Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
I've no problem with that really luther, if it works fair enough. I was simply meant that I only believe things that are true and can be proven to be true.Originally Posted by luther
I was gonna to a big paragraph on what I do and don't have a problem with but realised Stephen Fry said it a lot better than I ever could
YouTube - ‪QI Untransmitted 2‬‎
^^ sorry board doesn't like the embed code..
Last edited by punterminator; 10-08-10 at 20:44.
Anything's a dildo if you're brave enough.
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
No offence, and I'm not having a go here, but in my experience, this all makes more sence to me now...........
Men of science, by their very nature, are logical beings. They rationalise things, they need them to be proven to be believed...........
I totally understand why people may not believe in God, and that's their right, of course it's never been proven that he exists so perhaps difficult to believe he or it exists......
Nobody ever came back to tell us heaven existed, but nobody ever came back to tell us it didn't either.........
As I always say, religion is a bit like insurance. We hope we never need it, but best to keep the policy up to date just incase.......
Last edited by luther; 10-08-10 at 20:51.
"It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
L
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
Finally. I was expacting this to be in your first here Mousey...........
"It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
L
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
I take no offence whatsoever luther and am only too happy to hear a difference of opinion (that is after all how science works)..
I see where you are coming from but it is not the place of science to prove that god does or does not exist. There's a great thought experiment done by Bertrand Russell called the Celestial Teapot.
And that in a nutshell I guess is the big problem with religion and religious people. They shift the burden of proof to the sceptic which of course is the opposite of where it actually lies...If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time
And to quote Dawkins (which I just know is gonna annoy a lot of folks) "We are all atheist about 99.99% of gods that ever existed. Some of us just go one god further".
Last edited by punterminator; 10-08-10 at 20:54.
Anything's a dildo if you're brave enough.
oremus Bible Browser : Genesis 1
Are you saying this is a lie but its how i lived my life . Who will judge me now .
judge me please someone judge me please
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
All true except for the dinosaurs..
Anything's a dildo if you're brave enough.
An don (10-08-10)
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
I hear ya. I guess I'm just the live and let live type. I don't care what people think or believe, if it works for them, well, good luck to them...........I take no offence whatsoever luther and am only too happy to hear a difference of opinion (that is after all how science works)..
I see where you are coming from but it is not the place of science to prove that god does or does not exist. There's a great thought experiment done by Bertrand Russell called the Celestial Teapot.
And that in a nutshell I guess is the big problem with religion and religious people. They shift the burden of proof to the sceptic which of course is the opposite of where it actually lies...
And to quote Dawkins (which I just know is gonna annoy a lot of folks
"It's far easier to fight for principles than to live up to them."
L
Established Member
Certified E-I Addict
I hear ya too mate...
Seriously though - watch the video..
YouTube - ‪QI Untransmitted 2‬‎
Anything's a dildo if you're brave enough.
I think this thread has gone off on a tangent. It was about whether life is fair, not about whether there is a god.
There are basically three things you can believe:
1) Life is fair, in the usual sense of the word "fair".
2) Life is fair, but not in a way the mortals can understand.
3) Life is not fair.
If you believe in #1 then you and I are living on different planets. I don't really see a difference between #2 and #3, but if believing #2 makes you happier then go ahead. Personally, I believe in #3: Life is not fair.
God isn't really relevant to this whole discussion. You can believe any of these three possibilities either as an atheist or as a theist.
“I wish you wouldn’t keep appearing and vanishing so suddenly; you make one quite giddy!”
“All right,” said the Cat; and this time it vanished quite slowly, beginning with the end of the tail, and ending with the grin, which remained some time after the rest of it had gone.
ber (10-08-10)
I started the thread and at last someone gets it.
Three cheers for Gordo
Blatant promotion should be outlawed
but
Vincent Browne is a Hero
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
