| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Glenn Arnold" |
| Date: |
25 Apr 2005 08:29:48 PM |
| Object: |
Power of prayer |
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
.
|
|
| User: "Doc Smartass" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
25 Apr 2005 09:36:56 PM |
|
|
Glenn Arnold <oldnoah@att.net> wrote in news:426D998B.56D84090@att.net:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Sometimes the answer is 'no.' </fundie>
--
Dr. Smartass -- BAAWA Knight of Heckling -- a.a. #1939
Tesserasshole: When someone is such an ***** that he stretches into the
Fourth Dimension. (D. C. Davis)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "FreeThink" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
25 Apr 2005 08:44:34 PM |
|
|
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Peacenik" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
25 Apr 2005 11:14:40 PM |
|
|
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114479874.111312.263790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
Only because it has a placebo affect.
This cannot be the case in secret prayer where others are making decisions
that affect you.
.
|
|
|
| User: "FreeThink" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
25 Apr 2005 11:20:38 PM |
|
|
Peacenik wrote:
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114479874.111312.263790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the
ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive
effect on
the person doing the praying.
Only because it has a placebo affect.
This cannot be the case in secret prayer where others are making
decisions
that affect you.
I agree with you hypothetically.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "kathryn" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 10:01:48 AM |
|
|
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114479874.111312.263790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
So does taking a placebo drug
.
|
|
|
| User: "sdq" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 02:42:39 PM |
|
|
kathryn wrote:
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1114479874.111312.263790@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
So does taking a placebo drug
Yea I could go for a big placebo spliff just about now :-)
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "navi-gater" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
25 Apr 2005 09:13:52 PM |
|
|
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1114479874.111312.263790
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
The only thing statistically proven by that laughable sham is the
gullibility of the religious.
gater.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 09:38:18 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 02:13:52 GMT, "navi-gater" <gater@the-gate.net>
wrote:
"FreeThink" <zeno7772004@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1114479874.111312.263790
@l41g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
Glenn Arnold wrote:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/04/25/pope.monday/index.html
God always answers... Wait, the pope has a direct line to... umm.
Glenn Arnold
Actually, (I don't have the links but..) , I have read that the ritual
of prayer has been statistically proven to have some positive effect on
the person doing the praying.
The only thing statistically proven by that laughable sham is the
gullibility of the religious.
There is some truth in that as prayer could have a placebo affect
for those that really do believe making them feel better than they
actually might be. The problem is that some refuse proper medical help
thinking that prayer is all they need. This is particulary prevalent
amongst diabetics who do not take medicine but rely on prayer.
The problem with type 2 diabetes is that the effects are long term
and the damage is being done whilst you don't feel any ill
effects in the short term. You have to do what your doctor advises and
take any medicine he prescribes and follow a sensible diet.
I have heard stories about Lourdes, no cites since I cannot
recall where so I cannot confirm the truth of this:. Cripples are
conned into thinking they have been cured, throw their crutches away
(they are placed in piles) then are refused their return by nuns when
they try to leave and find out the cold reality.
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Robibnikoff" |
|
| Title: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 09:50:15 AM |
|
|
"Les Hellawell" <myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote in message
news:vqjs61dmrqun9dksqsk6g703utkbm261du@4ax.com...
snip
Begin nominated portion:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
End
Any seconds?
--
------
Robyn
Resident Witchypoo
Bride of Satan
#1557
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 05:18:40 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kathy" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 06:18:40 PM |
|
|
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4fft611famr1vi99mmaotn2njr95osjvqq@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
duke
Why do you imagine anyone here cares what you think about anything?
Kathy aa #1802
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
28 Apr 2005 12:53:17 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:18:40 -0400, "Kathy" <k.knight@rogers.com>
wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4fft611famr1vi99mmaotn2njr95osjvqq@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
duke
Why do you imagine anyone here cares what you think about anything?
Puke hasn't two functioning neurons to her name.
Kathy aa #1802
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 05:07:01 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 19:18:40 -0400, "Kathy" <k.knight@rogers.com> wrote:
"duke" <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote in message
news:4fft611famr1vi99mmaotn2njr95osjvqq@4ax.com...
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
duke
Why do you imagine anyone here cares what you think about anything?
You're wrong. I can help.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Steve Knight" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 07:41:46 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:18:40 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
Puke, the least you can do is stay out of atheist only subjects.
What we do among ourselves is not your business and making comments is
rude. If you need to blather something then start an original subject
thread.
Warlord Steve
BAAWA
www.sonic.net/~wooly
.
|
|
|
| User: "Kate " |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 09:12:10 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 00:41:46 GMT, Steve Knight <wooly@sonic.net>
wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:18:40 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
Puke, the least you can do is stay out of atheist only subjects.
What we do among ourselves is not your business and making comments is
rude. If you need to blather something then start an original subject
thread.
He's just too desperate for out attention. Pathetic, isn't it?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 05:09:39 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 00:41:46 GMT, Steve Knight <wooly@sonic.net> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 17:18:40 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff" <witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
Puke, the least you can do is stay out of atheist only subjects.
What we do among ourselves is not your business and making comments is
rude. If you need to blather something then start an original subject
thread.
What "atheist only"?
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "snex" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
26 Apr 2005 05:22:19 PM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 10:50:15 -0400, "Robibnikoff"
<witchypoo@broomstick.com>
wrote:
Religion is, of course about a flight from reality - the way
things
are - to a make believe word where things are what they want
them to be. It is a human weakness. We would all like to
win the lottery and perhaps dream of life aboard our luxury
yacht but then we wake up and return to the daily grind.
Actually the entire position of "no God" is by far the biggest flight
from
reality. It is totally unsupported, unsubstantiated, and
unbelievable.
You should really nominate it for the false aqotm.
Any seconds?
Not a chance.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
.
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 AM |
|
|
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 06:22:08 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god' is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrate
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
Thank you
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Veruyu" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 02:40:36 PM |
|
|
Les Hellawell wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god' is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrate
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup, Les?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 04:01:13 PM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2005 12:40:36 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net> wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god' is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrate
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup, Les?
Affirmation of believe in the existence of a god? Hardly!
I am here because I enjoy reading the opinions of others and
find great amusement from what the Christians say. I just
love to see how their pathetic attempts to push their religion
on us is so easily dismissed but find it sad that they are
poor losers. Of course all newsgroups have people who
show no respect for others and resort to insult and filth
but fortunately they are in the minority here. The standard
of conduct is unusually high in this group which adds to
its attraction. If there is one thing I hate is some prat coming
in with an insult which can destroy days of patient debate
giving the opponent the ideal opportunity to escape wiggle
off the hook and escape. To me it is a source of wonder the
opinions that people hold often starkly contrasing even when
from the same evidence. I just cannot understand why people
accept this Christian mythology when to me it looks so patently
false and does not even hold together as a credible story.
AA is by no means the only newsgroup I have subscribed
to over the years and I also subscribe to several closed forums on
a wide variety of subjects and greatly enjoy communicating
with people. I never miss the letters page in the newspapers
I read though I rarely contribute. An enjoyable hobby I
guess.
Incidentally I realised I was atheist when at school and
for over thirty years of my life it was never in my mind
and I had no thoughts at all concerning mythology and gods
(though I do enjoy visiting religious building for their
art and architecture - as you know Europe has a rich
cultural and historic heritage). I discovered a.a. late in life and it
is true it has allowed me to clarify my thoughts.
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Veruyu" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 04:21:12 PM |
|
|
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 12:40:36 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and
to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god'
is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to
share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrate
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup,
Les?
Affirmation of believe in the existence of a god?
No, Les. You don't understand.
You are here to be affirmed by your fellow atheists. You are here to
be affirmed and validated in your disbelief by others who share your
disbelief.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 05:27:14 PM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2005 14:21:12 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 12:40:36 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 05:06:10 -0500, duke <duckgumbo32@cox.net>
wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and
to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god'
is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to
share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrate
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup,
Les?
Affirmation of believe in the existence of a god?
No, Les. You don't understand.
You are here to be affirmed by your fellow atheists. You are here to
be affirmed and validated in your disbelief by others who share your
disbelief.
Another one telling us what we think.
No respect whatsover here.
If you lack respect for me and my views then I can hardly be
expected to respect you in return and this is no basis for
a dialogue.
Sorry but if you cannot accept my sincerity and start telling me what
I think and claim I am in denial if I say it is not true (calling me
a liar by inference) lthen there is nothing further I can say to
you and I care not for what you say.
How depressing it is when people act like this for no good reason.
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Veruyu" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
02 May 2005 06:33:27 AM |
|
|
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 14:21:12 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 12:40:36 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com>
wrote:
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion
that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup,
Les?
Affirmation of believe in the existence of a god?
No, Les. You don't understand.
You are here to be affirmed by your fellow atheists. You are here
to
be affirmed and validated in your disbelief by others who share your
disbelief.
Another one telling us what we think.
No respect whatsover here.
LOL! Les, you just got finished telling theists what *they "think" by
asserting that that they need "priests" giving constant affirmation
lest they grow weak in the faith.
If you lack respect for me and my views then I can hardly be
expected to respect you in return and this is no basis for
a dialogue.
Cry me a river, Les. You've proved you're not capable of having a
"dialogue" where religion is concerned.
Sorry but if you cannot accept my sincerity and start telling me what
I think and claim I am in denial if I say it is not true (calling me
a liar by inference) lthen there is nothing further I can say to
you and I care not for what you say.
Does that mean I shouldn't expect any more responses from you?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
02 May 2005 08:40:44 AM |
|
|
On 2 May 2005 04:33:27 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 14:21:12 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 30 Apr 2005 12:40:36 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com>
wrote:
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion
that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
'Constant affirmation'? Isn't that why you're in this newsgroup,
Les?
Affirmation of believe in the existence of a god?
No, Les. You don't understand.
You are here to be affirmed by your fellow atheists. You are here
to
be affirmed and validated in your disbelief by others who share your
disbelief.
Another one telling us what we think.
No respect whatsover here.
LOL! Les, you just got finished telling theists what *they "think" by
asserting that that they need "priests" giving constant affirmation
lest they grow weak in the faith.
Based on eyewitness reports in Vatican Square. One group
of interviewees (before the coclave began) said they were lost
without a pope and the second interviewee, (after the white smoke
emerged but before the new Pope was announced) a Catholic priest - no
less - hoped that the first thing the new Pope would do is reaffirm
his faith. So it seems without a leader to guide them their faith
fades. Is this a wrong interpretation?
Just you see them all anxiously rushing towards Vatican square
when the news about the white smoke broke?
If you lack respect for me and my views then I can hardly be
expected to respect you in return and this is no basis for
a dialogue.
Cry me a river, Les. You've proved you're not capable of having a
"dialogue" where religion is concern
My whole ability to debate with you about gods rest on you
demonstrating your basis for knowing their is a god. I still await
your answer. I will repeat the question again below in case you have
conveniently forgotten
Sorry but if you cannot accept my sincerity and start telling me what
I think and claim I am in denial if I say it is not true (calling me
a liar by inference) lthen there is nothing further I can say to
you and I care not for what you say.
Does that mean I shouldn't expect any more responses from you?
Is there a basis for dialogue? Here is the question again:
<quote>
As I keep trying to explain to you I am not making a comment on
a supposed god but this concept you have of a god which you
never explain the origin of. I aak again. where does this supposed
knowledge (or concept) of a god come from? It must have come
from somewhere for you to be able to claim it exists. Is this some
kind of secret or something? Is there some kind of non disclosure
agreement that you make promising never to reveal where you
got you knowledge of the existence of this god from?
Well, whatever, you clearly don't wish to tell me, otherwise you would
have done so by now.
I am sorry but unless you are willing to reveal this great secret
there is nothing else to talk about concerning gods.
</quote>
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "duke" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
01 May 2005 08:13:32 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 12:22:08 +0100, Les Hellawell
<myshredder@leswell.freeuk.com> wrote:
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
As you have finally admitted, all evidence demands that.
You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
No, of course not.
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
I've told you that over and over.
1. All evidence - which you now agree with.
2. Eternal love and sharing in the glory of God.
This is the default it needs no support. It is your religion that
needs to be propped up with irrational 'faith' which you seem
to need constant affirmation of by priests lest it starts to
fade and you loose control of yourself
Sorry, default definitely needs support. I have evidence - you have none.
Thank you
duke
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Veruyu" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 05:10:23 AM |
|
|
duke wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Actually the "default" position is total ignorance of the concept of
God. Once confronted with the concept and some evidence, a mind will
either believe or disbelieve.
These days atheists use the "lack of belief" to avoid having to defend
their disbelief. Or maybe they've simply gotten lazy....
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
29 Apr 2005 06:26:12 AM |
|
|
On 29 Apr 2005 03:10:23 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
duke wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Actually the "default" position is total ignorance of the concept of
God. Once confronted with the concept and some evidence, a mind will
either believe or disbelieve.
That is basically correct. We all share this same ignorance which
makes we womder where this concept of a god originates. It looks
very much like an argument from ignorance
These days atheists use the "lack of belief" to avoid having to defend
their disbelief. Or maybe they've simply gotten lazy....
Your post is predicated on this concept you have of a god.
Before I can consider you post you first need to establish
that your concept is valid. Can you please expain what this 'god' is
and where you got this notion of a god from? If you wish me to share
your belief and then consider your argument it is surely not
unreasonable for me to ask you give me some
evidence that demonstrates that this concept is not just
pure fantasy and is based on some evidence that demonstrates
the origins of this concept. You are surely not expecting us to
accept this god simply on your say so (or assertion) are you?
Think about it, that not an unreasonable request for any
intelligent person to make.
Once you have demonstrated a good reason for us to
share your belief then we have some grounds for discussion
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
| User: "Veruyu" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 02:39:06 PM |
|
|
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 29 Apr 2005 03:10:23 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
duke wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Actually the "default" position is total ignorance of the concept of
God. Once confronted with the concept and some evidence, a mind will
either believe or disbelieve.
That is basically correct. We all share this same ignorance which
makes we womder where this concept of a god originates. It looks
very much like an argument from ignorance
No, you are not ignorant of the concept of God. You have encountered it
-repeatedly encountered it - and have chosen, for your own reason, to
not believe.
That is NOT the same as 'lacking belief'.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Les Hellawell" |
|
| Title: Re: AQOTM Nomination: Power of prayer |
30 Apr 2005 03:42:03 PM |
|
|
On 30 Apr 2005 12:39:06 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
Les Hellawell wrote:
On 29 Apr 2005 03:10:23 -0700, "Veruyu" <rcman777@excite.com> wrote:
duke wrote:
On 26 Apr 2005 15:22:19 -0700, "snex" <snex@comcast.net> wrote:
actually the position of "no god" is the default position, and to
move
from that position requires evidence. no such evidence has been
provided, and so our position cannot move.
Can't be the default. It's total unsupported.
Actually the "default" position is total ignorance of the concept of
God. Once confronted with the concept and some evidence, a mind will
either believe or disbelieve.
That is basically correct. We all share this same ignorance which
makes we womder where this concept of a god originates. It looks
very much like an argument from ignorance
No, you are not ignorant of the concept of God. You have encountered it
-repeatedly encountered it - and have chosen, for your own reason, to
not believe.
Well obviously we are aware of your concept of a god but what we
are not aware of is where this concept originates or on what grounds
it is based. As I say it seems to me to have been created out of
nothing or ignorance a pure fantasy or invention conjured up to
fill a void.
For example: The very first page of the Bible says, "In the beginning
god...
Yet the author of this is unknown and makes no attempt to explain
where his knowledge of this god came from or that it did what he says
He certainly was not present when this claimed event took place so how
could he possibly know? As I say there is no attempt to explain how he
knows. Without any supporting evidence whatsoever I can only assume he
made this up and that the rest of this book is equally bogus.
From what I have read much is just assertion by the authors. We
are surely not expected to accept it 'just like' that are we. Are
we supposed to suspend judgement and intelligence or summat?
Until you can provide me some evidence to demonstrate what
gives rise to this concept of a god that you tell us about I will
remain unconvinced. Surely it is not unreasonable for me to ask for
some means whereby I can distinquish the truth from what looks
like and most likely is pure fantasy by the author.
That is NOT the same as 'lacking belief'.
If you wish me to believe this concept you have of a god really
exists then give me some valid reason to do so. I do not
even require proof just valid reasons and not simply assertion.
You are surely not asking me to believe something just on your
say so? That would be an outrageous demand.
--
Les Hellawell
greetings from
YORKSHIRE - The White Rose County
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
