Is there a God?

ohhhga,to love god isn,t a decision taken on an interlectuall level. so no amount of writings by academic non believers will prove anything.God has to be felt .if they havn,t felt god then they are in no postition to know of his power.a bit like me telling you about the feeling of pride you get when you see cardiff run out at the ccs.i wouldn,t understand totally as i,m not a ccfc fan.Religon is different to faith.a religon is for example catholic,c of e,baptist etc.faith is faith in what all those religons are supposed to practice.jesus/god ,the holy spirit .there are people in churches who are religous ,by that i mean they follow what the church tells them but it doesn,t mean they have unswerving faith(in what the bible teaches).some christians are raised from a baby in the faith.others like myself went away from faith,messed my life up ,hit a rock bottom then found a place where i could get help.my faith has built from there.so an academic non believer has zero knowledge of what it feels to be cleansed/forgiven if you like.i can see quite clearly at one stage i believed of god but not in him and certainly had no faith.to me if there if no god then we started from nothing are going nowhere and life means nothing.i believe totally in the right for a non believer to not believe.jesus wants people to come to him,not to be forced to come to him.[/quote]

^Never a truer word spoken on this site! Amen brother amen.

no not really its how you bring up your child, most things kids do wrong are of no real consequence but you have to install a level of morality and a vision of right and wrong. Hell is described as a scary place where you will be punished for a life time of wrong doings. Put it into context when I was a kid and I did something wrong my mum used to threaten me with the back of her hand or her slipper. Now if she said it to me now id probably laugh but when when I was very young that was a very scary prospect, but even now as it was when I was a child going to hell is a very prospect so I try to live my life as best I can. You do however miss out one huge side of this argument and thats forgiveness of sin and the idea of your slate being wiped clean so to speak. Most of the sacraments are based on forgiveness.

why does the catholic church do to anger you? and why dont you include other christian denominations. The Catholic church takes the blame of a lot failings in the christian church but they are not always to blame.
if you look at Gay marriage, its not the catholic church who are so against it with some pretty poor arguments you might want to look at the anglicans for that. As far as im concerned God created every individual if your gay your gay if your straight your straight. The Catholic church has the same opinion the same rules apply to every individual and gay people are not discriminated against. Marriage is a holy sacrament and prepares a couple to raise a family. Gay people cant do this not because they are emotionally incapable of raising a family its because they biologically cant produce children. As for civil marriage personally I dont see the difference between marriage and a civil partnership but if they want to call it marriage go for it doesnt bother me in the slightest.
Condoms, well if the church allows the use of condoms they might as well throw away their beliefs out of the window. Sex is for the procreation of children if you allow contraceptives your giving sex a whole other meaning.
Abortion, well its a living human being I dont see why we should justify murder because in the majority of cases being pregnant is inconvenient or something I discovered the other day the wrong sex. Why is having a boy more inconvenient to having a girl?
You are saying the bible is wrong when you keep saying its archaic and old. Though ill remind you the book will always remain but the way its interpreted is continually changing and is revised on many occasions.
You cant keep saying that people had limited knowledge and understanding they understood the world as it was. Even with technological and scientific advancements, the same questions remain who are we and where did we come from, the base questions still havent been answered today as they couldnt be answered thousands of years ago.

Yes religion is man-made but faith isnt. Why do people blame something when there isnt anyone to blame, or who are you asking for help when no one can help you. Who are you talking to when you ask why me? when something goes wrong, surely thats just the luck of the draw. Who are you asking for help when you enter an exam or a war-zone or a difficult situation and you utter those words to yourself i need help to get through this. Whether you rationalise faith as being an intervention from God to get you through things or just the belief in your own ability to get the job done faith is real and its the basis of every religion in the world.

You must surely be able to differentiate between the 'back of a slipper', and the constant fear of eternal and nightmarish torture? More so from a child's perspective? How you can compare the two is beyond me, and only goes to prove how religion turns honest and fair people into repugnant and immoral beings. Threatening an impressionable child with such hideous images cannot be justified, and I simply will not accept the excuse of 'well I believe it'. That's fine and is not my concern, but there is no need to scare and frighten young children, none whatsoever.

Also, can you stop miscontruing what I am saying? It's wholly infuriating. Stating that something is old (correct) and archaic (correct) is not the same as saying it is wrong.

Oh be realistic, of course they had a limited understanding of the world around them, the people of BC knew a tiny fraction of what we do today and almost every scientific claim from that epoch has been disproven. You claim that the question of where we came from has not been answered, however the question was answered for many with the publication of 'On the Origin of Species' and has been further answered through greater scientific understanding and advancements.

With regards to abortion, condoning it (as I do) does not mean I condone China's one-child policy as you seem to be implying. What nonsense. If my partner was pregnant, we would be first in line for an abortion as having a child is simply not a possibility at present. However we find contraception to be more effective, a subject I will later discuss. Either way, who are the Catholic church to dictate whether abortions are just? How many Popes, Priests, Arch-bishops or Bishops will ever require an abortion? The opinion of Catholics on is of no value.

So you ask, why does the Catholic church anger me? Let me tell you.

I must clarify something beforehand, I have no issue with personal devotion and faith. This is fine, understandable, and a basic right of which every human must always be allowed. This is not, in any way, an attack on the individual.

The Catholic church holds responsibility for the Crusades, the Inquisition, the persecution of the Jewish people, the torture of Gallileo, the repression and maltreatment of women (that's half the human race in other words) and the forced conversion of indigenous people; most notably in South America. Furthermore, Catholicism has blood on its hands from the African Slave trade, as well as the Third Reich's attempted elimination of the Jewish race; in which the Catholic church remained all too quiet during Hitler's 'Final solution' (Anti-Semitism was preached as an official doctrine of the Church until 1964; simply grotesque).

How many people were burned and tortured in this country as a result of Catholicism? Individuals were actually killed, maimed and tortured for owning a Bible in their own language, English. Ludicrous. Well, you might say, that was a long time ago. I presume you've heard of Thomas Moore, one of the principal burners responsible for the deaths of those who dared to own an English Bible. Only last century he was made a Saint by the Catholic Church and it was only in the year 2000 that the Pope made him the Patron Saint of Politicians. This is a man who tortured and burnt those who simply wanted to read the Bible in English.

It doesn't end there, there are smaller but equally deplorable examples of monstrosity in both the past and present records of Catholicism. Firstly, the institutionalisation of the rape, the torture and the maltreatment of many children across the globe is both odious and inexcusable. These include orphans in Church run schools in almost every country on earth, from Ireland to Australia, and such heinous crimes continue to occur on a regular basis today.

What about Rwanda? The most Catholic country in Africa. Here, Catholic Priests, Nuns and Bishops are on trial for inciting the massacre of their fellow people through pulpits, churches as well as media such as radio and newspapers. Staying with the African theme, the Catholic church were happy to declare that AIDS is a terrible disease, which it obviously is. However in their eyes it's not quite as bad as condoms and contraceptives, which are in some form more immoral then the disease they prevent. It is for this reason that the rhetoric of the Catholic church is directly responsible for the deaths of millions across the continent.

Of course, in your eyes, condoms would give intercourse 'a 'whole other meaning'. What, such as pleasure? Dolphins have intercourse for pleasure my friend, as humans have done for centuries. It is a primary impulse and perfectly healthy, yet the Cathlolic church is unwilling to accept this basic fact. Insisting instead to stubbornly scorn the use of contraceptives, as sexual intercourse for pleasure and love is evidently more immoral than the mass genocide of millions of Africans. So much so, that the Pope actually spreads the lie, the shameful lie, that condoms actually increase the likelihood of AIDS and HIV. The Catholic church should not only feel utterly ashamed, but should issue a direct apology and plea for forgiveness.

I find it shocking that you try to defer the discrimination of homosexuals from the Catholic church; which is of course the main perpetrator. Your church has condemned homosexuals for centuries, suggesting that they cannot and will not join, that they will not go to heaven, that they have sinned from birth because of who and what they are. The Catholic church branded and I quote, homosexuals as "disordered and morally evil individuals". This is inhuman, morally repugnant and disgraceful and your Church should feel utterly ashamed once again.

Even the the twisted, the neurotic and hysterical ways that the leaders of the Catholic church are chosen. The cellabacy, the nuns, the preisthood, it is quite simply not natural in the 21st century, not at all. Then we move on to the vulgar wealth, the disgusting hierachy of Bishops and Arch-Bishops, the possession of the money and treasures from the countries that they once raped and violated are all symbolic of the oligarchic form of the Catholic church.

This is why the Catholic church angers me, this is why I have zero respect for it as an institution, and this is why it should feel totally and utterly ashamed.

I dont really want to get into the past of the Catholic church not because I dont have a defence for it but we would be here for a very long time debating it.
I will only talk about the modern day church which could become an equally as long debate.

This is my religion I believe in its whole entirety with regards to pedophilia yes I agree it is disgusting and all efforts should be made to try and eradicate it, but the catholic church are not the only organisation which has pedophiles within its ranks but because the catholic church is one of few organisations that adhere to celibacy and being one of the largest religions in the world they get a huge amount of attention. Whether you believe pedophilia is a mental disorder or just some evil people satisfying their base instincts with children, its wrong and deserves to be punished. Though I will say its all to easy to accuse priests of pedophilia with no proof at all because labels stick. Thats not me saying every priest is innocent but like in this country there are people who get falsely accused. Priests are human beings and are capable of the same evils that you and I are capable of.
With regards to AIDs im not a medical expert or a disease expert but surely as the main cause of AIDs contraction is sexual intercourse would it not make sense that if you are in the unfortunate situation of having AIDs would it not be better to abstain from sex rather than risk the health of your sexual partner?
I dont see discrimination of homosexuals in the modern catholic church and in the past discrimination was no different from discrimination at the time. I know many gay catholics who are against gay marriage because they believe their religious right are at risk and they are happy in a civil partnership. Let me ask you this what about the discrimination of the church by gay people. What gives them the right to disregard my religious beliefs and the sanctity of the holy sacrament of marriage because a church is a nice venue? Its not a venue its a place of worship. The muslims would never allow so why is the catholic church being punished?
As for the hierachy of the church every organisation has a hierachy.
Whats your problem with the way the pope is elected, its a democratic process be it a basic one, but its a far cry from your problems with the monarchy.
As for celibacy its a choice its not forced on you, if you choose to dedicate your life to God via the priesthood or in a convent or a monastery thats an individual choice and you accept the sacrifices of that life. Same as any life choice, its not for you to say its not natural, its supposed to be difficult thats the point its a sacrifice. If and when you get married you will dedicate your life to one woman for the rest of your life there are lots of people who will say thats not natural it doesnt make it wrong though.
I can tell your very intelligent and you create a good argument though I dont agree with it. I can also assume your quite young so you will have a certain level ignorance. Let me give you some advice just because you dont understand something or you couldnt live your life in that way doesnt make it wrong, thats ignorance.

Bit long and boring that. There is no god……..get over it.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I dont really want to get into the past of the Catholic church not because I dont have a defence for it but we would be here for a very long time debating it.
I will only talk about the modern day church which could become an equally as long debate.

This is my religion I believe in its whole entirety with regards to pedophilia yes I agree it is disgusting and all efforts should be made to try and eradicate it, but the catholic church are not the only organisation which has pedophiles within its ranks but because the catholic church is one of few organisations that adhere to celibacy and being one of the largest religions in the world they get a huge amount of attention. Whether you believe pedophilia is a mental disorder or just some evil people satisfying their base instincts with children, its wrong and deserves to be punished. Though I will say its all to easy to accuse priests of pedophilia with no proof at all because labels stick. Thats not me saying every priest is innocent but like in this country there are people who get falsely accused. Priests are human beings and are capable of the same evils that you and I are capable of.
With regards to AIDs im not a medical expert or a disease expert but surely as the main cause of AIDs contraction is sexual intercourse would it not make sense that if you are in the unfortunate situation of having AIDs would it not be better to abstain from sex rather than risk the health of your sexual partner?
I dont see discrimination of homosexuals in the modern catholic church and in the past discrimination was no different from discrimination at the time. I know many gay catholics who are against gay marriage because they believe their religious right are at risk and they are happy in a civil partnership. Let me ask you this what about the discrimination of the church by gay people. What gives them the right to disregard my religious beliefs and the sanctity of the holy sacrament of marriage because a church is a nice venue? Its not a venue its a place of worship. The muslims would never allow so why is the catholic church being punished?
As for the hierachy of the church every organisation has a hierachy.
Whats your problem with the way the pope is elected, its a democratic process be it a basic one, but its a far cry from your problems with the monarchy.
As for celibacy its a choice its not forced on you, if you choose to dedicate your life to God via the priesthood or in a convent or a monastery thats an individual choice and you accept the sacrifices of that life. Same as any life choice, its not for you to say its not natural, its supposed to be difficult thats the point its a sacrifice. If and when you get married you will dedicate your life to one woman for the rest of your life there are lots of people who will say thats not natural it doesnt make it wrong though.
I can tell your very intelligent and you create a good argument though I dont agree with it. I can also assume your quite young so you will have a certain level ignorance. Let me give you some advice just because you dont understand something or you couldnt live your life in that way doesnt make it wrong, thats ignorance.

These are the same old cliched excuses wheeled out by the Church time after time.

How you can choose to ignore the entire history of the Catholic church is beyond me, surely the heinous and inexcusable crimes that it has commited cannot simply be dusted under the carpet? Much like it does, quite disgustingly, with its present day crimes.

"Oh, I don't really want to get into the past of the Catholic Church". There's a surprise, I wonder why that is. It wouldn't be because it's an organisation with a history darker than fascism and nazism combined? Surely? To simply ignore the past is equal to disregarding the present and ignoring the future. For the past is what built your religion, the past is what created the foundations of Catholicism, and my friend these very foundations are rotten to the core. Or, could it be that you're not fully aware of your Churche vile past?


Yes the main cause of AIDS is sexual intercourse, usually in third world countries, whereby contraception is either scorned upon by your Church or is simply not readily available. To simply say that AIDS sufferers should abstain all together is ignorant, surely if condoms were made available they may well be clear of any STI's? Including AIDS and HIV? You cannot deny that condoms will benefit African countries hugely, instead your Church is responsible for millions of deaths, both in the past and right now, today. You scorn the use of contraception, why? In case people freely engage in sexual intercourse? In case sex becomes a natural process between two individuals that can be enjoyed when they so choose? Well, if this is the best excuse the Catholic church can mumble then it is nothing short of a disgrace. Millions of people are dying because of AIDS, condoms would slash this number hugely, however your church is too caught up in the dark ages to face the reality.

Don't be ludicrous. The Catholic church has a well-publicised history of vile and unjust homophobia, even in recent times it has been discriminatory to put it lightly.To simply say, "Oh well everyone else was too" is not an acceptable, or correct, excuse.

Are you seriously suggesting that two gay people cannot get married in a church as it violates your religious beliefs? In what way? Equally, you claim that it is not a venue but a place of worship, so I presume you're totally against all church marriages regardless of sexuality? Yes? If so that puts you in a minority as most Churches are more than happy to conduct services. If two religious, or non-religious, individuals of the same-sex would like a Church service then I see no wrong there. Surely this boosts the 'sanctity of marriage'? Greater diversity, equality, and religious marriages can only be a good thing. sexuality is an irrelevence in my eyes.

Not every organisation has, as the Church so often boasts, a billion followers (therein lies the pathetic image of the flock). Why is the Pope so great? He's simply another primate or mammal, like you or I. The extravagant wealth and riches of the Catholic church is rather grotesque when one cosiders that a large proportion of its 'followers' are from third world countries, or at least poverty stricken backgrounds.

Nonsense, if the Pope's election is democratic then North Korea is a playground of equality. Seriously, that is not democray as I know it. Far from it, it is elitist and nonsensical oligarchy.

Celibacy belongs in the realms of history, of course it is their choice, however the Catholic Church's obsession with sex renders celibacy an obligation for anyone desperate to advance up its pathetic echelons and ranks.

I find it incredibly rude, and somewhat hypocritical, that you presume that my age renders me immediately ignorant. Age is but a number, and to resort to ad hominems or insults regarding one's age is a clear sign that the said individual is lacking in evidence, support and a general argument.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I understand what you are saying and im not really in the position to defend my church. I have no evidence to support or defend these accusations so I cant comment on exact cases.
All I can say is the Pope is elected as our leader by some of the greatest minds in the vatican and his is now Gods representative on earth and im not in a position to question him.
All I can say is I understand is these allegations were made when he was a Cardinal not as Pope (though if the accusations are true his position in the church shouldnt be a factor) the fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so until he dies.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I understand what you are saying and im not really in the position to defend my church. I have no evidence to support or defend these accusations so I cant comment on exact cases.
All I can say is the Pope is elected as our leader by some of the greatest minds in the vatican and his is now Gods representative on earth and im not in a position to question him.
All I can say is I understand is these allegations were made when he was a Cardinal not as Pope (though if the accusations are true his position in the church shouldnt be a factor) the fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so until he dies.

Jonny this speeks volumes to me - " The fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so untill he dies" So what i am hearing from this is your church once it found the pope guilty of covering up the acts of what is arguable the worst of crimes ( easliy verifiable will post links if you wish? ) And you will still follow this "church" I will ask you this what do you think Jesus would say/do about your church?
Jonny i dont want upset any of my brother's or sister's in Christ but the catholic church stinks of religion and not alot of faith!

Lots of knowledge claims here but not a lot of people prepared to back up how they can know anything?

Without God, you can't prove anything.

Can life come from non-life?

Can reason come from non-reason?

Can logic come from non-logic?

Any argument against God needs God to exists for it to work, because either your argument has no logic (and then why should we believe it?) or it has logic in which it's laws can only be accounted for by the existence of a intelligent, universal, unchanging, immaterial God.

You don't need god to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all. However you can neither disprove or prove God was the cause of it all aswell as that the Big Bang theory. That theory is the most common because it has the moat evidence more than that for god. As for life from more life yes it is possible simply put all we are is a junior of elements correctly aligned to produce life and it all comes down to probability

You do realise the probability of that is so ridiculous that no serious scientist would ever assume it could happen. It's akin to shooting a dart at the moon, hitting it and then the dart coming back and landing on an 'x' you have placed on earth!

How do you know that you don't need God to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all? If you're going to make knowledge claims, please show how you account for your knowledge!

Right first of all you talk about the probability being so small is impossible is f*cking bollucks. You do realise the universe is extremely large? The possibility of life occurring is nothing compared to the scale of the universe.

As for my knowledge I have spent 3 years studying in the top university for chemistry. Including in this course I spent time learning quantum mechanics and astrophysics. I have also taken time to learn the relevant theory behind the big bang aswell as string theory and following on to M-theory. I think I am perfectly qualified to inpart my knowledge on this subject thank you very much

I dont really want to get into the past of the Catholic church not because I dont have a defence for it but we would be here for a very long time debating it.
I will only talk about the modern day church which could become an equally as long debate.

This is my religion I believe in its whole entirety with regards to pedophilia yes I agree it is disgusting and all efforts should be made to try and eradicate it, but the catholic church are not the only organisation which has pedophiles within its ranks but because the catholic church is one of few organisations that adhere to celibacy and being one of the largest religions in the world they get a huge amount of attention. Whether you believe pedophilia is a mental disorder or just some evil people satisfying their base instincts with children, its wrong and deserves to be punished. Though I will say its all to easy to accuse priests of pedophilia with no proof at all because labels stick. Thats not me saying every priest is innocent but like in this country there are people who get falsely accused. Priests are human beings and are capable of the same evils that you and I are capable of.
With regards to AIDs im not a medical expert or a disease expert but surely as the main cause of AIDs contraction is sexual intercourse would it not make sense that if you are in the unfortunate situation of having AIDs would it not be better to abstain from sex rather than risk the health of your sexual partner?
I dont see discrimination of homosexuals in the modern catholic church and in the past discrimination was no different from discrimination at the time. I know many gay catholics who are against gay marriage because they believe their religious right are at risk and they are happy in a civil partnership. Let me ask you this what about the discrimination of the church by gay people. What gives them the right to disregard my religious beliefs and the sanctity of the holy sacrament of marriage because a church is a nice venue? Its not a venue its a place of worship. The muslims would never allow so why is the catholic church being punished?
As for the hierachy of the church every organisation has a hierachy.
Whats your problem with the way the pope is elected, its a democratic process be it a basic one, but its a far cry from your problems with the monarchy.
As for celibacy its a choice its not forced on you, if you choose to dedicate your life to God via the priesthood or in a convent or a monastery thats an individual choice and you accept the sacrifices of that life. Same as any life choice, its not for you to say its not natural, its supposed to be difficult thats the point its a sacrifice. If and when you get married you will dedicate your life to one woman for the rest of your life there are lots of people who will say thats not natural it doesnt make it wrong though.
I can tell your very intelligent and you create a good argument though I dont agree with it. I can also assume your quite young so you will have a certain level ignorance. Let me give you some advice just because you dont understand something or you couldnt live your life in that way doesnt make it wrong, thats ignorance.

These are the same old cliched excuses wheeled out by the Church time after time.

How you can choose to ignore the entire history of the Catholic church is beyond me, surely the heinous and inexcusable crimes that it has commited cannot simply be dusted under the carpet? Much like it does, quite disgustingly, with its present day crimes.

"Oh, I don't really want to get into the past of the Catholic Church". There's a surprise, I wonder why that is. It wouldn't be because it's an organisation with a history darker than fascism and nazism combined? Surely? To simply ignore the past is equal to disregarding the present and ignoring the future. For the past is what built your religion, the past is what created the foundations of Catholicism, and my friend these very foundations are rotten to the core. Or, could it be that you're not fully aware of your Churche vile past?


Yes the main cause of AIDS is sexual intercourse, usually in third world countries, whereby contraception is either scorned upon by your Church or is simply not readily available. To simply say that AIDS sufferers should abstain all together is ignorant, surely if condoms were made available they may well be clear of any STI's? Including AIDS and HIV? You cannot deny that condoms will benefit African countries hugely, instead your Church is responsible for millions of deaths, both in the past and right now, today. You scorn the use of contraception, why? In case people freely engage in sexual intercourse? In case sex becomes a natural process between two individuals that can be enjoyed when they so choose? Well, if this is the best excuse the Catholic church can mumble then it is nothing short of a disgrace. Millions of people are dying because of AIDS, condoms would slash this number hugely, however your church is too caught up in the dark ages to face the reality.

Don't be ludicrous. The Catholic church has a well-publicised history of vile and unjust homophobia, even in recent times it has been discriminatory to put it lightly.To simply say, "Oh well everyone else was too" is not an acceptable, or correct, excuse.

Are you seriously suggesting that two gay people cannot get married in a church as it violates your religious beliefs? In what way? Equally, you claim that it is not a venue but a place of worship, so I presume you're totally against all church marriages regardless of sexuality? Yes? If so that puts you in a minority as most Churches are more than happy to conduct services. If two religious, or non-religious, individuals of the same-sex would like a Church service then I see no wrong there. Surely this boosts the 'sanctity of marriage'? Greater diversity, equality, and religious marriages can only be a good thing. sexuality is an irrelevence in my eyes.

Not every organisation has, as the Church so often boasts, a billion followers (therein lies the pathetic image of the flock). Why is the Pope so great? He's simply another primate or mammal, like you or I. The extravagant wealth and riches of the Catholic church is rather grotesque when one cosiders that a large proportion of its 'followers' are from third world countries, or at least poverty stricken backgrounds.

Nonsense, if the Pope's election is democratic then North Korea is a playground of equality. Seriously, that is not democray as I know it. Far from it, it is elitist and nonsensical oligarchy.

Celibacy belongs in the realms of history, of course it is their choice, however the Catholic Church's obsession with sex renders celibacy an obligation for anyone desperate to advance up its pathetic echelons and ranks.

I find it incredibly rude, and somewhat hypocritical, that you presume that my age renders me immediately ignorant. Age is but a number, and to resort to ad hominems or insults regarding one's age is a clear sign that the said individual is lacking in evidence, support and a general argument.

No I stated I was unwilling to get into an argument on the churches past because however relevant the past is I dont want to be arguing with you until the end of time.
As for your AIDs HIV argument condoms arent 100% fool proof they break. Why would you want to risk someone to that disease however little the risk maybe. Until a cure is found AIDs is a death sentence why would you inflict that on someone?
As for freely enjoying sex at what cost? how many fatherless kids are running around this country because sex is fun? Marriage instills morality and the guidance to make the right decisions and to raise a wholesome family, you may disagree with the religious side but you cant really argue with the practical teachings of the responsibility of having sex, something that seems to be lacking in this country. If your old enough to have sex your old enough to accept the responsibilities that having sex brings.
I dont believe the church is rampant with homophobia, the church teaches that everyone was created and loved by God regardless of your sexual orientation you cant have sex before marriage so I dont see how gay people are treated any differently as any straight person is.
Yes two gay people having a religious marriage as the church will offer no other marriage violates my religious beliefs, its simple as that you cant argue against it a gay catholic will tell you exactly the same thing. Marriage is a sacrament (I presume you know what one them is) and im not having my religious practices desecrated so someone can have a party, I will say exactly the same things to non-belivers if they wanted to get married in a catholic church. If your not catholic why do you want a catholic wedding?
The simple fact is im a big believer in gay rights but im not going to let my religious rights suffer for them. Its the problem with equality not everyone can be equal. You cant discriminate against my religious beliefs anymore than you cant discriminate against homosexuals. In your eyes I dont give a shit about your eyes your not a catholic and you obviously dont understand the religious implications of it. Baptism, Confession, Communion, Confirmation, Marriage, Holy Orders and The Last Rights are all deeply religious practices and have stood the test of time what gives you the right to diminish them.
The Pope is the leader of the catholic church and is elected and chosen as the representative of God on earth and yes the church has a lot of money it also does a lot for charity and looks after the world as a whole each religious order does its own thing in regards to its faith, some live in poverty, some dedicate their lives to prayer, some take a more proactive role and help the people Mother Theresa would be one example.
The Popes election is democratic no getting out of that one. When the Pope dies there are 9 days of morning and then the process of electing the new pope begins. As the election rules stand. 120 cardinals representing the world must participate and meet in the college of cardinals and are locked in until they reach a decision so no outside influences can effect the vote. For a pope to be elected a cardinal must have a two thirds plus one majority after that 2 votes a day will commence 1 in the morning and 1 in the evening, though after four days of voting if no cardinal has the required two thirds the cardinal with the majority of votes will be elected as pope. I dont know about you but sounds pretty democratic to me.
Well if you what I say is rude stop trying to destroy my church and dismiss it as hocus pocus. Im not criticising your practices what gives you the right to criticise mine? If you dont like the idea of being a catholic dont become one no one has a gun against your head forcing you to be one.
As for my comment on youth its accurate research shows that young people are very black and white in their personal beliefs and will defend them vehemently. I also know this from experience because I wasnt much different when I was younger.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I understand what you are saying and im not really in the position to defend my church. I have no evidence to support or defend these accusations so I cant comment on exact cases.
All I can say is the Pope is elected as our leader by some of the greatest minds in the vatican and his is now Gods representative on earth and im not in a position to question him.
All I can say is I understand is these allegations were made when he was a Cardinal not as Pope (though if the accusations are true his position in the church shouldnt be a factor) the fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so until he dies.

Jonny this speeks volumes to me - " The fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so untill he dies" So what i am hearing from this is your church once it found the pope guilty of covering up the acts of what is arguable the worst of crimes ( easliy verifiable will post links if you wish? ) And you will still follow this "church" I will ask you this what do you think Jesus would say/do about your church?
Jonny i dont want upset any of my brother's or sister's in Christ but the catholic church stinks of religion and not alot of faith!

well there is no precedent for a leader of a religion to be accused or convicted of a crime the church may change its mind I dont know but thats as I understand it, but im not a religious expert either so I could be wrong.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I understand what you are saying and im not really in the position to defend my church. I have no evidence to support or defend these accusations so I cant comment on exact cases.
All I can say is the Pope is elected as our leader by some of the greatest minds in the vatican and his is now Gods representative on earth and im not in a position to question him.
All I can say is I understand is these allegations were made when he was a Cardinal not as Pope (though if the accusations are true his position in the church shouldnt be a factor) the fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so until he dies.

Jonny this speeks volumes to me - " The fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so untill he dies" So what i am hearing from this is your church once it found the pope guilty of covering up the acts of what is arguable the worst of crimes ( easliy verifiable will post links if you wish? ) And you will still follow this "church" I will ask you this what do you think Jesus would say/do about your church?
Jonny i dont want upset any of my brother's or sister's in Christ but the catholic church stinks of religion and not alot of faith!

well there is no precedent for a leader of a religion to be accused or convicted of a crime the church may change its mind I dont know but thats as I understand it, but im not a religious expert either so I could be wrong.

Sorry again Jonny but you lost me there and didnt anwser any of my pionts.

JONNY012. I like you am wholeheartedly christian, But never attend any church, and am of no religious denomination ( just pure and simple a God loving and Bible believing christian) The question i must ask you is should the pope be the head of your religous order? - having helped with the cover up of the pedofile priests?

I understand what you are saying and im not really in the position to defend my church. I have no evidence to support or defend these accusations so I cant comment on exact cases.
All I can say is the Pope is elected as our leader by some of the greatest minds in the vatican and his is now Gods representative on earth and im not in a position to question him.
All I can say is I understand is these allegations were made when he was a Cardinal not as Pope (though if the accusations are true his position in the church shouldnt be a factor) the fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so until he dies.

Jonny this speeks volumes to me - " The fact is even if he was found guilty and sent to prison he would still be pope and will remain so untill he dies" So what i am hearing from this is your church once it found the pope guilty of covering up the acts of what is arguable the worst of crimes ( easliy verifiable will post links if you wish? ) And you will still follow this "church" I will ask you this what do you think Jesus would say/do about your church?
Jonny i dont want upset any of my brother's or sister's in Christ but the catholic church stinks of religion and not alot of faith!

well there is no precedent for a leader of a religion to be accused or convicted of a crime the church may change its mind I dont know but thats as I understand it, but im not a religious expert either so I could be wrong.

Sorry again Jonny but you lost me there and didnt anwser any of my pionts.

Fine I dont know then as far as I am aware the pope is pope until he dies.
there is no one the pope can tender his resignation to and a pope hasnt abdicated since 1415 with pope gregory XII.
letters of conditional resignation have been produced in the past and maybe an option if the pope is convicted of a crime. Precedents to that would be pope pius VII when he went to crown Napoleon and if he was taken prisoner the church was to elect a new pope. Pope pius XII wrote a similar instruction during WW2 if he was ever kidnapped by the Nazis. In more recent history pope john paul II wrote a letter of resignation if he was struck down with an incurable disease or if anything happened tnat would prevent him from performing his duties, but as far as I am aware a pope has never been convicted of a crime and im not sure what would happen other than he is still the pope. Im sure Canon Law will sort it all out though in the best interests of the church.

Fine I dont know then as far as I am aware the pope is pope until he dies.
there is no one the pope can tender his resignation to and a pope hasnt abdicated since 1415 with pope gregory XII.
letters of conditional resignation have been produced in the past and maybe an option if the pope is convicted of a crime. Precedents to that would be pope pius VII when he went to crown Napoleon and if he was taken prisoner the church was to elect a new pope. Pope pius XII wrote a similar instruction during WW2 if he was ever kidnapped by the Nazis. In more recent history pope john paul II wrote a letter of resignation if he was struck down with an incurable disease or if anything happened tnat would prevent him from performing his duties, but as far as I am aware a pope has never been convicted of a crime and im not sure what would happen other than he is still the pope. Im sure Canon Law will sort it all out though in the best interests of the church.[/quote]

Your totaly missing what i'm trying to get you thinking about!
These things have gone on! and you shouldn't be waiting for the pope to "abdicated" i would want to run as far away from such an organization that has done these things as fast as i could!
Read the book of Revolation! Jesus begs for people to come out of churches like these. The one thing your right about though is " I'm sure canon law will sort it all out though in the best interests of the church" which it will!!! ( but not in the best interests of it's flock! )

"None are so blind as those that would not see"

Firstly God if your up there turn off your laptop for a few minutes .... or click on youporn or something!

I have genuinely just wasted about 20mins writing out about 4 paragraphs on religeon, and have decided to delete it all

not because i fear if I pressed submit I would be struck by lightening, or i would get a shit load of virgins or whatever he says in luke 13:2 chapter 5, but because I just simply have zero knowledge or care for religeon. But i have sat and thread through this thread (the comments less that 3 lines) and found out a few things, but I certainly wont be poping down waterstones tomorrow morning!

Lots of knowledge claims here but not a lot of people prepared to back up how they can know anything?

Without God, you can't prove anything.

Can life come from non-life?

Can reason come from non-reason?

Can logic come from non-logic?

Any argument against God needs God to exists for it to work, because either your argument has no logic (and then why should we believe it?) or it has logic in which it's laws can only be accounted for by the existence of a intelligent, universal, unchanging, immaterial God.

You don't need god to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all. However you can neither disprove or prove God was the cause of it all aswell as that the Big Bang theory. That theory is the most common because it has the moat evidence more than that for god. As for life from more life yes it is possible simply put all we are is a junior of elements correctly aligned to produce life and it all comes down to probability

You do realise the probability of that is so ridiculous that no serious scientist would ever assume it could happen. It's akin to shooting a dart at the moon, hitting it and then the dart coming back and landing on an 'x' you have placed on earth!

How do you know that you don't need God to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all? If you're going to make knowledge claims, please show how you account for your knowledge!

Right first of all you talk about the probability being so small is impossible is f*cking bollucks. You do realise the universe is extremely large? The possibility of life occurring is nothing compared to the scale of the universe.

As for my knowledge I have spent 3 years studying in the top university for chemistry. Including in this course I spent time learning quantum mechanics and astrophysics. I have also taken time to learn the relevant theory behind the big bang aswell as string theory and following on to M-theory. I think I am perfectly qualified to inpart my knowledge on this subject thank you very much

Yes, I do, and it goes to show how unbelievably impossible the likelihood is.

Kudos for that but still no account for how you can know anything for sure. I'm not saying you don't know anything, you do know things but you can only know it because God exists. Without Him, we cannot know anything. To know something for sure you either have to know everything or have revelation from someone who does.

Logic's three qualities are that it is immaterial (can't touch or see it), unchanging (2+2 doesn't equal 5 tomorrow) and universal (2+2 isn't 5 in Bangladesh). How do you account for these immaterial, unchanging and universal qualities aside from the God of the Bible who is described as immaterial (can't touch or see Him), unchanging and universal. The answer is you cannot.

All arguments against God assume the existence of God.

All arguments against God assume the existence of God.

Obviously. How can you disprove something without first assuming that it exists? Regardless of whether you believe it does or does not, you must assume, hypothetically. that He does for the purpose of argument.

Anyway this is nonsense, there is no use in arguing against the existence of a deity as there is no conclusive proof either way. The argument would be interminable. Instead, it makes more sense to argue (as I do) against the merits of organised religion.

The probability of life occurring on earth is approximately 1 in 10000000 however the size of the universe is so large that overall it is very likely that life exists on more than just earth.

As for know anything is just down to God is incorrect humans rationally discovered things for themselves without the aid of a deity. According to the bible the earth and humanity is only 4000 years old and well that's been proven to be wrong. Humanity has been around alot longer than religion so therefore it is simply a man made idea.

My main problem is that religions are slowly moving further away from the religious text so surely that would mean we as a collective see God words are not important.

Lots of knowledge claims here but not a lot of people prepared to back up how they can know anything?

Without God, you can't prove anything.

Can life come from non-life?

Can reason come from non-reason?

Can logic come from non-logic?

Any argument against God needs God to exists for it to work, because either your argument has no logic (and then why should we believe it?) or it has logic in which it's laws can only be accounted for by the existence of a intelligent, universal, unchanging, immaterial God.

You don't need god to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all. However you can neither disprove or prove God was the cause of it all aswell as that the Big Bang theory. That theory is the most common because it has the moat evidence more than that for god. As for life from more life yes it is possible simply put all we are is a junior of elements correctly aligned to produce life and it all comes down to probability

You do realise the probability of that is so ridiculous that no serious scientist would ever assume it could happen. It's akin to shooting a dart at the moon, hitting it and then the dart coming back and landing on an 'x' you have placed on earth!

How do you know that you don't need God to explain anything in the universe except for the beginning of it all? If you're going to make knowledge claims, please show how you account for your knowledge!

Right first of all you talk about the probability being so small is impossible is f*cking bollucks. You do realise the universe is extremely large? The possibility of life occurring is nothing compared to the scale of the universe.

As for my knowledge I have spent 3 years studying in the top university for chemistry. Including in this course I spent time learning quantum mechanics and astrophysics. I have also taken time to learn the relevant theory behind the big bang aswell as string theory and following on to M-theory. I think I am perfectly qualified to inpart my knowledge on this subject thank you very much

Yes, I do, and it goes to show how unbelievably impossible the likelihood is.

Kudos for that but still no account for how you can know anything for sure. I'm not saying you don't know anything, you do know things but you can only know it because God exists. Without Him, we cannot know anything. To know something for sure you either have to know everything or have revelation from someone who does.

Logic's three qualities are that it is immaterial (can't touch or see it), unchanging (2+2 doesn't equal 5 tomorrow) and universal (2+2 isn't 5 in Bangladesh). How do you account for these immaterial, unchanging and universal qualities aside from the God of the Bible who is described as immaterial (can't touch or see Him), unchanging and universal. The answer is you cannot.

All arguments against God assume the existence of God.

You my friend, have been brainwashed.

An interesting conversation perhaps:
" I am an atheist"
" Are you sure of that ?"
"yes,I have thought it through,studied the issue from every angle,and I am quite cetain that I can say,there is no God"
" I have never met anyone who has been alive throughout all time,visited every spot in the universe and knows every single thing that it is possible for a human being to know"
"Well you still haven`t"
"Then let me ask you some questions.If you have not been alive throught time,won`t you acept that it is possible that God does exist but that he revealed himself to humanity at some point before you were born ?If you have not been everywhere in the universe,won`t you accept that it is possible that God does exist,but that he is somewhere in the universe that you have never visited ? And as you admit that you don`t know everything it is possible to know,won`t you admit tha t there may be evidence of Go`s existence within that biody of knowlege you don`t possess ?"
"I see what you mean it is impossible for me to be an atheist.I have just become an agnostic"

Sorry about my typing....

An interesting conversation perhaps:
" I am an atheist"
" Are you sure of that ?"
"yes,I have thought it through,studied the issue from every angle,and I am quite cetain that I can say,there is no God"
" I have never met anyone who has been alive throughout all time,visited every spot in the universe and knows every single thing that it is possible for a human being to know"
"Well you still haven`t"
"Then let me ask you some questions.If you have not been alive throught time,won`t you acept that it is possible that God does exist but that he revealed himself to humanity at some point before you were born ?If you have not been everywhere in the universe,won`t you accept that it is possible that God does exist,but that he is somewhere in the universe that you have never visited ? And as you admit that you don`t know everything it is possible to know,won`t you admit tha t there may be evidence of Go`s existence within that biody of knowlege you don`t possess ?"
"I see what you mean it is impossible for me to be an atheist.I have just become an agnostic"

It's not impossible to be an atheist, being an agnostic means remaining open minded about something. But I can't remain open to something which has no evidence to support it what so ever.

An interesting conversation perhaps:
" I am an atheist"
" Are you sure of that ?"
"yes,I have thought it through,studied the issue from every angle,and I am quite cetain that I can say,there is no God"
" I have never met anyone who has been alive throughout all time,visited every spot in the universe and knows every single thing that it is possible for a human being to know"
"Well you still haven`t"
"Then let me ask you some questions.If you have not been alive throught time,won`t you acept that it is possible that God does exist but that he revealed himself to humanity at some point before you were born ?If you have not been everywhere in the universe,won`t you accept that it is possible that God does exist,but that he is somewhere in the universe that you have never visited ? And as you admit that you don`t know everything it is possible to know,won`t you admit tha t there may be evidence of Go`s existence within that biody of knowlege you don`t possess ?"
"I see what you mean it is impossible for me to be an atheist.I have just become an agnostic"

I wasted a proportion of my limited existence on this earth reading that tripe.

(I consider myself an 'anti-theist').

It`s nice to see such open minds,who has the burden of proof the atheist or the theist or both ?
If your mind is already made up then there is no room for discussion and so this thread is a waste of time.This always leads to abuse instead of arguement.

It`s nice to see such open minds,who has the burden of proof the atheist or the theist or both ?
If your mind is already made up then there is no room for discussion and so this thread is a waste of time.This always leads to abuse instead of arguement.

If you read the thread you'll see that there has been perfectly reasonable and fair discussion and debate, not regarding God as you seem to be obsessing about, but of things that can actually be debated successfully and with reason.

Tripe was your comment not mine.
So I will leave you too it. I am not obsesive just trying to look at an arguement from both sides not one.
bye.

Tripe was your comment not mine.
So I will leave you too it. I am not obsesive just trying to look at an arguement from both sides not one.
bye.

It was, and a fair description at that. Ahh, if it's objectivity that you're seeking you aren't doing a great job.

..bye

It`s nice to see such open minds,who has the burden of proof the atheist or the theist or both ?
If your mind is already made up then there is no room for discussion and so this thread is a waste of time.This always leads to abuse instead of arguement.

May I ask, where is the abuse?

All arguments against God assume the existence of God.

Obviously. How can you disprove something without first assuming that it exists? Regardless of whether you believe it does or does not, you must assume, hypothetically. that He does for the purpose of argument.

Anyway this is nonsense, there is no use in arguing against the existence of a deity as there is no conclusive proof either way. The argument would be interminable. Instead, it makes more sense to argue (as I do) against the merits of organised religion.

How do you know any of what you have written is true?

The probability of life occurring on earth is approximately 1 in 10000000 however the size of the universe is so large that overall it is very likely that life exists on more than just earth.

As for know anything is just down to God is incorrect humans rationally discovered things for themselves without the aid of a deity. According to the bible the earth and humanity is only 4000 years old and well that's been proven to be wrong. Humanity has been around alot longer than religion so therefore it is simply a man made idea.

My main problem is that religions are slowly moving further away from the religious text so surely that would mean we as a collective see God words are not important.

How do you know that?

Show me where the Bible says earth and humanity is only 4000 years old?

I don't know any serious Christians who are moving away from the Bible, aside from the Church of England which hasn't taken the Bible seriously for donkeys years in an attempt to please various factions of society.

[quote="Bridgend_bluebird
You my friend, have been brainwashed.[/quote]

I, my friend, am the one who can account for how I know things.