Will we survive religion?

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu
If you don’t acce…man beings.

Would it, by any chance, be the church that told you this?

Not the church, per se, but all wise people that I’ve ever met have told me so, and I believe it because of the evidence for it through history.

Quote:
but consider both how much WORK it takes to push the idea of God out of your mind

Probably as much work as it took to push it into your mind in the first place.

DO you have a belief here, or are you just being argumentative?

Quote:
When men push God from His rightful place, man fills the vaccuum with “himself” (or some aspect of himself).

Some might do, but certainly not me.

I’ll leave it to the readers to judge that.

Quote:
You’re miserable only (as far as I know) in that you don’t know what the point is of your life or that of the universe.

I am far from miserable, I have a lovely wife and child that mean more to me than anything else.

I’m SO glad to hear that. They will be your lead into the arms of God.

Quote:
You would have God do as YOU prefer, regardless of the fact that the wisest possible course of things MUST come from the wisest possible PERSONS (the Trinity), and that course is preferable to anything anyone else could propose.

Not just what I prefer, the people themselves that are suffering, would prefer it.

Were you ever admonished when one of your classmates did something that got the whole class punished, I’m sure you wished that “suffereing” to go away.

Those who disobey, or suffer, are not necessarily the only targets of the lesson.

I definitely would not call their suffering the results of wisdom, far from it.

That’s correct. Their suffering is the result of SIN.

Nice to agree with you.

Quote:
You put your wisdom above that of God. Is that really wise?

You are doing just that in wanting an end to world suffering, just the same as I do.

I want people to CHOOSE to end world suffering by right living.

You want GOD to impose an end to world suffering, simply because He can.

See the difference?

Quote:
God IS omnipotent, and only that omnipotence could allow God to choose and implement the wisest course of events for our salvation (the present one) over simply “solving all the problems of his children which would teach them nothing”.

This sounds like parrot-fashion regurgitation of what you’ve been brainwashed with.

Like most in this culture, you have a problem with authority.

The mere fact that a “dominant authority” proclaims something makes it “bad”, even if it makes sense, to folks like yourself.

Good luck with your parenting.

Quote:
If you want information on a subject, you read the opinions of those who are experts in that subject.

Religion has no experts, it’s all faith and opinion.

Religion to you, as you’ve just stated, is not legitimate as a “discipline”.

I can’t argue with your lack of respect.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu
If you are simply mocking a subject, you need only read the opinions of those opposed to the experts, and parrot those condemnations.

I form my own opinions if I am going to mock something.

So,… when I state a belief of mine, it’s a REGURGITATION, but when you do it’s “a well formed opinion”?

You’re lack of respect for other’s beliefs is dropping your credibility again…!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu
By saying, “Why should I read a biased book such as that?”, you come very close to exposing yourself as a very juvenile person, by the way, and thereby losing ALL credibility.

How is rejecting something biased, juvenile?

Because you’re imposing a prejudice as to HOW that thing is biased. It DOES take a stand, but ALL works take a stand.

You PRESUME that it’s “bad” simply because it comes from the Catholic Church.

THAT is juvenile.

I wouldn’t take the word from a biased atheist source, so why should I take the word from a biased theist source.

You don’t “TAKE THE WORD OF”, which I take you to mean as “The TRUTH”, any work.

It is a document that clearly states a position. Just as an ATHEIST document would expectedly take a position.

I’m not asking you to take anything as “The TRUTH”. I’m suggesting that read some information as to a position.

By taking the word of the church without question, it is you that loses ALL credibility.

Once again, you need to read the Catechism. No one in the Catholic Church takes ANYTHING anyone says, with the exception of doctrine and morals, without critical thought.

See Secs: 889-91, 2035, 2051

You simply don’t understand what “truth” means.

(( …And there goes his eyes rolling back into his head again…! ))

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

Mirdath

I said:

And your wry put-down of his achievements is really rather startling.

You answered:

Putting Newton in the company of Euclid does no dishonor to either of them.

Euclid and Newton in the same class? With that, I think I’ll let you have the last word.

**Drum roll … fade out.
**

 

[whatever]

…

We could go around this for a few more times, but you have to understand that as far as I’m concerned, organized religion runs the gamut from the outright fraud to lifestyle coaching corporations. I trust this answers which side I’m on?

Religion has been with us for thousands and thousands of years. The very question asked in the opening post wouldn’t be possible if religion could deliver what it promises, at least during anybody’s lifetime. I do believe in life before death and an appeal to a grand design rings more than just hollow to me.

I see no insanity in chipping away at hard and perhaps intractable problems. Right back at you, by the way. Two thousand years of Christianity and what do you have to show for it? People still go hungry, die of diseases, and we still have to suffer politicians - including those in ecclesiastical garb.

To me, the Catechism is the bylaws of a particular religious organization. If you want to make a case that the solution to world hunger or the cure for cancer is in there, quote it.

 

[Mirdath]

I can only speak from my own point of view. That’s my opinion. My question is what is YOUR opinion.

My opinion? I think it unlikely that God or Gods exist, but leave the question open. If there is such a thing as the divine, it hasn’t come out and told me yet.

“Religion”, as a thing, is a ubiquitous feature of all individual human beings. (That is an axiom. You may deny it regardless of course.)

It is not. The mere existence of atheists and irreligious people proves that.

True religion (catholicity [no, I’m not particularly interested in being “tolerant”]) shows us the way to seeing God most clearly, with the most positive social effects possible in the obedience thereof.

Funny, that’s what all the other ones say – including those promoting human sacrifice, which is not exactly a ‘positive social effect’. How can any outsider know that you’re right and the rest are wrong?

It is our job to NOT ERR to solve our problems, not God’s to “FIX” our problems.

Which do you choose?

Decently put, but who picks the definition of error?

It is axiomatic that humans have an inherent place for God.

Prove me wrong.

I do not believe in any deity, and don’t know what it feels like to ‘believe’ at all. I have no inherent faculty for faith, nor do I wish to have such a thing. There, you’re wrong.

If you were wrong, you assume that “God will forgive you because”:

1. …you can’t be blamed for not believing in such an obtruse deity who doesn’t speak to me in words I understand.
2. …you can’t be blamed because it’s “God’s Will” that you NOT understand.

If I’m wrong and you’re right, I would hope that my actions and good intent would speak for themselves. I’d expect no forgiveness, merely a fair trial.

The very fact that you consider the fact that you COULD BE WRONG tells me that the thought has crossed your mind, and that points to the fact that the “place” of God exists in your mind.

(( As it must because you’re human. ))

Nope, it has crossed my mind because if there is a deity, it is beyond mere human knowledge and reason. And until this hypothetical divine chooses to make itself directly known to me, I can’t know – and therefore leave the question where it stands. Next problem?

Both you and RM are perfect examples of people who fill God’s place with “the works of men”, because if you could you’d do what you think God SHOULD do.

Aren’t we all? Aren’t you instructed to ‘take up your cross and follow Me’, acting as God would?

If the universe is pointless, then no act has consequences into the ultimate future.

The ‘ultimate future’ perhaps, but who we are and what we do has consequences for others in the immediate future. Which is more important – how you deciding not to brush your teeth will affect the death of the Sun, or how it will affect your relationship when you try to kiss your SO with garlic on your breath?

If you do “good deeds” to relieve the suffering of people you love, for example, then you have pleased someone.

Who is that someone? Why is pleasing that someone of any value whatsoever if the universe will eventually anihilate all effects of your “good deed”?

It is of immediate value.

But without a society that is right living, with as few problems, created by wrong living, as possible to hinder the development of ethical science,… we’re not maximizing out potential to live as best we can in this world.

According to one of many religions. There are far more ways to determine ‘right living’ than the Catechism – as a matter of fact, ‘right living’ is a direct Buddhist phrase.

Agnostics are merely atheists who are too cowardly to state their actual decisions.

You’re merely insulting. It takes more courage than you’ve shown to admit you don’t know, the possibility that you’re wrong, or personal accountability for one’s good and evil.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

Kiekielu

Agnostics are merely atheists who are too cowardly to state their actual decisions.
I’m sorry to say I have to agree with this. The agnostic, like the atheist, is in flight from God. However, I think the atheist is running faster than the agnostic.

He thinks that by running so fast he will outrun the Hound of Heaven.

Fat chance.

 

[Keikiolu]

We could go around this for a few more times, but you have to understand that as far as I’m concerned, organized religion runs the gamut from the outright fraud to lifestyle coaching corporations. I trust this answers which side I’m on?

Yup. Why do you think you’re correct in that assesment, though?

Religion has been with us for thousands and thousands of years. The very question asked in the opening post wouldn’t be possible if religion could deliver what it promises, at least during anybody’s lifetime. I do believe in life before death and an appeal to a grand design rings more than just hollow to me.

What do you think religion promises?

That’s PRECISELY where you go wrong…!

Religion, true religion, is about God, and His “Fathership” of humanity.

It’s not about “solving individual human problems”, or even about solving entire civilizational human problems.

It’s about “Fathering” (parenting/teaching) humanity about the only ultimate “good” and “wisdom”, which is about HIM.

If we act within HIM, we will live the best possible way on earth, and with Him afterward.

The reason a “grand design” rings hollow to you is you’re thinking in terms of HUMAN designs.

God’s is not like a human design.

I see no insanity in chipping away at hard and perhaps intractable problems. Right back at you, by the way. Two thousand years of Christianity and what do you have to show for it? People still go hungry, die of diseases, and we still have to suffer politicians - including those in ecclesiastical garb.

You’re absolutely right about “chipping away at problems”, regardless of there difficulty, if that brings good into the world. That is every human being’s job. Not to do so is explicitly a sin.

The reason that Christianity hasn’t “lived up to your expectations” is because it hasn’t been followed by enough people.

If no one obeys the rules of the playground, why should the kid being bullied blame the “rules”, and not those disobeying the rules?

God has given us free will. Without it there’s no choice in our choosing to obey the rules. And without the ability to choose to obey there’s nothing to learn, as it would all be futile.

People go hungry because they don’t have enough food.
Who has commited what sin that created the conditions of their starving?

People die of diseases because the have accidents, contract pathogens, get old, and become poisoned.
Which of those are humanly “fixable”?
Of the humanly “fixable”, who is commiting what sins that would make it easier to “fix” those things?

What sins do “politicians” do that shouldn’t be done?
You blame God for the sins of mere men?
Why?

To me, the Catechism is the bylaws of a particular religious organization. If you want to make a case that the solution to world hunger or the cure for cancer is in there, quote it.

The catechism is a “proposition paper” as to how to live.

By living properly we mere humans are more likely to find those solutions from knowledge (technology from science) to live in this world as well as possible.

Even you, I dare say, would admit that if everyone “simply did the right things” that the world would be a better place?

It’s easy to fall into the trap of wanting a “cookbook” answer-sheet of quick solutions for all the hard problems in life.

The problem is that it doesn’t exist, and God won’t provide it because the act of doing so would nullify “free will”.

Without free will, you are a robot. Is that what you REALLY want to be?

The solution to the problem of creating the best environment for finding the solutions is to listen to God.

Peace be with you.

 

[Keikiolu]

Kiekiolu

Agnostics are merely atheists who are too cowardly to state their actual decisions.
I’m sorry to say I have to agree with this. The agnostic, like the atheist, is in flight from God. However, I think the atheist is running faster than the agnostic.

He thinks that by running so fast he will outrun the Hound of Heaven.

Fat chance.

That’s true (atheists run faster than agnostics) but they’re running in the forest in the dark, and the agnostic has the flashlight…!!

OH NO…!!!

 

[Mirdath]

Even you, I dare say, would admit that if everyone “simply did the right things” that the world would be a better place?

I, for one, would not. Ideas of what is ‘right’ are far too easily corrupted and modified for that to work, and such specific ideas as are promoted by many religions are often difficult or impossible to apply categorically. I would rather everyone try simply to do good by others, to love and support them, and to recognize their humanity without imposition.

It’s easy to fall into the trap of wanting a “cookbook” answer-sheet of quick solutions for all the hard problems in life.

The problem is that it doesn’t exist, and God won’t provide it because the act of doing so would nullify “free will”.

Without free will, you are a robot. Is that what you REALLY want to be?

I thought the laws of the bible are a ‘cookbook’ in precisely that manner? They do not nullify free will (or free won’t) merely by their presence.

That’s true (atheists run faster than agnostics) but they’re running in the forest in the dark, and the agnostic has the flashlight…!!

OH NO…!!!

And if we’re going to keep it up like that, the theist is tripping out of his mind in a psychedelic-painted VW microbus parked at the edge of the forest

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Keikiolu
I can only speak from my own point of view. That’s my opinion. My question is what is YOUR opinion.

My opinion? I think it unlikely that God or Gods exist, but leave the question open. If there is such a thing as the divine, it hasn’t come out and told me yet.

That’s fine. You shall find out.

Quote:
“Religion”, as a thing, is a ubiquitous feature of all individual human beings. (That is an axiom. You may deny it regardless of course.)

It is not. The mere existence of atheists and irreligious people proves that.

It proves only that people can say what they like, which is an ability granted by free will.

We don’t KNOW that they don’t have a religion. We only know they don’t PROFESS a religion.

If an atheist makes a religion of “making money”, then he still has a religion while being an avowed atheist.

Quote:
True religion (catholicity [no, I’m not particularly interested in being “tolerant”]) shows us the way to seeing God most clearly, with the most positive social effects possible in the obedience thereof.

Funny, that’s what all the other ones say – including those promoting human sacrifice, which is not exactly a ‘positive social effect’. How can any outsider know that you’re right and the rest are wrong?

The test is in the trial. (“Know them by their fruits” I believe is the line, somewhere… )

That’s why I’m always on about people reading the Catechism. It’s a clear statement of belief. If anyone is TRULY interested in finding “true religion” perhaps a check of one of the largest and most open religions would be worthwhile?

Quote:
It is our job to NOT ERR to solve our problems, not God’s to “FIX” our problems.

Which do you choose?

Decently put, but who picks the definition of error?

That’s up to you, based on your experience. I personally choose the definitions of error given me by God as transmitted by the Church.

Quote:
It is axiomatic that humans have an inherent place for God.

Prove me wrong.

I do not believe in any deity, and don’t know what it feels like to ‘believe’ at all. I have no inherent faculty for faith, nor do I wish to have such a thing. There, you’re wrong.

Do you believe the sun will come up tomorrow?

…extrapolate that into “GOD the creator of the universe”.

Why would you not wish to have something of which you have experience either good or bad, as you’e just said you have no “feeling” of it at all?

Sounds like simple prejudice to me.

Why the negative prejudice?

Quote:
If you were wrong, you assume that “God will forgive you because”:

1. …you can’t be blamed for not believing in such an obtruse deity who doesn’t speak to me in words I understand.
2. …you can’t be blamed because it’s “God’s Will” that you NOT understand.

If I’m wrong and you’re right, I would hope that my actions and good intent would speak for themselves. I’d expect no forgiveness, merely a fair trial.

Indeed, that is an explicit tenet in the catechism. (I’ll find it if you WANT me to,… but I don’t wanna right now. I believe that’s in the “invincible ignorance” section somewhere… )

But do you REALLY do yourself a favor for willfully overlooking information that might help you do good?

The mere fact that it’s even crossed your mind that I could be right tells me that you are now not “invincibly ignorant”, by the way.

Quote:
The very fact that you consider the fact that you COULD BE WRONG tells me that the thought has crossed your mind, and that points to the fact that the “place” of God exists in your mind.

(( As it must because you’re human. ))

Nope, it has crossed my mind because if there is a deity, it is beyond mere human knowledge and reason. And until this hypothetical divine chooses to make itself directly known to me, I can’t know – and therefore leave the question where it stands. Next problem?

How do you God hasn’t made Himself known to you?

Your narrow window of perception, which you narrow even further by your non-curiosity and obstinance, may preclude, via prejudice, your “reception” of “the word”.

 

[Keikiolu]

Quote:
Both you and RM are perfect examples of people who fill God’s place with “the works of men”, because if you could you’d do what you think God SHOULD do.

 

[Mirdath]

That’s fine. You shall find out.

Or I won’t, because I’ll be taking a dirt nap

We don’t KNOW that they don’t have a religion. We only know they don’t PROFESS a religion.

I know full well that I do not have a religion.

That’s why I’m always on about people reading the Catechism. It’s a clear statement of belief. If anyone is TRULY interested in finding “true religion” perhaps a check of one of the largest and most open religions would be worthwhile?

I actually spent a good decade of my life in it, have read the Catechism, the bible, the Didache, many of the early Church fathers and doctors, lives of the saints, the Baltimore Catechism (and some of the big book), and so on and so forth. It’s interesting, but I don’t believe it; but when I was growing up, there was nothing else I was allowed to believe – or even knew about. Once I had grown to the point of being able to truly understand things, I lost that ability to believe, if I ever really had it in the first place rather than being told I did.

Do you believe the sun will come up tomorrow?

…extrapolate that into “GOD the creator of the universe”.

I’m pretty sure it will – but all I can extrapolate from that is chemistry and physics, not theology.

Indeed, that is an explicit tenet in the catechism. (I’ll find it if you WANT me to,… but I don’t wanna right now. I believe that’s in the “invincible ignorance” section somewhere… )

Baptism of desire. I’m not sure how fully that applies to me, being an apostate.

But do you REALLY do yourself a favor for willfully overlooking information that might help you do good?

Being informed is not the same thing as believing In either case, I am informed and do not find it applicable.

The mere fact that it’s even crossed your mind that I could be right tells me that you are now not “invincibly ignorant”, by the way.

As I said above, I’m not sure if it applies to me.

How do you God hasn’t made Himself known to you?

My life has a significant lack of angels, trumpets, talking burning bushes, Jesus-shaped cornflakes, and well-placed lightning strikes

Your narrow window of perception, which you narrow even further by your non-curiosity and obstinance, may preclude, via prejudice, your “reception” of “the word”.

I’m open to being proven wrong – I just highly doubt it’s possible. As for my non-curiosity, it’s mostly because I already know it. You would do well to check out what other belief systems think

 

[Mirdath]

Yes indeed…! But WHY we do it and WHY YOU do it are based on different choices.

You do it because you think you CAN do it.

We do it because we know we CAN’T do it, and only by following God can we get even remotely close to helping the “good” prosper.

I do it because it needs doing, and even if I can’t it’s worth just trying to better peoples’ lives and mitigate some of the suffering that comes with existing. That seems to be about all the theists can do when they put their minds and efforts to it.

Your sense of “immediacy” changes when faced with the question of mortality.

The question is how would you act if the asteroid was going to touch down in your backyard in 12 minutes?

…or if you had the power of Ghengis Khan, knew your were to die in 2 weeks, and no one to rein in your actions?

Mortality isn’t a question, it’s thermodynamics

If I had 12 minutes, I’d be spending it with my loved ones. If I had two weeks with the power of an emperor, I’d spend most of it fixing things up as well as I could and then attend my own wake – after all, I’d deserve it

If you value wealth, and wealth was your god, and the “immediate value” of the moment was the 20 carat diamond you just discovered in your freshly drycleaned suit pocket, would you do a “good deed” for yourself in keeping it?

If, then yes, by those standards it is a good deed for yourself. But if one values wealth so, not merely for oneself but for all, a better deed would be to try to return it to its owner, or use it to help people who really need the money (if you can afford a nice suit and drycleaning, you’re better off than a lot of people).

And what have been the “fruits” of Buddhist societies? (Pre-contact with western civilization, of course.)

Where to start? The first novel ever written, the great age of Ashoka (perhaps one of the most truly enlightened rulers of all time), the teachings of Gautama and Confucius, much of Chinese culture, the monastic traditions of Tibet and south Asia, art, music, philosophy… it’s a long, long list, and shamefully ignored in Western history courses.

You ARE courageous to come here and lay yourself open…!!

But when you scoff at looking at a book because “it’s biased and can’t possibly be the truth”, you invite being called a coward.

I do not invite such accusations because I’ve already read it and found it wanting.

If you’ve, conveniently, pre-decided that something is “unknowable”, then why bother being curious about the subject at all?

I’m not curious as to whether or not any gods exist. I have equal amounts of fun arguing against both pro and con arguments – it’s an intellectual exercise. What I’m curious about is the experiences of people who do believe in such things.

You AREN’T accountable to anyone for your actions, other than yourself, if there is no “judge” other than yourself.

There is. Everyone else is a judge and jury (and some are executioners), and it is to them that even the theist is accountable for his actions. The thought of a supernatural judge who waits until we’re dead seems rather superfluous.

 

[whatever]

Yup. Why do you think you’re correct in that assesment, though?

There was a time when I would have made an attempt to answer these questions, but this time is long gone. Tell you what, if your god leads you to my website, you can the answers I’ve already written. If not, then it wasn’t meant for you to know.

What do you think religion promises?

That’s PRECISELY where you go wrong…!

Religion, true religion, is about God, and His “Fathership” of humanity.

Why don’t you of the religious persuasion first get on the same page which one’s the true religion?

It’s not about “solving individual human problems”, or even about solving entire civilizational human problems.

It’s about “Fathering” (parenting/teaching) humanity about the only ultimate “good” and “wisdom”, which is about HIM.

If we act within HIM, we will live the best possible way on earth, and with Him afterward.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry when I read something like the above.

The reason a “grand design” rings hollow to you is you’re thinking in terms of HUMAN designs.

No, it’s because I don’t believe in such a grand design. Life sucks, then you die. The trick is to minimize the overall suckiness.

God’s is not like a human design.

In my opinion, gods are nothing but a human design, created after our image.

The reason that Christianity hasn’t “lived up to your expectations” is because it hasn’t been followed by enough people.

No, the reason is that Christianity or any other religion cannot change human nature.

People go hungry because they don’t have enough food.
Who has commited what sin that created the conditions of their starving?

I cannot answer that, because sin is a meaningless concept to me.

People die of diseases because the have accidents, contract pathogens, get old, and become poisoned.
Which of those are humanly “fixable”?

Read medical journals.

Of the humanly “fixable”, who is commiting what sins that would make it easier to “fix” those things?

It’s a sin to make it easier to cure diseases?

What sins do “politicians” do that shouldn’t be done?

Turn on CNN and Faux News. Five minutes should do the trick.

You blame God for the sins of mere men?
Why?

I can’t blame something that I don’t believe or know to exist in the first place. Nor do I care. I blame human nature for some of our ills.

The catechism is a “proposition paper” as to how to live.

By living properly we mere humans are more likely to find those solutions from knowledge (technology from science) to live in this world as well as possible.

Like I said, lifestyle coaching.

Even you, I dare say, would admit that if everyone “simply did the right things” that the world would be a better place?

…

Without free will, you are a robot. Is that what you REALLY want to be?

I haven’t made up my mind whether we do or do not have free will, whatever that may be. I don’t consider it an important question. What matters is whether or not our thoughts and actions are predictable. And if everybody magically did the right thing, assuming there is a right to do, we’d be closer to robots.

The solution to the problem of creating the best environment for finding the solutions is to listen to God.

If certain authorities in this forum are to be believed, I must consider myself god. It’s a good thing, too, because I don’t listen to anybody else.

 

[Keikiolu]

…

Heh,… have a great life, dude…!

I’m not here ot convince you, and you’re not here to convince me.

Thanks for your wonderous, and amusing, responses and questions. What you’ve had to say says a BOATLOAD about you and those who think like you. It’s been VERY edifying to us all. Congratulations on your position in the universe.

Although,… why do you like to talk about this stuff again?

Don’t answer if you’re not going to be serious.

 

[whatever]

Heh,… have a great life, dude…!

I do and no gods required.

I’m not here ot convince you, and you’re not here to convince me.

Astute.

Thanks for your wonderous, and amusing, responses and questions. What you’ve had to say says a BOATLOAD about you and those who think like you. It’s been VERY edifying to us all.

I’m just doing my civic duty by returning a favor. The theists that drop by the sites I usually hang out on are edifying, too.

Although,… why do you like to talk about this stuff again?

Don’t answer if you’re not going to be serious.

My lips are sealed.

 

[R_McGeddon]

Agnostics are merely atheists who are too cowardly to state their actual decisions.

That just goes to show your ignorance. Do yourself a favour, get a dictionary and look up the proper definitions.

No your not. You’re trying to bash “religion”.

Something so self-satirising is impossible to bash.

If you understand anything “perfectly” then you are either a liar or you consider yourself God.

So a good mechanic, for instance, is either lying or thinks himself God, when he says he perfectly understands engines?

Who takes care of your car then???

My opinion,… you’re the latter.

The more I read of your posts, the more it seems that the church gives you your opinion.

It doesn’t take much at all to boggle your mind.

Having a “boggled mind” is not a bad thing, necessarily, but when you react to any “boggling” as meaning that since you can’t understand the “boggler” the “boggler” is insane, then you have a problem.

It usually takes quite to boggle my mind, but your lying back and accepting all the world’s ills as God’s way, is truly mind boggling.

Once again,… YOU are the measure of all truths. Lovely.

No, I am the observer.

Why are humans occupying a land that is “utterly inhospitable”?

They were born there and don’t have the means to move elsewhere.

Who made the land “utterly inhospitable” in the first place??

If they followed God’s way, they might come to realize that they either need to implement some technology to make the place habitable, or leave the place entirely.

They are just too hungry and poor. If they could feed themselves from their land and maybe have enough left over to sell, they might be able to implement some technology. But God’s way seems to be getting in the way.

Oh,… they can’t leave because their neighbors won’t let them leave?!

Their neighbours are most likely in the same predicament.

Perhaps if their neighbors were following God’s way, they’d let them pass, or give them the means by which to make their land habitable again (as it must have been in the past).

See reply above.

Your arguments aren’t arguments. They’re statements of a child.

Your reasons, if you can call them that, are that of a brainwashed automaton.

How the heck old are you?

As a matter of fact, I’m 41 years old.

How old are you?

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

A swarm of atheists here … I suggest the moderator lock this thread before Catholic Answers gets a reputation for encouraging juvenile and moronic atheists to arrive and take over the operation.

 

[Mirdath]

A swarm of atheists here … I suggest the moderator lock this thread before Catholic Answers gets a reputation for encouraging juvenile and moronic atheists to arrive and take over the operation.

The horror

This may be a Catholic-centric board but it’s open to all faiths and the lacks thereof. If you’ve got a problem with being ‘overrun’ by non-theists, start your own forum. We’re here to contribute, not to bumrush the place, and you’ve been asking for contributions all along. If you can’t take it, the ‘back’ button should be in the upper left hand corner of your browser. You’re free to ignore this thread.

 

[Gilbert_Keith]

Mirdath

If you can’t take it, the ‘back’ button should be in the upper left hand corner of your browser. You’re free to ignore this thread.

Well, if Catholic Answers is going to continue giving atheists a forum to insults Catholics right and left without admonishing you to stop it or kicking you off the Forum, cancel my subscription. Also, Catholic Answers can stop asking me for money … maybe the Atheists will start sending checks?

Mirdath … R McGeddon …when did you last send money to Catholic Answers? Do you own a piece of the action?

And what about this web site posted in another thread? youtube.com/watch?v=CBslO2JbEXs

More moronic atheists insults … I’m planning a scathing letter to the people who run Catholic Answers!!!

 

[R_McGeddon]

Well, if Catholic Answers is going to continue giving atheists a forum to insults Catholics right and left without admonishing you to stop it or kicking you off the Forum, cancel my subscription. Also, Catholic Answers can stop asking me for money … maybe the Atheists will start sending checks?

Stifling free speech is a part of totalitarian regimes, is that what you really want?

Mirdath … R McGeddon …when did you last send money to Catholic Answers? Do you own a piece of the action?

I use the Internet as it was intended, the **free sharing **of information.

And what about this web site posted in another thread? youtube.com/watch?v=CBslO2JbEXs

More moronic atheists insults … I’m planning a scathing letter to the people who run Catholic Answers!!!

So you don’t like it when some atheists insult you, but you can freely insult atheists? Now you show yourself in your true colours, go ahead and write your letter but realise that other people are entitled to hold their own views and opinions that may differ from your own.

Nobody put a gun to your head and forced you here.