David M. Payne

Yes, a much shorter version that was posted in the Freethinkers lounge for input, prior to submitting it to a national news magazine. I never heard back from them, surprise surprise. I have also posted that short version, after this was published here, on two other web sites as a lead into this version. I do my best to spread the word about the problems God/religion has created for humanity wherever I can. The battle to free humanity from the grip of this destructive God/religion concept will not be won with bullets, but with intellect, in that we all should do everything we can to help the cause. This is what I can do.

David

David M. Payne

Fiach, excellent post.

David

David M. Payne

I created satire, which is very useful in pointing out the problems of religion in a humorous way. You don't like it JohnV, that's OK, it's not for everyone. There are atheist/agnostic members of these forums that can argue religious text tooth and nail with the best that theism has to offer. Richard Carrier, James Still, Don Morgan, to name but a few can take theist arguments and tear them to shreds using the bible. I don't try to do that, its not my forte, this is. And in this I do the best I can with what I have to help defeat the forces of ignorance. Have a nice day.

David

Hayden

So, are you saying there isn't any justice? If God exists, He is not just?

Or you could just be joking...

HR

Douglas J. Bender

HR,

I used a common saying, one that is not meant to be taken literally. Although, to be absolutely literal and technically correct, I should have said, "If there was any consistently applied and accurate justice in this Discussion Forum,...."

In Christ,

Douglas

JohnV

So a better title would have been, "See how easy it is to satirize other people's beliefs." I would have agreed with that title. That is a very easy thing to do.
And why isn't hearsay evidence? Most people who believe scientific findings do so on the basis of hearsay.

Llyricist

Crafty wording, while true the way you have said this, it's still actually physically possible for anyone to reproduce those findings, or falsify them. The same cannot be said for the religious "evidence".

JohnV

Other than hearsay, what evidence do most people have of this?

SanDiegoAtheist

Arguing that most people are poorly educated isn't a very positive argument for your position.

The fact of the matter is that unlike Christians, EVERY 'truth' that I know is provisional, and subject to reassessment should evidence to the contrary make itself known.

I don't necessarily trust every word that has been spoken by a scientist - in an area of science that I am insufficiently familiar with, I wait for corroboration from other scientists, and general consensus.

As an example - 10 years or so ago it was reported that a team of scientists working at a Utah university had observed 'cold fusion'. I read the results, thought "that's interesting, and has rather profound consequences IF in fact it is shown to be correct". I don't/didn't know enough about nuclear physics to be able to determine the truth of the matter enough from my own efforts...however I KNOW there are many other scientists that DO have the expertise and DID attempt to reproduce the findings...and couldn't. Ergo, I don't believe that was a real example of cold fusion.

If there is a CLEAR lack of consensus amongst experts on what is held to be 'true' in that field, I withold judgement myself. If there is a CLEAR consensus amongst experts, I tend to believe those experts.

Religion, and Christianity in particular, isn't in anywhere NEAR the same boat. Despite TWO THOUSAND YEARS of basically being the biggest dog in the biggest empires (well, ok 1600 years), Christianity is more fragmented than ever, with thousands of competing and contradictory viewpoints on interpretations, and is only one of a half dozen major, and thousand of minor religions. Where's the CONSENSUS?

After 2000 years, I'd HOPE that Christians (and this applies to other religions as well) would have been able to actually figure out what they are supposed to believe...especially if they expect me to believe that their religion is the one true one, and their holy book directly inspired by God. If this level of consensus is what I can expect of a religion created, nurtured, and provided with a book of instructions BY that God, then I'm less than impressed with His/Her/Its abilities.

I'd have the EXACT same response to any other subject that despite 2000 years of working on the same theory, that STILL can't come up with real results or consensus (a great example of this would be astrology).

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

Llyricist

If by "this" you mean the fact that the findings can be reproduced (given the resources and time), a basic science class with hands on experience should provide the evidence to support it.

If you are trying to say that most people treat science in the same way they do religion, I almost agree, except that I would take exception to the word most. I have no doubt that a large percentage do in fact do this, but whether that percentage constitutes a majority I cannot say.

This says nothing of the still actual difference between the weight of religious hearsay and the weight of scientific "hearsay".

But this is WAY off the topic of the OP... to continue I would suggest another thread.