Atheist, are you one??

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by Roger Allott

No. An omnipotent god would have access to a damn good dictionary, so he'd punish them for their insincerity instead.

The omniscient God would detect insincerity and the omnipotent God would hand out the punishments. Its the reason why I don't go to church. There are verious things which I do in my life, such as mooching around in a porn forum on the web, which are inconsistent with Anglican teachings and principles. I decline to repent on Sunday for things which I fully intend to do again on Monday, if I wait that long. So I only turn up for weddings, christenings and funerals: mostly funerals these days, alas. I do believe in God and I wouldn't respect a God who could tolerate hypocrisy.

I'm not convinced that Pascal's Wager is hypocrisy though. It strikes me as pragmatism. You have two options: Option One, you definitely lose, Option Two, who knows? Even the most convinced religious people hedge their bets as well. Cromwell never said this, but the saying is very true of his approach to politics and generalship:

Put your faith in God; but keep your powder dry.

Meaning that religious faith is not an alternative to common sense.

[Galahad]

Originally Posted by ramphull

Not one of us can say anything about the existence (or non existence) of god. I wish the religious folk would just shut up.

And yet theres 103 separate pages of people doing just that

[cicciobuki]

Originally Posted by Dropped52

I have not gone thru all the posts in the thread but all of the posts I read are to the atheist side of the isle.

Not all, but i guess a majority here is. Or we're just more talkative

That said I believe in god, I believe I'm a sinner and my road leads straight to hell. I go on a daily basis to feed my dark desires and don't try to change.

Dropped52, do you feel you're a sinner because your religion says so or because your conscience tells you so? (or both?)

[Dropped52]

Originally Posted by cicciobuki

Not all, but i guess a majority here is. Or we're just more talkative



Dropped52, do you feel you're a sinner because your religion says so or because your conscience tells you so? (or both?)

I'm working on being a contributing member
Well more the religion than the conscience but at times both. If that sums it up for you. There's nothing wrong with having a belief just as there is nothing wrong with not having a belief.

[cicciobuki]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I'm not convinced that Pascal's Wager is hypocrisy though. It strikes me as pragmatism. You have two options: Option One, you definitely lose, Option Two, who knows? Even the most convinced religious people hedge their bets as well.

But it would be fake faith (be it out of opportunism, self-deception or perhaps even fear or social pressure, which is even worse, and probably happens a lot)

Originally Posted by scoundrel

(...) church (...)So I only turn up for weddings, christenings and funerals: mostly funerals these days, alas. I do believe in God and I wouldn't respect a God who could tolerate hypocrisy.

But in these cases you're going for the people you care about, not for the deity. As all of us would, i hope.

[howerd]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

The omniscient God would detect insincerity and the omnipotent God would hand out the punishments. Its the reason why I don't go to church. There are verious things which I do in my life, such as mooching around in a porn forum on the web, which are inconsistent with Anglican teachings and principles.

Why haven't you considered the Hindu gods? Hinduism is loaded with sexual imagery because it views sex as a good thing. Christianity just exploits natural (god given?) sexual desire as dirty & wrong so you'll feel you need the blood of Jesus to wash you clean - what a loooovely image!

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I'm not convinced that Pascal's Wager is hypocrisy though. It strikes me as pragmatism. You have two options: Option One, you definitely lose, Option Two, who knows?

How can you 'loose' if there's no you too lose? Have you ever considered your lack of existence before your conception as a loss? No there was no 'you' to be bereft of anything so how can that be the case once you've stopped existing either?

Originally Posted by scoundrel

Even the most convinced religious people hedge their bets as well. Cromwell never said this, but the saying is very true of his approach to politics and generalship:
Meaning that religious faith is not an alternative to common sense.

Indeed because there is no alternative to logical reasoning. People often claim that logical reasoning can't be relied upon while forgetting they are attempting to reason reason away! L.O.L!

[scoundrel]

Originally Posted by howerd

Why haven't you considered the Hindu gods? Hinduism is loaded with sexual imagery because it views sex as a good thing. Christianity just exploits natural (god given?) sexual desire as dirty & wrong so you'll feel you need the blood of Jesus to wash you clean - what a loooovely image!

As the Devil says to Henry van Cleeve in Heaven Can Wait (1944 film) when courteously declining to admit Henry into Hell on the grounds that Henry has overestimated his wickedness in life:

Henry...I don't make the rules.

I can't help it if the religion of my ancestors is odd and peculiar. I am not about to convert to a faith which is alien to my background and culture. I prefer the delusions of my own ancestors to the delusions of other peoples' ancestors.

Originally Posted by howerd

How can you 'loose' if there's no you too lose? Have you ever considered your lack of existence before your conception as a loss? No there was no 'you' to be bereft of anything so how can that be the case once you've stopped existing either?

I believe intuitively in my own existence. I am less certain about your existence but am inclined to suspect that you probably do exist.

Originally Posted by howerd

Indeed because there is no alternative to logical reasoning. People often claim that logical reasoning can't be relied upon while forgetting they are attempting to reason reason away! L.O.L!

I wish you were right about this. The mere fact that I have religious faith (I know you do not) does not mean that I have failed to observe and deplore the antics of people who think that religious faith trumps common sense. I do not burn witches, or even (in any literal sense) believe in their existence, although Macbeth is one of my favourite stage plays. The Bible tells me that I should kill witches. In this I am consciously a heretic. I would imprison for whole of life in one of those ghastly Supermax prisons, or hang by the neck until dead, anyone who burned a witch. If it turns out that this really is what God expected of me, that I should randomly kill people He dislikes, I would be proud, like Prometheus, to defy such a God. This would, in my mind, be the Devil, not God at all. That's what I really was thinking about when I mentioned in an earlier post that some people divorce religion from ethics when it is ethics, not religion, which make it possible for human beings to live together in peace. As soon as you start a "religious" country, the first thing it does is to persecute "heretics" and "unbelievers". So, while having my own private religious beliefs, which I don't mind discussing, I won't impose them onto others. I would very strongly oppose a real as opposed to a nominal state religion in the UK, and I would take huge exception to having someone else's religion foisted onto me.

[comeon93]

Originally Posted by cicciobuki

Not all, but i guess a majority here is. Or we're just more talkative



Dropped52, do you feel you're a sinner because your religion says so or because your conscience tells you so? (or both?)

I'd love for someone to rationally explain the whole sexual morality/immorality thing to me. If it's between consenting adults, how can it be immoral, and why would a god give a shit?

[comeon93]

Originally Posted by scoundrel

I'm not convinced that Pascal's Wager is hypocrisy though. It strikes me as pragmatism. You have two options: Option One, you definitely lose, Option Two, who knows? Even the most convinced religious people hedge their bets as well. Cromwell never said this, but the saying is very true of his approach to politics and generalship:
Meaning that religious faith is not an alternative to common sense.

Pascal's wager is not a two option wager though, it's option one, non-belief or option thousands, as in which of the thousands of gods to believe in.

[howerd]

Originally Posted by comeon93

I'd love for someone to rationally explain the whole sexual morality/immorality thing to me. If it's between consenting adults, how can it be immoral, and why would a god give a shit?

That's an excellent question! I have a theory about this: religions, especially Catholicism 'sex-up' (if you'll excuse the pun) sexual desire as sin. As a cultural Protestant I was amazed to learn from Catholics that the 'original sin' of Adam & Eve was (or caused?) sexual desire. This figures in a sense actually - Young kids get force fed religious dogma & being young & trusting they usually buy it in much the same way they buy into Santa Claus & the Tooth Fairy. Once they are old enough to start questioning the religious claims they've been brought up on wham: the hormones kick in & sexuality emerges. - This is 'stage two' of a religious viral infection: the guilt kicks in for having such 'dirty' & 'sinful' desires - so it's a double whammy. If it doesn't get you the first time it gets you in the second time around instead.

This is why Catholicism has been so successful at spreading the faith virus. It is obviously a 'numbers game': Sex is wrong unless it's to make more Catholic babies which is why contraception is wicked folks! - Unsurprisingly this ploy leads to more Catholics a generation on & more still 2+ generations on.

And if you are gay - surprise surprise you will be castigated by the priests & bishops for not being a cash cow! It's largely about money & power not spirituality. A truly spiritual doctrine would encourage love of any kind between two consenting adults.