Comments
201 - 220 of 419 Comments Last updated Sunday Aug 24

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#209 May 17, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
Science is silent on God
Odd that atheists talk about God.
The United States is governed by elected officials who are Christian.
President Obama and VP Biden two examples.
Peace
I hope lying to yourself and others makes YOU feel better, at the very least.
Thinking

Hounslow, UK

#210 May 17, 2013
My sister's friends "kidnapped" one of their father's garden gnomes for two years. Whenever anyone went on holiday, they had to take the gnome, photograph it in front of a landmark, print it out and send it "home" as a postcard.

The father went bosmic [Oxford slang for crazy] every time he got a postcard. If it wasn't for the fact that it was too much like hard work, the gnome would still be travelling today...
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Indeed. Science is silent on unicorns, small, world-traveling garden-gnomes, telekinesis and...
... Rush Limbaugh.
The latter one, mainly due to the total disconnect between reality (science) and the aforementioned radio "celebrity".

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#211 May 17, 2013
Richardfs wrote:
<quoted text>
Batman, Superman, Spiderman....
.... Harry Potter, Hermione, Gandalf, Frodo & Bilbo, Gollum, Retief, "Slippery" Jim DeGris, Lazarus Long, Huckleberry Finn, Tom Sawyer, Darth Vader, Princess Leia, Buggs Bunny, Woody Woodpecker....

.... and one of my personal favorites: Alice's Restaurant.

:)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#212 May 17, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
I hope lying to yourself and others makes YOU feel better, at the very least.
Indeed.

Your sentiment, which I share, as a wish for his happiness--however miniscule it would be (considering his insanity)-- is a damn sight superior than what HE wishes for people like you and I.

But then again? Anyone who is >>not<< a True Believer™--whatever the reasons-- is already in better shape mentally, than anyone who is suffering under the insanity that is Religious Faith™.

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#213 May 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
My sister's friends "kidnapped" one of their father's garden gnomes for two years. Whenever anyone went on holiday, they had to take the gnome, photograph it in front of a landmark, print it out and send it "home" as a postcard.

The father went bosmic [Oxford slang for crazy] every time he got a postcard. If it wasn't for the fact that it was too much like hard work, the gnome would still be travelling today...
<quoted text>
Yes, I've heard of other folk doing the exact same thing. In fact, the idea was so popular, that they made a movie about it, Amalie.

I rather enjoyed that one--even though it was subtitled.

:)
Thinking

Hounslow, UK

#214 May 17, 2013
Are you talking about Amélie Poulain?
It's one of my wife's favourites.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes, I've heard of other folk doing the exact same thing. In fact, the idea was so popular, that they made a movie about it, Amalie.
I rather enjoyed that one--even though it was subtitled.
:)

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#215 May 17, 2013
Thinking wrote:
Are you talking about Amélie Poulain?
It's one of my wife's favourites.
<quoted text>
It's a French film, and was quite popular world-wide a while back.

I rather liked it.

It definitely did not spring from Hollywood, which made it a cut above the usual USA fare.
Imhotep

Ocala, FL

#216 May 18, 2013
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a French film, and was quite popular world-wide a while back.
I rather liked it.
It definitely did not spring from Hollywood, which made it a cut above the usual USA fare.
1969's film entitled simply Z is really interesting.
Yves Montand

Crazy credit category...
Any resemblance to actual events, to persons living or dead, is not the result of chance. It is DELIBERATE.(Signed by) Jorge Semprún, Costa-Gavras

The left-wing leader assassinated in Costa-Gavras's 1969 thriller célčbre dies not from a sharp-shooter's bullet but from a whack to the head, and the difference plays up the essential street-thuggery of the uniformed right-wingers in power. By far the most electric sequence in the film, the drive-by killing happens in a public square, tensely (and, for the times, topically) ringed by protesters and police, after a speech in a nearby hall; the assailant's truck speeds us away (DP Raoul Coutard's idea?) and leaves behind a Hitchcockian parallel story to be told later. Recapitulating Vassili Vassilikos's novel about the real-life murder of Greek MP Gregoris
~ The Village voice

“Quantum Junctn: Use Both Lanes”

Since: Dec 06

Tulsa, Oklahoma USofA

#217 May 18, 2013
Imhotep wrote:
<quoted text>
1969's film entitled simply Z is really interesting.
Yves Montand
Crazy credit category...
Any resemblance to actual events, to persons living or dead, is not the result of chance. It is DELIBERATE.(Signed by) Jorge Semprún, Costa-Gavras
The left-wing leader assassinated in Costa-Gavras's 1969 thriller célčbre dies not from a sharp-shooter's bullet but from a whack to the head, and the difference plays up the essential street-thuggery of the uniformed right-wingers in power. By far the most electric sequence in the film, the drive-by killing happens in a public square, tensely (and, for the times, topically) ringed by protesters and police, after a speech in a nearby hall; the assailant's truck speeds us away (DP Raoul Coutard's idea?) and leaves behind a Hitchcockian parallel story to be told later. Recapitulating Vassili Vassilikos's novel about the real-life murder of Greek MP Gregoris
~ The Village voice
Interesting.
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#218 Jun 12, 2014
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>
That is most unfortunate.
However, it is hardly unique among True Believers™ leadership.
Since there isn't really any GOD behind them?
There is nothing to curb the behaviors of the leaders--
-- except ... SECULAR law, naturally.
SECULAR law does not depend on gods to work; it depends on people instead, dedicated to upholding the laws.
As such, SECULAR law... actually works.
In contrast to religious law--which does not.
I am just trolling again and came across this interesting comment of yours. You seem to equate the actions of people with i.e. Biblical standards. The actions of people do not justify you to make a judgement on the value of the principles outlined in for instance the Bible.
As far as the law and the principle of right and wrong is concerned - could I ask you which of the Ten commandments are wrong and why? Which of the guidelines provided by Jesus during sermon on the mount is wrong and why?
Amused

Lowell, MA

#219 Jun 12, 2014
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>I am just trolling again and came across this interesting comment of yours. You seem to equate the actions of people with i.e. Biblical standards. The actions of people do not justify you to make a judgement on the value of the principles outlined in for instance the Bible.
As far as the law and the principle of right and wrong is concerned - could I ask you which of the Ten commandments are wrong and why? Which of the guidelines provided by Jesus during sermon on the mount is wrong and why?
The first four commandments don't have anything to do with how to treat others or behave in society. They are rules for massaging the ego of an omnipotent, omniscient being, which seems like a silly concept at best.

By the same token, the commandments (which are duplicative of many similar formulations by non- abrahaimic religions) and the sermon on the mount are not the only bible passages addressing morality attributed to god. What is right about stoning a woman to death if she is not a virgin on her wedding night? What is right about killing gays? What is right about killing people for working on the sabbath? About stoning disobedient children to death? About forcing a widow who has not borne a son to sleep with her brother-in-law? Why is owning slaves A-Ok with the source of all morals, to the point where he spends much time setting up the rules for slave owning? Why is it OK to conquer cities and kill all the inhabitants, including infants?

Need I go on? You cherry picked a couple of marginally positive passages and ignored a mountainous dung pile of rank immorality.
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#220 Jun 13, 2014
The first few of the 10 commandments read like a twisted EULA.
It's all about god, nothing about doing right or humanity.
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
The first four commandments don't have anything to do with how to treat others or behave in society. They are rules for massaging the ego of an omnipotent, omniscient being, which seems like a silly concept at best.
By the same token, the commandments (which are duplicative of many similar formulations by non- abrahaimic religions) and the sermon on the mount are not the only bible passages addressing morality attributed to god. What is right about stoning a woman to death if she is not a virgin on her wedding night? What is right about killing gays? What is right about killing people for working on the sabbath? About stoning disobedient children to death? About forcing a widow who has not borne a son to sleep with her brother-in-law? Why is owning slaves A-Ok with the source of all morals, to the point where he spends much time setting up the rules for slave owning? Why is it OK to conquer cities and kill all the inhabitants, including infants?
Need I go on? You cherry picked a couple of marginally positive passages and ignored a mountainous dung pile of rank immorality.
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#221 Jun 14, 2014
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
The first four commandments don't have anything to do with how to treat others or behave in society. They are rules for massaging the ego of an omnipotent, omniscient being, which seems like a silly concept at best.
By the same token, the commandments (which are duplicative of many similar formulations by non- abrahaimic religions) and the sermon on the mount are not the only bible passages addressing morality attributed to god. What is right about stoning a woman to death if she is not a virgin on her wedding night? What is right about killing gays? What is right about killing people for working on the sabbath? About stoning disobedient children to death? About forcing a widow who has not borne a son to sleep with her brother-in-law? Why is owning slaves A-Ok with the source of all morals, to the point where he spends much time setting up the rules for slave owning? Why is it OK to conquer cities and kill all the inhabitants, including infants?
Need I go on? You cherry picked a couple of marginally positive passages and ignored a mountainous dung pile of rank immorality.
You did not answer the question. And if you object to the cases mentioned, what objective standard do you have to suggest they are wrong?
Amused

Lowell, MA

#222 Jun 15, 2014
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>You did not answer the question. And if you object to the cases mentioned, what objective standard do you have to suggest they are wrong?
Let me try again. I will use small words to help you get my point.

Commandments 1 through 4 are not even about morals. They tell you how to make a made up being happy. Vast amounts of human time, work and money are awsted on this. Wasting money or time on this means taking money and time away from helping people. That is wrong.

Commandment 10 tells us not to want things others have. Thought-crime sin, in other words. It exists to make people feel sinful even if they never act on their thoughts. That is bad.

Compare the commandments with Buddhism's 5 precepts:
Don't kill
Don't lie
Don't steal
Don't commit adultery
Don't drink alcohol

Short, simple, covers all the worthwhile points of the commandments with none of the woo.
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#223 Jun 17, 2014
Amused wrote:
<quoted text>
Let me try again. I will use small words to help you get my point.
Commandments 1 through 4 are not even about morals. They tell you how to make a made up being happy. Vast amounts of human time, work and money are awsted on this. Wasting money or time on this means taking money and time away from helping people. That is wrong.
Commandment 10 tells us not to want things others have. Thought-crime sin, in other words. It exists to make people feel sinful even if they never act on their thoughts. That is bad.
Compare the commandments with Buddhism's 5 precepts:
Don't kill
Don't lie
Don't steal
Don't commit adultery
Don't drink alcohol
Short, simple, covers all the worthwhile points of the commandments with none of the woo.
Thank you for indulging me.

Your argument that the first 4 commandments are wrong because they waste time? That your argument? What is the basis for claiming this to be wrong?
Helping people is morally proper and better than "wasting" your time? Why?

You are actually not wrong, as the following proves, yet you have no idea why. To explain to you why:
Ephesians 5:16- ESV :Making the best use of the time, because the days are evil.
Proverbs 6:9-11 ESV : How long will you lie there, O sluggard? When will you arise from your sleep? A little sleep, a little slumber, a little folding of the hands to rest, and poverty will come upon you like a robber, and want like an armed man.
Gal 6:10 As we have therefore opportunity, let us do good unto all men, especially unto them who are of the household of faith.

Rom 2:14 For whenever gentiles, who do not possess the law, do instinctively what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law.
Rom 2:15 They show that what the law requires is written in their hearts, a fact to which their own consciences testify, and their thoughts will either accuse or excuse them
Rom 2:16 on that day when God, through Jesus Christ, will judge people's secrets according to my gospel.

Thus you do basically know right from wrong, yet have no basis to judge something either right or wrong..

You suggest that having bad thoughts are OK as long as you don't act on it? So you can daydream about killing a person, cruelly hurting a defenseless woman/man or molesting little children and you are OK as long as you do not act upon it? A little sick, don't you think?

Compare with:
Php 4:8 Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things.

So you would claim that a chap who has lewd thoughts are of similar "holiness" than the chap obeying Php 4:8?. You are wrong and you know it, my friend.

You have failed to provide any basis for judging right from wrong. Just personal opinion.

If you consider Buddhism's teachings as all valid, you should read "Death of a Guru" by Rabi Maharaj. A very interesting story which you may enjoy.

Thanks for the chat.
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#224 Jun 17, 2014
Yes, they're totally self indulgent. Nothing to do with helping people or doing the right thing. They are all about the church covering its arse.
There is nothing of value in the first four commandments.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy"
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>Thank you for indulging me.
Your argument that the first 4 commandments are wrong because they waste time?
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#225 Jun 18, 2014
My friend, you have no concept whatsoever of the Christian faith at all as it requires just the opposite of what you suggest (self indulgence). Thus you are "fighting" Christianity on false grounds.

But coming back to the main point , you have yet to tell me on what objective grounds you determine something to be right/wrong. Please answer that and do not introduce red herrings.
Thinking

Stockbridge, UK

#226 Jun 18, 2014
Because they're totally self indulgent. Nothing to do with helping people or doing the right thing. They are all about the church covering its arse.
There is nothing of value in the first four commandments.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy"
Andre wrote:
My friend, you have no concept whatsoever of the Christian faith at all as it requires just the opposite of what you suggest (self indulgence). Thus you are "fighting" Christianity on false grounds.
But coming back to the main point , you have yet to tell me on what objective grounds you determine something to be right/wrong. Please answer that and do not introduce red herrings.
Andre

Durban, South Africa

#227 Jun 18, 2014
Thinking wrote:
Because they're totally self indulgent. Nothing to do with helping people or doing the right thing. They are all about the church covering its arse.
There is nothing of value in the first four commandments.
"Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy"
<quoted text>
Yep. Nothing new my friend. I know you do not have an answer. Nothing wrong with admitting that. That will show some integrity.
I have sympathy with your predicament - none of us have all the answers (although some claim rather stupidly that they do).
But it would be a good thing if you would verify your facts before making comment, as ignorance of some basic facts suggests that you would argue a point without any real evidence. This suggests that your problem is not with facts but with God. Basically rebellion against God. I have bad news for you. God wins.
Thinking

Marston Magna, UK

#228 Jun 18, 2014
The first four commandments are all about killing the competition.
Nothing to do with helping people or doing the right thing. They are all about the church covering its arse.
There is nothing of value in the first four commandments.

"Thou shalt have no other gods before me
Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image
Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain
Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy"
Andre wrote:
<quoted text>Yep. Nothing new my friend. I know you do not have an answer. Nothing wrong with admitting that. That will show some integrity.
I have sympathy with your predicament - none of us have all the answers (although some claim rather stupidly that they do).
But it would be a good thing if you would verify your facts before making comment, as ignorance of some basic facts suggests that you would argue a point without any real evidence. This suggests that your problem is not with facts but with God. Basically rebellion against God. I have bad news for you. God wins.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Atheists forgetting the meaning of freedom 17 min Carchar king 43
Should Uninformed Opinion Be Respected? 19 min Carchar king 23
Our world came from nothing? 25 min Carchar king 410
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 32 min KiMare 226,287
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 1 hr Thinking 21,500
100% Faith Free 2 hr Thinking 11
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 3 hr ChristineM 902
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••