The History of God and Other Religious Myths

First topic message reminder :

Background

Tectonic forces began splitting east Africa apart 25 million years ago resulting in today's Great Rift Valley. The rainforest flourished in the east but the western side dried giving way to vast savannah grasslands. Chimpanzees in the west were eventually forced out of the trees to search for food on the ground beginning a 9 million year evolutionary trek ending in humanity. After 5 million years Australopithecus afarensis developed DNA mutations of the feet, toes, legs and pelvis enabling them to walk upright. About 1.5 million years ago Homo erectus, a prehuman ancestor with a larger brain, migrated out of Africa to the Asian continent before going extinct. Geneticist Spencer Wells estimates that Homo sapiens, fully modern-day humans, evolved 60,000 to 90,000 years ago. Two of our earliest intellectual creations were art and religion.

Early Sacred Art

Cave art suggests that early humans conceived of a spiritual realm. These first humans painted and engraved animals they feared (lions, rhinos, etc.) and revered (deer, bison, etc.) on the walls of Altamira in Spain 40,000 years ago and Chauvet in France 32,000 years ago. Looking up at the art produces the same sense of awe you feel from the majesty of a Gothic cathedral. Caverns with drawings lay deep inside the caves indicating they were not used for habitation but possibly to hold ceremonies with devout rituals to insure or celebrate the success of the hunt.
The 35,000 year-old ivory figurines of Venus of Hohle Fels (fertility icon) and Lion-Man of Hohlenstein Stadel (lion head on man's body) were found in caves in Germany. They are symbols of a rudimentary belief in a spirit world. Lion-Man effigies were found in both caves (above) indicating the existence of a cult. Other statuettes were buried with the dead. (Were devotional services held at the death of a loved one or tribal leader?)
In the Fertile Crescent valley of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in southern Turkey 11,600 years ago, nomad hunter-gatherers built circular one-room halls at Gobekli Tepe. Surreal depictions of animals and humans with elongated bodies were carved as bas reliefs on 16-ton, 18-foot-tall smooth limestone pillars that held up the roof. The secret society of elders may have used these sanctums for meetings to conduct sacred rites of passage.

Birth of Religion

Archaeologists estimate there were 15,000 people living in Western Europe at the end of the last Ice Age, 20,000 years ago. There were approximately 500 different groups each with about 30 extended family members. A single elder with experience, intelligence, and strength could coordinate and harmonize the efforts and activities of his small clan. As climate warmed, these hunter-gatherers migrated into farming settlements of 100s, then 1000's, then tens of thousands. One-man rule was no longer adequate to manage the complex relationships of a large community. According to National Geographic magazine (June 2011, page 41), religion arose in one of two ways:

Religion preceded Farming: "People came together for rituals creating the need to grow food for large groups gathering near sacred sites." The mere existence of Gobekli Tepe supports this view since there is no evidence of human settlements nearby.

Farming preceded Religion: "After people began settling in villages and farming, religion arose to promote social cooperation." Michael Shermer prefers this second scenario: "Leaders developed two new institutions to organize and control the affairs of the masses--government with an all-powerful military police and religion with all-powerful gods and goddesses."

First Approximations

Great intelligence and imagination evolved to set us humans apart from the rest of the animal kingdom. These traits enable us to ponder the answers to two philosophical questions: how the universe works and our place in it. Finding the answers would satisfy our intellectual curiosity, bolster our emotional self-confidence, and insure our basic physical necessities of food, clothing and shelter. For answers we observed Nature: the plants and animals that nourished us, the forces (lightning, volcanoes, and floods) that devastated us, and the benevolence (the sun and stars) that helped us. At this early time our only technology was simple math/geometry and the naked eye. Our measurements were pretty good--good enough to build temples and pyramids. But our conclusions were pretty bad: the Earth was flat (not round) and the Earth was stationary (The Sun circled Earth.). There were huge gaps in our knowledge so we played make-believe: we projected our own emotions and motives onto Nature creating human-like persona to explain/understand how Nature works. (This is called the anthropomorphic principle.) In hindsight we confused and thus blended Nature with the Super-Natural, turning a purely intellectual inquiry into a religious one.
People all around the globe were trying to figure out the answers to the two questions, but all failed miserably.

3000 BC Southern England: Circular wooden structures predate the megaliths erected 2200-2400 BC at Stonehenge--an astronomical observatory of the rising and setting sun. While precise measurements may have helped the ancients plan their farming to maximize harvests, G. T. Meaden suggests the site was a place to worship the sun.

1500 BC Iraq (ancient Babylon): Astrology was devised to determine the destiny of a person from the positions of the star constellations at the time of birth.

500 BC Germany/Scandinavia: The god Thor swung his war hammer to produce lightning and thunder to punish human misdeeds.

500 AD Southern Peru: The Nazca lines extend from the plain by the ocean miles into the mountains. Using precisely placed rocks, large outlines of animals mirroring the star constellations were drawn but could only be viewed and appreciated by someone (or some god) positioned hundreds of feet in the air above. Could the lines and animals contain spiritual significance?

1200 AD Hawaii: Hawaiians thought their goddess Pele made the Kilauea volcano erupt when she was angered by their actions.

1300 AD Central Mexico: The Aztecs believed the sun had died four times and now was on its fifth and possibly last life cycle. To ensure the sun remained alive, they sacrificed slaves by cutting out their beating hearts and offering them to their gods. They slaughtered thousands on a single day.

These first approximations of reality were made with a minimum of technology resulting in many bizarre and some brutal religious misinterpretations. The divine nature of these early concepts could not be disproved so the leaders of society could use them to support the authority of religious institutions. Starting 400 years ago science through technology provided the valid insight of reality we enjoy today even though some of these illusory religious concepts persist.

History of God and Other Religious Myths--Middle East

After Gobekli Tepe there is a gap of 9,000 years until the advent of writing provides a glimpse of religious doctrine in the Middle East--religious practices were passed down from generation to generation via word-of-mouth and repetition of rituals. When writing first appeared in Sumer (cuneiform, 3000 BC) and Egypt (hieroglyphs, 2300 BC), religious concepts were highly developed thus we cannot be certain of the time and place of the rise of religious ideas but we can draw some logical conclusions. The main point of this article is that there is an unbroken historical timeline showing that spirituality was first conceived by Ice-Age cavemen 35,000 years ago, then developed by nomad hunter-gatherers 10,000 years ago and (presented below) embellished by prehistoric pagans 5,000 years ago--three groups that have no credibility for establishing the reality of god or any spiritual belief.

In Secret Origins of the Bible (pages 6-39) Tim Callahan presents the Babylonian, Greek and Hebrew religious stories of the creation of the universe. His research shows that all three stories contain four basic concepts:

1. Supreme Being: a supernatural all-powerful god, gods and goddesses.
   
2. Eternal Water: seas, rivers, and rain did not have to be created but always existed.
   
3. Chaos: the natural order of the pre-universe was disorder.
   
4. Humans: god created humans out of earth, soil, or clay.
   
   

The similarity in the three creation myths is no coincidence. The three cultures resided within a 500 mile radius: they knew each other well through trade and war. Their creation stories are similar. Lacking hard evidence these cultures borrowed and copied the best of each other's ideas in an attempt to understand their own origin. Callahan estimates that the Babylonian myth was written 1600-2300 BC; that the Greek myth dates from 800-1000 BC: and that the Hebrew Genesis story was written 600-900 BC. Since the Babylonian story is the oldest we might conclude it is the source of the other two. But concurrent with the Babylonian writings there is a pagan superstition containing all four concepts that may be the original source for the other three--and that is the Egyptian creation myth. The ancient Egyptian empire is the oldest, richest, mightiest, most productive and longest-lived superpower in recorded history, lasting from 3100-332 BC. Starting in 2300 BC with pharaoh Unis, the Egyptians drew and chiseled the beliefs of their creation myth, the famous "pyramid texts," on the stone walls of their pharaohs' tombs, displaying the first truly religious scriptures before writing them down on papyrus in their Book of the Dead.

Egyptian Creation Myth

In the beginning Amun created himself above the eternal waters of Chaos. The Egyptians believed the Mediterranean Sea and Nile River always existed and did not have to be created. When Amun masturbated where his semen fell became land: thus originated the myth of the Supreme Being or all-powerful god. Amun created many other gods and goddesses, important among them was his sister Nut, goddess of the Sky. Nut bent over the land with her feet on the east side of the Nile and her hands on the west side. She raised her nude body high up with her elongated arms and legs, and formed the sky. Stars shone from her bare torso at night. The Egyptians believed that at sunset the sun vanished because Nut swallowed it. During the night it passed through her digestive tract and in the morning she excreted it at sunrise allowing the sun to traverse the sky again.

Egyptian Myth of Human Creation

There are two parts to the myth of human creation: how the pharaoh was created, and how ordinary people were created.

Creation of Pharaoh
Amun had sexual relations with many of his sisters and produced second and third generation deities. Important among these were two brothers, Set and Osiris, and their sister Isis. Set murdered Osiris, cut his body into pieces, and threw them away in the desert. Wherever a body part landed, an oasis was created. Isis gathered the pieces of Osiris and put his body back together. She turned herself into a bird, and flapping her wings she resuscitated him back to life but (in one version of the story) he could live for only one day on Earth; thus originated the Resurrection myth. The Egyptians drew and chiseled on the walls of their temples the story of how Osiris impregnated Isis, who gave birth to a son Horus who was part human and part divine; thus originated the myth of the Virgin Birth. The pyramids were tombs for the pharaohs. The Egyptians became excellent pyramid builders designing passages inside leading upwards and downwards. One small passage (4 inches by 4 inches) from the chamber holding the pharaoh's body led diagonally up and out of the pyramid so the pharaoh's soul could travel up to the sky and become a new star; thus originated the myth of Heaven. Osiris ruled the afterlife and sat in judgement of humans after they died. The Egyptians developed mummification since they believed that the soul ceased to exist if the body decayed leaving only the skeleton; thus originated the myth of the Soul and the Accountability of humans to god in the Afterlife (heaven and hell). Horus redeemed Osiris by killing Set and became pharaoh ruling over the Egyptian people. Generation after generation Horus-Pharaoh married one of his sisters and their first born son became pharaoh, part human and part divine. The Egyptians believed in the tri-part unit of three gods: God the Father, God the Son and Goddess the Sister-Wife-Mother; thus originated the myth of the Trinity. Certain numbers (such as three, seven, nine and twelve) were important to the Egyptians. The number twelve was especially important because they measured time by this number: 12 hours of day, 12 hours of night, and 12 months of the year (30 days in each month with 5 or 6 holidays to balance out the year).

Creation of Ordinary Humans
Ordinary humans were created when the god Ptah took clay from the ground and molded it into human form on a potter's wheel. Ptah used an ankh to breathe life into humans through their nostrils.

Borrowed Ideas

The ancient Egyptians formulated four basic religious concepts: supernatural Supreme Being, eternal waters, pre-universe of chaos, and human creation from earth. Having no better insight, ancient cultures arising after or concurrently with the Egyptians borrowed these ideas and made them central to their ethnic religion. But peripheral concepts were borrowed too.

The Greeks
The Greeks borrowed the Egyptian number twelve for their counsel of twelve gods on Mount Olympus and devised a story about the twelve labors of Heracles. Heracles was part human and part divine by a virgin birth, having the god Zeus as father and a human, Alcmena, as mother. The Greeks were the only culture to incorporate incest into their religion: Kronos and Rhea were brother and sister--and husband and wife--who had children, Zeus and Hera, who married and produced offspring.

The Hebrews
The Hebrews borrowed the Egyptian number twelve for their twelve Tribes of Israel. Cain murdering Abel is reminiscent of Set killing Osiris. They also copied several ideas from the Babylonians.

1. Creation Myth. There were six generations of Babylonian giants: the sun and moon were created during the fourth generation and humans were created during the sixth generation. In the Hebrew Genesis story, the sun and moon were created on the fourth day and humans were created on the sixth day.
   
2. The Hebrews copied two Babylonian stories to describe their prophet Moses:
   a. Sargon was born of humble birth. His mother put him in a basket and floated him down the river. The queen of Babylon rescued him and raised him in her household. Later he became king.
   b. The Babylonian king Hammurabi went up into the mountains and received the laws of his code from God.
   
3. The flood and ark stories come from ancient Babylonian mythology 1000 years before Noah.
   
   

The Christians
The Christians appropriated several Egyptian myths into their religion: the number twelve for the Apostles of Jesus; the Osiris resurrection myth for Jesus; the Egyptian trinity was modified into God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Ghost; the duality of Horus-Pharaoh for Jesus being part human and part divine; and Isis' virgin birth (or a Greek version) for Mary.
The Christians also borrowed from the Hebrews, adopting their entire bible (Tanakh) as the Old Testament and claiming Jesus was a direct descendant in the lineage of the House of David.

The Muslims
By the time Islam arose 622 AD, the Egyptian, Babylonian and Greek religions had vanished with the military destruction of their empires. Christianity and Judaism were well-defined, intertwined and central to the powerful Roman/Byzantine Empire headquartered in Constantinople (Istanbul). While Muslims had Arab precedents, they adopted the core beliefs of Christianity and Judaism: one god, the soul, heaven and hell.
The Hojjatieh sect of Shia Islam borrowed the Egyptian number twelve for their apocalyptic Twelfth Imam. The Muslims appropriated the Jewish founder Abraham as their patriarch and recognized Jesus as a prophet but not the divine son of God. The Muslims borrowed the Jewish/Christian messenger angel Gabriel saying he whispered the words of the Koran into Muhammad's ear.

Summary

The ancient Hebrew religious thinkers and leaders accepted as fact the Egyptian myths of a Supreme Being and a human soul because they were intellectually the smartest common sense answers, and emotionally the most optimistic motivators of the time. Since the Hebrews established their religion 2000 years after the Egyptians, the Hebrews were more realistically grounded: they eliminated the pantheon of gods, the animals and the pornography, and developed the concept of one omnipotent, omniscient god. The Muslims followed their example believing in just one god while the Christians held on to the ancient Egyptian concept of the Trinity in modified form. The prehistoric pagans of 5,000-year-ago Egypt borrowed their basic idea of a spirit world from 10,000-year-ago hunter-gatherers who in turn inherited it from 35,000-year-ago cavemen, preparing ancient Hebrews, Christians and Muslims to mistakenly perceive many natural events as miraculous happenings. With so many borrowed ideas (from cavemen, hunter-gatherers, Babylonians, Egyptians), and so many misinterpretations, Genesis, the Gospels, and the Koran, cannot be considered the word of god. That is the history of the idea of god and other religious beliefs.

Conclusion

Today nobody would believe in the Egyptian religion because it contradicts what we understand about the world around us: gods don't swallow the sun and birds can't bring anything back to life. These blatant misinterpretations of Nature discredit the validity of the pagans' core Super-Natural beliefs: a Supreme Being, a human soul, and heaven and hell. If they could be so wrong about the obvious, how could they be right about the obscure? These four Egyptian supernatural beliefs are as frivolous as the Babylonian giants, and acquire substance in only one context: the weird, imaginary Egyptian religion. All of the Egyptians' fanciful beliefs are just fuzzy thinking; to believe in something that science cannot verify to exist runs the risk of believing in nothing at all. Over the last 400 years as science explained the mysteries of the universe, the mysticism of religion should have declined. As we figured out the mechanisms of Nature, faith in Super-Natural miracle should have declined. As human self-confidence grew through science and technology, reliance on prayer should have declined. As modern scientific insight made more and more sense out of the universe (with quantum mechanics, Einstein's relativity, the Big Bang, evolution, and our expanding universe), all ancient religious beliefs should have become obsolete because they are no longer needed to explain our universe, they are no longer needed to define us humans, they just no longer make sense. Yet curiously people today do believe in the four superstitions of religion: god, soul, heaven, and hell. Apparently their origin has been erased by time. Would modern day Jews, Christians and Muslims discontinue belief in these four superstitions if they realized their dubious origin: Ice-Age cavemen, wandering hunter-gatherers and pagans? Or is faith an unreasonable emotion?




http://infidels.org/kiosk/article/the-history-of-god-and-other-religious-myths-907.html

---

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You think it would be understandable if they thought about little else? Would you like it if they said you were "poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"?

Well I think he must be used to that being as you have said this to him and religious people generally say this themselves to athiests. Goes with the territory, but as seen athiets do not act like religious people do on the matter and get over sensitive

Please link to where I've said that to him.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


Well I think he must be used to that being as you have said this to him and religious people generally say this themselves to athiests. Goes with the territory, but as seen athiets do not act like religious people do on the matter and get over sensitive

Please link to where I've said that to him.

You have said it many times Rags, I am not going back over threads to look either

You just have to suck it up I know for a fact you have, if you do not like that, tough, go cry to admin, as you need to be told how silly you are becomi9ng

That would be confusing, since nothing exists that could misguide or brainwash sexual orientation.

We are dangerlously close to getting back on to how sexuality and religion are not the same.

Some people are gay, others aren't. The only brainwashing that goes on is to stop people being gay. So the comparison doesn't work. I would still understand someone questioning 'why' though.

There have, however, been 1000s of religions, and only 1 or none of them is real. So it stands to reason nearly believers are misguided.

If I was religious I'd be offended a bit by the statement of course, regardless though the likelihood of you being misguided in enormous. If we take you and Zack alone I can be 100% sure at least one of you is totally misguided.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Please link to where I've said that to him.

You have said it many times Rags, I am not going back over threads to look either

You just have to suck it up I know for a fact you have, if you do not like that, tough, go cry to admin, as you need to be told how silly you are becomi9ng

I deny that I've ever said that to him. It's up to you to prove that I have - or admit that you're a liar.

You're the one who's always running off crying to admin. You even report your own posts sometimes.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


You have said it many times Rags, I am not going back over threads to look either

You just have to suck it up I know for a fact you have, if you do not like that, tough, go cry to admin, as you need to be told how silly you are becomi9ng

I deny that I've ever said that to him. It's up to you to prove that I have - or admit that you're a liar.

You're the one who's always running off crying to admin. You even report your own posts sometimes.

But we all know you have rags, I mean look at your behaviour again now where you use smiles as a defense mechanism, thinking it protects you from exposing how chikldish you are being

Sadly it does not but is showing up your insecurities

Eilzel wrote:That would be confusing, since nothing exists that could misguide or brainwash sexual orientation.

We are dangerlously close to getting back on to how sexuality and religion are not the same.

Some people are gay, others aren't. The only brainwashing that goes on is to stop people being gay. So the comparison doesn't work. I would still understand someone questioning 'why' though.

There have, however, been 1000s of religions, and only 1 or none of them is real. So it stands to reason nearly believers are misguided.

If I was religious I'd be offended a bit by the statement of course, regardless though the likelihood of you being misguided in enormous. If we take you and Zack alone I can be 100% sure at least one of you is totally misguided.

I think you're missing the point. The point is that if you and the other atheists want to discuss why some people believe in God, you would do well to do so in a way which doesn't patronise those who do. If you fail to do so, you will be pulled up for your arrogance. This thread was not of particular interest to me until I read Stardesk's post. If you lot want to obsess about something which is none of your business, that's up to you, but if you start getting above yourselves, you will be challenged.

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I deny that I've ever said that to him. It's up to you to prove that I have - or admit that you're a liar.

You're the one who's always running off crying to admin. You even report your own posts sometimes.

But we all know you have rags, I mean look at your behaviour again now where you use smiles as a defense mechanism, thinking it protects you from exposing how chikldish you are being

Sadly it does not but is showing up your insecurities

"We" all know I haven't. Trolling your own thread just shows how bored and irritable you are today.

Can't you go for a nice walk or something to calm down?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Didge wrote:


But we all know you have rags, I mean look at your behaviour again now where you use smiles as a defense mechanism, thinking it protects you from exposing how chikldish you are being

Sadly it does not but is showing up your insecurities

"We" all know I haven't. Trolling your own thread just shows how bored and irritable you are today.

Can't you go for a nice walk or something to calm down?

The best thing I can do to benefit you is allow you to sulk and get it out of your system

Seriously rags you do yourself no favours

Didge wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

"We" all know I haven't. Trolling your own thread just shows how bored and irritable you are today.

Can't you go for a nice walk or something to calm down?

The best thing I can do to benefit you is allow you to sulk and get it out of your system

Seriously rags you do yourself no favours

The best thing you can do is think about your behaviour and try to improve it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Eilzel wrote:That would be confusing, since nothing exists that could misguide or brainwash sexual orientation.

We are dangerlously close to getting back on to how sexuality and religion are not the same.

Some people are gay, others aren't. The only brainwashing that goes on is to stop people being gay. So the comparison doesn't work. I would still understand someone questioning 'why' though.

There have, however, been 1000s of religions, and only 1 or none of them is real. So it stands to reason nearly believers are misguided.

If I was religious I'd be offended a bit by the statement of course, regardless though the likelihood of you being misguided in enormous. If we take you and Zack alone I can be 100% sure at least one of you is totally misguided.

I think you're missing the point. The point is that if you and the other atheists want to discuss why some people believe in God, you would do well to do so in a way which doesn't patronise those who do. If you fail to do so, you will be pulled up for your arrogance. This thread was not of particular interest to me until I read Stardesk's post. If you lot want to obsess about something which is none of your business, that's up to you, but if you start getting above yourselves, you will be challenged.

Crying over arrogance doesn't interest me, raggs.

There are 2.5 billion Christians in this world.
1.5 billion Muslims.
Nearly 1 billion Hindus.
Slightly fewer Buddhists.
And the rest are divided between smaller religions or none at all.

Among the 2.5 billion Christians the largest group is Catholics, just over 1 billion I believe.

That means, at most, 1 billion people have been lucky enough to find 'the truth' about god. The other 6 billion plus ARE hopelessly misguided- that is an unquestionable, absolute fact.

If it is arrogant to assert as much then so what. IF that bothers people who are too immature enough to accept the reality then tough. Fortunately, with or without outspoken atheists this would will be, and is, becoming more godless, secular and all the better for it.

Eilzel wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think you're missing the point. The point is that if you and the other atheists want to discuss why some people believe in God, you would do well to do so in a way which doesn't patronise those who do. If you fail to do so, you will be pulled up for your arrogance. This thread was not of particular interest to me until I read Stardesk's post. If you lot want to obsess about something which is none of your business, that's up to you, but if you start getting above yourselves, you will be challenged.

Crying over arrogance doesn't interest me, raggs.

There are 2.5 billion Christians in this world.
1.5 billion Muslims.
Nearly 1 billion Hindus.
Slightly fewer Buddhists.
And the rest are divided between smaller religions or none at all.

Among the 2.5 billion Christians the largest group is Catholics, just over 1 billion I believe.

That means, at most, 1 billion people have been lucky enough to find 'the truth' about god. The other 6 billion plus ARE hopelessly misguided- that is an unquestionable, absolute fact.

If it is arrogant to assert as much then so what. IF that bothers people who are too immature enough to accept the reality then tough. Fortunately, with or without outspoken atheists this would will be, and is, becoming more godless, secular and all the better for it.

I'm not interested in your figures, I posted in this thread merely to comment on Stardesk's arrogant and patronising post. Think about your own immaturity before you point the finger at anyone else.

Just accept that some people believe in God, and that they don't have to explain why to you if they choose not to.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Eilzel wrote:

Crying over arrogance doesn't interest me, raggs.

There are 2.5 billion Christians in this world.
1.5 billion Muslims.
Nearly 1 billion Hindus.
Slightly fewer Buddhists.
And the rest are divided between smaller religions or none at all.

Among the 2.5 billion Christians the largest group is Catholics, just over 1 billion I believe.

That means, at most, 1 billion people have been lucky enough to find 'the truth' about god. The other 6 billion plus ARE hopelessly misguided- that is an unquestionable, absolute fact.

If it is arrogant to assert as much then so what. IF that bothers people who are too immature enough to accept the reality then tough. Fortunately, with or without outspoken atheists this would will be, and is, becoming more godless, secular and all the better for it.

I'm not interested in your figures, I posted in this thread merely to comment on Stardesk's arrogant and patronising post. Think about your own immaturity before you point the finger at anyone else.

Just accept that some people believe in God, and that they don't have to explain why to you if they choose not to.

I never said they had to.

Eilzel wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I'm not interested in your figures, I posted in this thread merely to comment on Stardesk's arrogant and patronising post. Think about your own immaturity before you point the finger at anyone else.

Just accept that some people believe in God, and that they don't have to explain why to you if they choose not to.

I never said they had to.

Good.

Raggamuffin wrote:I mean - Stardesk seems to spend every waking moment worrying about why some people believe in God. It's a wonder he gets anything done.

Sorry but that did make me laugh

Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant etc, but have opened our minds and freed ourselves from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant etc, but have opened our minds and freed ourselves from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

stardesk wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant etc, but have opened our minds and freed ourselves from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

I don't knock on people's doors either. I'm not brainwashed, and I'm not misguided either. You weren't exchanging knowledge, you were being patronising and offensive to all those with religious faith.

stardesk wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant etc, but have opened our minds and freed ourselves from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

Great post, honest, to the point and accurate

Raggy, Sorry to disapoint you but I'm not going to enter into a slanging match. If you can't debate with an educated and adult mind then perhaps you should go and join a different topic or forum.

Raggamuffin wrote:

You can make them cheer across the screen too, FTL showed me that:

stardesk wrote:Have it your way, mate, I'm not going to enter into a slanging match. If you can't debate with an educated and adult mind then perhaps you should go and join a different topic or forum.

So you can sit here and patronise those with religious faith with impunity? I don't think so. There's nothing educated or adult about imposing your own interpretation on why people have faith and then complaining when you're challenged on it.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You can make them cheer across the screen too, FTL showed me that:

I like that, but my cheerleaders are too lazy to move.

Before I log off I'd just like to say thank you to those members who have supported me. Thanks folks.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Eilzel wrote:No. It would be an understandable interest. Especially since that question currently has no conclusive answer.

I know I have always been gay; but I don't know why. Of course others might be interested in that.

You think it would be understandable if they thought about little else? Would you like it if they said you were "poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"?

umm
people say that and a lot worse about gay men,
Chirstians for example say they are Infected by Satan, should be killed and are going to burn forever in eternal torment
which is a little bit stronger than
"poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You think it would be understandable if they thought about little else? Would you like it if they said you were "poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"?

umm
people say that and a lot worse about gay men,
Chirstians for example say they are Infected by Satan, should be killed and are going to burn forever in eternal torment
which is a little bit stronger than
"poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"

Well I'm sure that gay men would object then, wouldn't they?

I don't know why people seem to think that Christians aren't allowed to say anything if someone is offensive about them.

stardesk wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant (1) etc, but have opened our minds (2) and freed ourselves (3) from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. (4) As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

::::rotgdflmmfa  

LOL
in response
1. Didge
2. only a little bit
3. by jumping into another cage
4. Sam Harris's Youtube videos...  I mean there was fundamentalist athiest adverts for sam harris on the sides of buses.

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You think it would be understandable if they thought about little else? Would you like it if they said you were "poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"?

umm
people say that and a lot worse about gay men,
Chirstians for example say they are Infected by Satan, should be killed and are going to burn forever in eternal torment
which is a little bit stronger than
"poor", "misguided", and "brain-washed"

Well I'm sure that gay men would object then, wouldn't they?

I don't know why people seem to think that Christians aren't allowed to say anything if someone is offensive about them.

they do but the iorony is that you compalin louder than les, when the offense is less...

besides I do agree about the arrogance of some 'New athiests' 

christians are just wrong (the Bible is factually incorrect) so contiuned faith in something that is wrong is just willful ignorance, which is just stupid.

veya_victaous wrote:

stardesk wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant (1) etc, but have opened our minds (2) and freed ourselves (3) from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. (4) As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

::::rotgdflmmfa  

LOL
in response
1. Didge
2. only a little bit
3. by jumping into another cage
4. Sam Harris's Youtube videos...  I mean there was fundamentalist athiest adverts for sam harris on the sides of buses.

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well I'm sure that gay men would object then, wouldn't they?

I don't know why people seem to think that Christians aren't allowed to say anything if someone is offensive about them.

they do but the iorony is that you compalin louder than les, when the offense is less...

besides I do agree about the arrogance of some 'New athiests' 

christians are just wrong (the Bible is factually incorrect) so contiuned faith in something that is wrong is just willful ignorance, which is just stupid.

This is nothing to do with Les. You're saying that because a Christian might have said something somewhere about a gay person, it's fine for atheists to be rude about all Christians. That makes no sense. It's like saying that if a black person treated someone badly, it's fine to be rude about all black people.

Christians are not wrong or stupid. I see that you're just as arrogant as Stardesk, and then you have the nerve to accuse Didge of being arrogant.

stardesk wrote:Quoting Raggy: 'you don't want anyone to challenge the arrogant and patronising attitude of some atheists.'

Raggy, we're not arrogant etc, but have opened our minds and freed ourselves from the chains of religious adherance. We don't go round knocking on people's doors preaching, we don't have services on tv. As has been said above, this forum, like many others, is for people to exchange knowledge, ideas, hobbies and etc etc. We talk frankly and open-minded, we like to discuss different subjects. None of us knows eveything and therefore we can all learn something from somone else. Most of us don't start abusing and criticizing others who don't follow the same pathway. We don't come on here with a view to deliberately cause trouble, therefore Raggy, if the cap doesn't fit, don't wear it. In other words if you don't like what we naughty Atheists are saying then go elsewhere.

What you mean is that when it comes to your hobby, only certain people are allowed to post about it - those who agree with you. However, I'm sure that if you disagreed with someone on another thread you'd say that it was a public forum and you are entitled to post where you like.

The point is that you did criticise people who don't follow the same pathway as you.

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well I'm sure that gay men would object then, wouldn't they?

I don't know why people seem to think that Christians aren't allowed to say anything if someone is offensive about them.

they do but the iorony is that you compalin louder than les, when the offense is less...

besides I do agree about the arrogance of some 'New athiests' 

christians are just wrong (the Bible is factually incorrect) so contiuned faith in something that is wrong is just willful ignorance, which is just stupid.

This is nothing to do with Les. You're saying that because a Christian might have said something somewhere about a gay person, it's fine for atheists to be rude about all Christians. That makes no sense. It's like saying that if a black person treated someone badly, it's fine to be rude about all black people.

Christians are not wrong or stupid. I see that you're just as arrogant as Stardesk, and then you have the nerve to accuse Didge of being arrogant.

You dont choose a skin colour you do choose to belong to a religion
so they are not comparable

Yes they are Wrong, Simple question does the sun revolve around the earth?
Bible and therefore Christians say yes... It doesn't therefore that makes them Wrong.
Now since it isn't 2000 years ago and that knowledge is readily available and actively taught as it being fact is required for things like space travel, GPS satellites, the tides, the seasons, Physics in general.

TO Willfully deny All those things that you can see in real life because of a 2000 year old fairy tale can be describe in no other way than Stupidity.

I am arrogant I'm half french what do you expect

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

This is nothing to do with Les. You're saying that because a Christian might have said something somewhere about a gay person, it's fine for atheists to be rude about all Christians. That makes no sense. It's like saying that if a black person treated someone badly, it's fine to be rude about all black people.

Christians are not wrong or stupid. I see that you're just as arrogant as Stardesk, and then you have the nerve to accuse Didge of being arrogant.

You dont choose a skin colour you do choose to belong to a religon
so they are not comparable

Yes they are Wrong, Simpel question does the sun revovle around the earth?
Bible and therefore Christans say yes... It doesn't therefore thant makes them Wrong.
Now since it isn't 2000 years ago and that knowledge is readly available and activily taught as it beign fact is requitred for things like space travel, GPS satalites, the tides, the seasons, Physics in general.

TO Willfilly deny All those things that you can see in real life because of a 2000 year old fairytale can be decirbe in no other way than Stupidity.

I am arrgoant I'm half frnech what do you expect 

I see you completely missed the point as usual. The point is that you are assuming that all Christians have said the stuff that you referred to. That is comparable to pointing the finger at all members of any group if one of them says something you don't like. That includes racial groups.

The other point is that some arrogant atheists think they have the right to criticise someone merely for having religious faith, but if that person challenges them, that's not OK to them. Stardesk is an example of such a person.

Raggs, above you claimed you are not misguided. By default then you are claiming Zack (and any Muslim), and anyone who doesn't follow your branch of Christianity, IS misguided. You understand that don't you?

Raggamuffin wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

This is nothing to do with Les. You're saying that because a Christian might have said something somewhere about a gay person, it's fine for atheists to be rude about all Christians. That makes no sense. It's like saying that if a black person treated someone badly, it's fine to be rude about all black people.

Christians are not wrong or stupid. I see that you're just as arrogant as Stardesk, and then you have the nerve to accuse Didge of being arrogant.

You dont choose a skin colour you do choose to belong to a religion
so they are not comparable

Yes they are Wrong, Simple question does the sun revolve around the earth?
Bible and therefore Christians say yes... It doesn't therefore that makes them Wrong.
Now since it isn't 2000 years ago and that knowledge is readily available and actively taught as it being fact is required for things like space travel, GPS satellites, the tides, the seasons, Physics in general.

TO Willfully deny All those things that you can see in real life because of a 2000 year old fairy tale can be describe in no other way than Stupidity.

I am arrogant I'm half french what do you expect 

I see you completely missed the point as usual. The point is that you are assuming that all Christians have said the stuff that you referred to. That is comparable to pointing the finger at all members of any group if one of them says something you don't like. That includes racial groups.

The other point is that some arrogant atheists think they have the right to criticise someone merely for having religious faith, but if that person challenges them, that's not OK to them. Stardesk is an example of such a person.

Umm Raggs
Christians are Are Group Defined by their belief in the BIBLE
SO YES I can point the finger AT ALL CHRISTIANS
If they do not believe that then they are not Christian by the fact they do not believe in the bible

Raggs, and everyone else, please try to understand, it's not a case of being arrogant, and deliberately picking on Christians. What I try to do is highlight the falsehood and misleading accounts in parts of the Bible. Which is a lot different to going out in the street and pointing at a Christian, and/or other faith followers, and calling them fools. I try logically and factually to present the case for Evolutionists.

OK?

Perhaps some religious people don't "follow the book".
Do you have to "follow the book" to be religious?

stardesk wrote:Raggs, and everyone else, please try to understand, it's not a case of being arrogant, and deliberately picking on Christians. What I try to do is highlight the falsehood and misleading accounts in parts of the Bible. Which is a lot different to going out in the street and pointing at a Christian, and/or other faith followers, and calling them fools. I try logically and factually to present the case for Evolutionists.

OK?

You said they were brainwashed and misguided, which is basically calling them fools. Do you think that Christians can't think for themselves? Of course if they don't follow the whole of the New Testament some people will say they're cherry picking, so they can't win. That is their business though, and it shouldn't be followed up by accusations that they're not "real Christians", or that they're cherry picking. Those who do not have any faith simply do not have the qualifications to decide what Christians should believe or not.

You can follow whichever path you like, but when you start judging others who follow a different path to you, you sound arrogant and patronising.

Eilzel wrote:Raggs, above you claimed you are not misguided. By default then you are claiming Zack (and any Muslim), and anyone who doesn't follow your branch of Christianity, IS misguided. You understand that don't you?

Do I understand that? Do you think I've five years old or something? Of course I understand what you mean, but I would not tell Zack he was misguided, or imply that he was a fool to have a different belief to me. I have to say that Zack has not criticised Christians on here or said that they are wrong in any way. Perhaps many people with religious faith are a lot more tolerant and less judgemental than those who do not.

The Pope has faith, so I guess qualifications. Does he get to decide who is Christian and who isn't?

And I'll look at strongly religious societies and strongly atheistic ones to decide who is more tolerant,

Norway and Sweden currently looking pretty good besides Nigeria and Iran it must be said lol

Eilzel wrote:The Pope has faith, so I guess qualifications. Does he get to decide who is Christian and who isn't?

And I'll look at strongly religious societies and strongly atheistic ones to decide who is more tolerant,

Norway and Sweden currently looking pretty good besides Nigeria and Iran it must be said lol

No he does not. I'm not a Catholic. However, that doesn't mean I would call a Catholic a fool or "brainwashed".

Looking at this forum, I conclude that the most intolerant people on here are the atheists. Of course you don't think of it as intolerance because you'll always find some reason to claim that religion is harmful, but we're not talking about that, we're talking about just having faith. Some of you can't seem to bear anyone to believe something that you don't believe.

Let me try to explain my attitude. It's not knocking a person, not trying to hurt them, but trying to get them to see the realities of this world and its history, trying to help them get to grips with life and strengthen their mental capabilities and resolve, and take control of their lives, instead of hoping an unreal deity is going to help them.

Many people of various religious sects do have a high opinion of themselves and a self-righteous attitude when talking to non-believers.
Just because they believe in a god they then believe he really does exist, and that all the foundations of their belief are firm and solid and factual, when in reality those foundations are badly flawed. Where Atheists are concerned we deal with facts, proven facts, with knowledge, not what we want to believe. Thus, whether I want to believe or not, we now know that Dinosaurs roamed the Earth until they were extinguished by an Asteroid. We know that 'The Flood' could never have happened as described in Genesis. We know that several species of animals returned to the sea. We know that some animals began growing feathers and eventually became birds.

There are many cases like the above which prove my point, that followers of the Bible are mislead, and yes, in some sects, brainwashed. But saying what I have said here, doesn't make me arrogant, but just making a proved and factual point. I hope now that my critics will understand that and not put it down to arrogance.

stardesk wrote:Let me try to explain my attitude. It's not knocking a person, not trying to hurt them, but trying to get them to see the realities of this world and its history, trying to help them get to grips with life and strengthen their mental capabilities and resolve, and take control of their lives, instead of hoping an unreal deity is going to help them.

Many people of various religious sects do have a high opinion of themselves and a self-righteous attitude when talking to non-believers.
Just because they believe in a god they then believe he really does exist, and that all the foundations of their belief are firm and solid and factual, when in reality those foundations are badly flawed. Where Atheists are concerned we deal with facts, proven facts, with knowledge, not what we want to believe. Thus, whether I want to believe or not, we now know that Dinosaurs roamed the Earth until they were extinguished by an Asteroid. We know that 'The Flood' could never have happened as described in Genesis. We know that several species of animals returned to the sea. We know that some animals began growing feathers and eventually became birds.

There are many cases like the above which prove my point, that followers of the Bible are mislead, and yes, in some sects, brainwashed. But saying what I have said here, doesn't make me arrogant, but just making a proved and factual point. I hope now that my critics will understand that and not put it down to arrogance.

Look, to someone with religious faith, they're already in touch with the realities of the world, and they can sort their own lives out. They don't need someone telling them that if they drop their faith they'll have a "real" life.

I'm sure you wouldn't like a religious person going up to you and trying to convince you that you'd be much happier if you believed in God.

Why don't you leave people alone and let them be the best judge of what makes them happy? Assuming that your way is best is arrogant.

Raggamuffin wrote:

stardesk wrote:Let me try to explain my attitude. It's not knocking a person, not trying to hurt them, but trying to get them to see the realities of this world and its history, trying to help them get to grips with life and strengthen their mental capabilities and resolve, and take control of their lives, instead of hoping an unreal deity is going to help them.

Many people of various religious sects do have a high opinion of themselves and a self-righteous attitude when talking to non-believers.
Just because they believe in a god they then believe he really does exist, and that all the foundations of their belief are firm and solid and factual, when in reality those foundations are badly flawed. Where Atheists are concerned we deal with facts, proven facts, with knowledge, not what we want to believe. Thus, whether I want to believe or not, we now know that Dinosaurs roamed the Earth until they were extinguished by an Asteroid. We know that 'The Flood' could never have happened as described in Genesis. We know that several species of animals returned to the sea. We know that some animals began growing feathers and eventually became birds.

There are many cases like the above which prove my point, that followers of the Bible are mislead, and yes, in some sects, brainwashed. But saying what I have said here, doesn't make me arrogant, but just making a proved and factual point. I hope now that my critics will understand that and not put it down to arrogance.

Look, to someone with religious faith, they're already in touch with the realities of the world, and they can sort their own lives out. They don't need someone telling them that if they drop their faith they'll have a "real" life.

I'm sure you wouldn't like a religious person going up to you and trying to convince you that you'd be much happier if you believed in God.

Why don't you leave people alone and let them be the best judge of what makes them happy? Assuming that your way is best is arrogant.

Have to answer before I go

The above is a falsehood, as have you ever told a a christian to stop preaching and trying to convert someone and to leave them alone?

No

The fact is for centuries preists, Imans, preachers etc have never left people alone to their own buisness and converted people, so there is nothing wrong with Stardesk, being able to speak his views to others.
A christian attempting to convert a Muslims, does not respect the Muslim faith, they will try to prove its wrong in every way possible.

Either you accept Stardesk has a right to question and say his views or you need to ban every faith from doing the same..,.

And we do not have to even limit religion to this, your political views, your views on animals, your views on women, on men, on homosexuals. What you are fundementally saying is you have a right to question others beliefs or who they are, but others cannot when they conflict with yours or who you are.

That is flawed

Ever heard the phrase

stuck between a rock and a hard place

I'm not particularly interested in discussing this with anyone except Stardesk, who is the person who made the patronising remark in the first place.

To be honest, I already feel like I'm casting pearls before swine as it is.

Lol that has to be the biggest copout excuse I have ever heard


Like i say Rags, if you are able to speak your mind, you cannot stop or ask others doing the same

You have to then ask the same of anyone religious, who's main objective is to convert everyone when they are a literal believer.

@Stardesk, feel free to use my reasoning

Stardesk seems very keen to convince me that he's not being arrogant, but has failed so far.

He is the least arrogant person you will hope to find more than many here

Your claim to arrogance is misplaced, its based on you again not liking his views, which means the fault lies with you Rags.
For a start, Stardesk, can very much admit at being wrong or in error or top have made a mistake, which is not a sign of arrogance.
That is not the trait of arrogance, it is the opposite

It's up to Stardesk to convince me, if he wants to. If he fails and keeps saying the same thing, I'll keep telling him that he's being arrogant.

He does not need to convince you, that is impossible, you are already convinced of religion. Only you yourself would have to allow doubt to setin. Which I doubt would be possible, if you are as strong willed as you claim to be. There is no chance of being manipulated and thus no harm of Stardesk expressing his views

Now either you are a strong willed woman and can take anything thrown your way, or you are weak willed and thus easily manipulated?

What ever way you look at this, its you having the problem, not stardesk

Sorry, one last thing

The floor then is all yours Stardesk as it seems there is now no issue for you to speak.

Nobody can ever seem to answer a psychological kobayashi maru.


All the best