Ever felt insignificant?

[amateur51]

We can tell that, from the Reception level "arguments" that we get from you!

At least you grant that I can be in reception mode, Simon whereas you appear to be stuck on broadcast

[Alison]

If you believe in god / believe that god exists - such a belief is important to you, and there flows from this a tendency to need to see matters in terms of such belief, and hence to classify people as believers / theists / deists / agnostics / atheists etc.

However - if you don't happen to have any such belief, all of this is quite irrelevant, and there is a natural disinclination to accept the labels - 'deist', 'agnostic', 'atheist' - that the believer wishes to impose upon one.

For someone who has no particular belief in god, the lack of such belief is EXACTLY THE SAME as the lack of any belief in orbiting teapots or spaghetti monsters. The question simply doesn't arise.

It is as relevant for scottycelt to wish to demonstrate that those who 'have no belief' are really only 'agnostics' (because they cannot 'prove' the non-existence of a non-existent thing) as it is for me to demand clarification of scottycelt's belief or otherwise in orbiting teapots and spaghetti monsters. From scottycelt's previous postings I have to assume he is an agnostic as to the existence of orbiting teapots and spaghetti monsters.

It strikes me that the question arises rather often. And non- believers get quite heated about it.

[Pabmusic]

Sadly, we now appear to be back to discussing unicorns ...

The difference is about likelihood and relevance. There is an order in the universe so that suggests the possible (even likelihood to many) of an original 'intelligent' cause or Creator. There is nothing to suggest the likelihood and relevance or also any evidence for unicorns (and flying teapots and green-eyed spaghetti monsters) and if atheists keep going on about such absurdities in a blatant attempt to avoid the issue, one is sorely tempted to fear they may well end up believing in these peculiar fantasies themselves.

As Chesterton neatly put it ... 'When a man ceases to believe in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he ends up believing in anything ... '

A bit harsh, maybe, but with more than just a grain of truth ... ?

I quite like Chesterton, and I'm sure he would have understood the use of analogy.

But why the appearance of order anywhere can only - or even most likely - be explained by the presence of a creator is beyond me.

[amateur51]

Sadly, we now appear to be back to discussing unicorns ...

The difference is about likelihood and relevance. There is an order in the universe so that suggests the possible (even likelihood to many) of an original 'intelligent' cause or Creator. There is nothing to suggest the likelihood and relevance or also any evidence for unicorns (and flying teapots and green-eyed spaghetti monsters) and if atheists keep going on about such absurdities in a blatant attempt to avoid the issue, one is sorely tempted to fear they may well end up believing in these peculiar fantasies themselves.

As Chesterton neatly put it ... 'When a man ceases to believe in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he ends up believing in anything ... '

A bit harsh, maybe, but with more than just a grain of truth ... ?

Whoever has said that those of us who don't believe in God believe in nothing? I believe in something else, scotty and that seems to cheese you off mightily

[vinteuil]

It strikes me that the question arises rather often. And non- believers get quite heated about it.

I wd say that some of us get irritated rather than heated - irritated that we are sometimes expected to fit in to the conceptual world-view of those who happen to believe

[amateur51]

I wd say that some of us get irritated rather than heated - irritated that we are sometimes expected to fit in to the conceptual world-view of those who happen to believe

[MrGongGong]

At least you grant that I can be in reception mode, Simon whereas you appear to be stuck on broadcast

or even

[scottycelt]

I wd say that some of us get irritated rather than heated - irritated that we are sometimes expected to fit in to the conceptual world-view of those who happen to believe

What utter balderdash ... no one's expecting you to fit in with any philosophy,and, frankly, it often seems the other around.

If you can't stand the heat of forum debate simply keep well clear. I'm perfectly happy not to have any discussions about religion whatsoever and I never instigate such threads.

However, I'm certainly not shy about challenging what I consider to be bogus arguments. This is a public forum after all and if my (or anybody elses) views irritate you that much just ignore them, and pass onto the next post or thread.

It's really that easy not to get irritated by anyone or anything here ... so don't blame others!

[amateur51]

What utter balderdash ... no one's expecting you to fit in with any philosophy,and, frankly, it often seems the other around.

If you can't stand the heat of forum debate simply keep well clear. I'm perfectly happy not to have any discussions about religion whatsoever and I never instigate such threads.

However, I'm certainly not shy about challenging what I consider to be bogus arguments. This is a public forum after all and if my (or anybody elses) views irritate you that much just ignore them, and pass onto the next post or thread.

It's really that easy not to get irritated by anyone or anything here ... so don't blame others!

Sounded irritated .. nay rattled! ... to me!

[scottycelt]

Whoever has said that those of us who don't believe in God believe in nothing? I believe in something else, scotty and that seems to cheese you off mightily

Even you never quite manage to 'cheese me off', amsey ... though you have come rather close on the odd occasion.

Can you prove the existence of this 'something else', amsey ... or is it just one of those non-provable flying teapots, maybe?

[amateur51]

Even you never quite manage to 'cheese me off', amsey ... though you have come rather close on the odd occasion.

Can you prove the existence of this 'something else', amsey ... or is it just one of those non-provable flying teapots, maybe?

I believe that we live in a universe not created by God as you might describe or define her, scotty

[scottycelt]

I believe that we live in a universe not created by God as you might describe or define her, scotty

Good on you, amsey ... don't worry, I know I'm not permitted to request any supporting evidence, so you're certainly on a real winner there ..

[MrGongGong]

one of those non-provable flying teapots, maybe?

hardly "non-provable" imv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2Yc9mHCwRI

[scottycelt]

hardly "non-provable" imv

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k2Yc9mHCwRI

So they do exist after all, despite the many 'non-existent' sneers ... any relation?

[Serial_Apologist]

So they do exist after all, despite the many 'non-existent' sneers ... any relation?

Well, you asked!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KEUxtJbLLJM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xu6swDk4xKA&feature=relmfu

You can follow the other 7 parts