you disregard the idea of a "multi-verse" the origin would be unique and that would be odd. But oddness does not by necessity lead to a super-sentient being, which in my opinion is explaining one big unknown with an even bigger unexplainable unknown.

That doesn't preclude the idea that it COULD be a supernatural sentient being, but since we don't have a lick of evidence to support that, it collapses down to what humans THINK might be an explanation. And unless we are reigned in by evidence, we have a tendency to ascribe all kinds of attributes to things we cannot perceive and for which we are unable to say really exist.

Thanks Jay S,

You say: ‘I fail to see how not knowing how the universe was initiated, or the possibility that it always existed, leads necessarily to a god concept.’

I postulate that there are only two possibilities: (1) the universe was created, or (2) it has existed forever. The first possibility is what I call a god concept, saying nothing about the nature of the creator, sentient or otherwise. It would be rather odd if it were some non-sentient creator, and might be considered the same as the universe spontaneously springing into existence from nothing.

Rick:

I was the Anon response. Forgot my name tag.

I fail to see how not knowing how the universe was initiated, or the possibility that it always existed, leads necessarily to a god concept. You're taking an unknown (origin of universe), which produced something we know exists (the universe) and suggesting we need an even bigger unknown (god) to explain it. "God" becomes just a place-holder for lack of knowledge and says nothing about the nature of such an entity, whether it is natural or supernatural, sentient or lacking in consciousness, all-knowing or totally unaware of us, all-powerful or just a cosmic spark-plug, etc., etc.

When you don't have any evidence, you can plug in whatever seems reasonable to you. But that doesn't elevate the idea to something that increases the odds that it exists. It's just a free-floating idea, unanchored by evidence.

If the squishy concept of god is being used as a synonym for unknown, then fine, use it. But it has a lot of human-imagined baggage, so I'd recommend against it.

You didn't define what YOU mean by god, so it's hard to build a specific argument for why your concept might be wrong. Again, the problem of a free-floating idea that can never be targeted.

Anon,

Thank you, that’s a good coherent response, but it neglects part 2 of my question.

‘Keep in mind that the only two alternatives are also not compelling: either (1) that the universe that we can all see around us sprang into existence from nothing, or (2) that it has existed forever, from negative infinity to the present. The negative infinity point on the timeline is also hard to get ones mind around. And if infinite time exists, the other dimensions of the space-time fabric are also probably infinite. These assertions of an eternal and infinite universe seem to be no more likely than the existence of god.’

So far so good, it looks like my 50/50 coin toss is holding up pretty good.

"If you are an atheist, please explain why you rate the likelihood of god’s existence as vanishingly small."

Lack of evidence for how most believers define "god". Also, a complete lack of evidence that ANY supernatural force or entity exists in the universe. Everywhere we look we find natural processes, and what was considered "supernatural" a century or more ago has been found to be explainable by naturalism. There are many unknowns in the universe, but somewhere in all the years of looking one would've expected that SOME evidence of an event, force, or entity that lies completely outside of a naturalistic framework would have been documented in a manner that it could be independently examined and evaluated by scientists and non-scientists alike. We're still waiting.

A big part of the problem with the whole god idea is that there are as many different concepts of god as there are believers. ranging from an uninvolved, distant, deistic god (a "starter motor" god, which is functionally indistiguishable from a natural process which initiated the universe) to a pantheistsic god to a very involved "micro-managing" god who knows and sees all. Given this amazing range of possibilities, and the tendency of theists to imagine god in the way that best fits their own personality, I'm lead to the conclusion that god is purely a human concept, not an independent entity.

If evidence arises that there is some independent supernatural entity responsible for the universe, I'll be all ears. It would be a spectacular discovery. But the evidence from all sources suggests that such a discovery is not forthcoming. Given that track record, I place the odds for a supernatural deity (consistent with at least one of the numerous god concepts that has been proposed) as very low.

Here is a question that I just posed to WP. Maybe you can help me with the answer; we have already lain some of the initial groundwork:

Atheists/agnostics believe that god does not exist, although they are very careful to leave open the possibility that it does exist. Most atheists put the likelihood of existence at near 0, or vanishingly small as they say. Agnostics (like myself) may tend to rate the likelihood of existence higher, say 50/50. Actually this is a fine distinction, and many consider there to be no difference between atheists and agnostics. Thus I say that I am atheist/agnostic.

If you are an atheist, please explain why you rate the likelihood of god’s existence as vanishingly small. Keep in mind that the only two alternatives are also not compelling: either (1) that the universe that we can all see around us sprang into existence from nothing, or (2) that it has existed forever, from negative infinity to the present. The negative infinity point on the timeline is also hard to get ones mind around. And if infinite time exists, the other dimensions of the space-time fabric are also probably infinite. These assertions of an eternal and infinite universe seem to be no more likely than the existence of god.

I think the following humorous piece, allegedly co-authored by Christopher Hitchens, best explains his point of view. It's the 95 A-Theses, the atheist rebuttal to Martin Luther's 95 Theses:

http://www.audienceoftwo.com/mag.php?art_id=750

sorry for the double post- my ineptitude at the computer lends no credence to my claims of having half a brain, does it.

well id be just as bored if people were yelling to kick mexicans out of america, or any of the many bandwagons crowds latch onto-

underdogs and their causes have always been my passion- ive had the fortune of bieng born into america, blessed with modest access to things that most people only dream about-

possibly i might be an underdog myself now, having become what i championed for (but i did it before 911 so it wasnt true when i became muslim)
just an ironic twist of fate-

but im certainly the noisiest and most complainingest one in the litter.

( i hope marian doesnt come and rant on my constant cat references, but hey- i have 3 kittens and 3-- ok--4-----alright, actually 5 adult cats so i cant help it- and these d*****d kittens dont seem to be going anywhere either- they seem quite conmfortable and at home to me and have shown no indiciation of getting their screen actors guild union cards like their co-species on tv and contribute or leave as i suggest to them everyday and they obliviously ignore- they are laughing at me right now- IM NOT PARANOID-but thats another story)

did i have a point?

o mob mentalities frighten me thats for sure-

the grandson of that great proponent of darwin thomas huxley, aldous, wrote a great book on that called the devils of loudin.

its about mob rule and mob hysteria and mob hypnosis etc---

thanks for the convo rick, i should actually attempt to do something remotely productive here-

apparently the aforementioned mood of the other day hasnt subsided.

peace

hi rick- i was just asking what their ideas are-

any ideas that are crafted positively constructed alternatives and require creativity and intelligence, maybe some insight into human nature-

as opposed to the endless deconstruction of religion, which is fine for awhile, but seems like at some point there should be more- just from a standpoint of listening to someone complain or make accusations- one eventually thinks, well, is that all you've got?

so what would you do to make it better?

1 in 10 isnt so bad.

you seem to have unwittingly made a case for the 2 prophets Jesus(ata) and Muhammad(pbuh) who actually did effect great impact and worldwide change- and they were individuals.

they had help from the god of course but...

and ive certainly asked alot of questions
and not with any edge or impolitelness or insult

but respectful inquiries

at least you're trying a little

but any individual can think and conjecture a little at least

but, nothing

how do atheists deal with mans inhumnity to man?

if youve got complaints, take it a step further- if you cant, well stop complaining

(not you personally rick)

i just got back from being in the vast wasteland of politeness and manners that is new york-
and this was still here-

i know im probably speaking to myself, which is fine by me- but it occurs to me that the main contentions of the social impact of evolutionists, that the strong survive- that compassion serves the purpose of helping humans to oil the gears of interaction to enable their own survival and generation of the species

(why would those who dont procreate ever indulge in an any compassionate acts- it kind of sidelines the value of those who live and contribute as if procreation of the animal man is the only reason to exist0- to what end? but thats another point)

ideas ive seen proposed on therse boards- i simplify but thats whats been expressed-

but exactly what is so good about the strong surviving?
the strong are the ones that hurt the weak, and to consider being gentle, waiting your turn instead of greedily grabbing for yourself- not advancing oneslef at the cost of taking away from another-

are these really traits we want to cull from the human race?

ISTM that the exact traits that atheists compalinabout in the religious, the aggression, the violence of the strong against the weak, subjugation of others through force-
are more n line with evolutionary theory than religious theories.

if we thin the herd of the patient, the self sacrificing,the recessive and passive gentlefolk- what are we left with ?

and is that better?

not to me- but--- o well more ramblings but this is a dead board and i indulge myself.

peace again

Hi Victoria,

I hear you sister. There most certainly is a lot of religion (especially Islam) bashing going on around here. I don’t blame you for getting tired of it.

I gave you a few of my ideas for improving society; e.g. stop squandering trillions on invading and occupying Muslim holy lands, develop alternate energy sources and control population. These things are of course more easily said than done, but our current leadership seems to be oblivious and making no effort.

The first item on my list, stop invading and occupying the Muslim holy lands, relates to your ‘man’s inhumanity to man’ issue I think. As you know, this has displaced millions of families, mostly women and children, into refugee camps in neighboring countries.

Yes, Jesus and Muhammad did effect great impact and worldwide change, and they were individuals. But this change perhaps was not for the best. It certainly has us polarized and seems to be responsible for a lot of the ‘man’s inhumanity to man’ that you mention. I don’t expect you will agree with that observation.

What do you mean ‘at least you’re trying a little’? Shame on you, I’m trying a lot.

hi rick- i was just asking what their ideas are-

any ideas that are crafted positively constructed alternatives and require creativity and intelligence, maybe some insight into human nature-

as opposed to the endless deconstruction of religion, which is fine for awhile, but seems like at some point there should be more- just from a standpoint of listening to someone complain or make accusations- one eventually thinks, well, is that all you've got?

so what would you do to make it better?

1 in 10 isnt so bad.

you seem to have unwittingly made a case for the 2 prophets Jesus(ata) and Muhammad(pbuh) who actually did effect great impact and worldwide change- and they were individuals.

the had help from the god.

and ive certainly asked alot of questions
and not with any edge or impolitelness or insult

but respectful inquiries

at least you're trying a little

but any individual can think and conjecture a little at least

but, nothing

how do atheists deal with mans inhumnity to man?

if youve got complaints, take it a step further- if you cant, well stop complaining

(not you personally rick)

peace

Mr. Hitchens,

I take it that you do not believe that god exists. But, can you say that the likelihood that the universe spontaneously sprang into existence from nothing is greater than the likelihood that there’s a god?

Or, can you say that the likelihood that the universe has always existed on an infinite timeline from negative infinity to the present time is greater than the likelihood that there’s a god?

Mr. Hitchens,

I take it that you do not believe that god exists. But, can you say that the likelihood that the universe spontaneously sprang into existence from nothing is greater than the likelihood that there’s a god?

Or, can you say that the likelihood that the universe has always existed on an infinite timeline from negative infinity to the present time is greater than the likelihood that there’s a god?

Hi Victoria,

You said:

‘to me it beggars the question, well, if atheism is so intellectually superior, what alternatives, social solutions etc have they come up with?’

Why do you think that atheists should come up with social solutions?

Social problems belong to us all, believers and nonbelievers. The soulutions, or lack thereof, cannot be attributed to (or blamed on) either believers or nonbelievers.

However, since atheists are in the minority by a factor of about 10 to 1, how are they supposed to have any control over the direction of society.

again HIMH- i should have elaborated- those were all excerpts from my own posts with the common theme being that i was asking atheists to please not answer the questions with more defnition of atheists- and then, you know, you answered with a defnition of atheism---so...

sorry hitchens is my hero-

since you started your psot out with mny quote, i assumed you realized the pages of posts ive made here-

sorry i didnt realize my name was missing

go to victorias many posts and you will find no lack of communication skills-
well, skills are subjective- but certainly no lack of communication!

"thats what ive been asking everyone on these boards, and instead i get LONG UNASKED FOR EXPLANATIONS of what atheisim is."

it seemed like you didn't know what atheism is....

"ok, no one likes to be misunderstood, so what exaclty DO atheists construct?"