The MI6 Community Religion and Faith Discussion Space (for members of all faiths - and none!)

18485878990108

Comments

  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there

    Literally mental.
  • Posts: 14,840
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there

    It's not my fault either.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,701
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    He'll probably send Sarah Huckabee Sanders for the press conference.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.
  • Posts: 9,779
    RC7 wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there

    Literally mental.

    Hey you have not given me the real writers of the Bible yet come on times a wasting
  • Posts: 14,840
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.
  • RC7RC7
    edited May 2018 Posts: 10,512
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    For me it’s not about abolition (purely because it’s impossible), it’s about tempering religion’s purchase in a societal sense, particularly in law. It’s part of ‘culture’, whether we like it or not, and I’m not averse to spirituality (it can be a necessary part of our emotional self), but in terms of the way a society is structured and governed it should surely be a secular one? One that has science and reason at its core. Something that is fundamentally fair, because it can be challenged. Religion cannot. It is ‘the’ word.

    I’ll also add that the UK government’s extra funding for faith schools is a terrifying prospect. We don’t need more division in the country. Religion should be a personal, emotional engagement, not something that is an omnipotent part of a child’s educational journey.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    RC7 wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there

    Literally mental.

    Hey you have not given me the real writers of the Bible yet come on times a wasting

    Honestly, I’ve had more enlightening chats with my 2 1/2 year old. An inquisitive mind is a beautiful thing.
  • Posts: 9,779
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night
  • Posts: 14,840
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night

    I already rape and pillage as much as I want and by that I mean I don't rape and pillage.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night

    I already rape and pillage as much as I want and by that I mean I don't rape and pillage.

    Ha ha.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night

    There is a religion for those so inclined as well.
  • RC7RC7
    Posts: 10,512
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night

    There is a religion for those so inclined as well.

    We still on for Friday, @Thunderfinger?
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    RC7 wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.

    Whether these things can be achieved by secular means is not for me to decide. So far I can't see anyone doing anything to try and replace these small, comforting gatherings prior to the revolution.

    Elderly non believers are welcome to stay at home.

    So... an atheist cannot serve cakes, coffee, tea, organize parties and so on? Or at least you are not sure we can. Why not? Or you mean only on Sundays?

    Don't take it the wrong way but that is laughable. It takes faith to bake cupcakes now? Or explain to me what you meant with your post.

    So, you will only step up and organise such events after religion has been abolished? What, as a gesture of goodwill?

    Or do you already hold such events?

    It's straying from the point I tried to make really. That there is a portion of society who needs the church. it's their own haven. Their comfort blanket.

    By all means push for its abolition,( no skin off my nose, I don't go to church and I don't need it.)

    But don't do so without considering those who really would lose out.

    Secular groups hold such events yes and so do groups that are although not based on secularism are not religiously affiliated. Your post was saying church groups do such events and losing religions we'd lose them. That's patently false.

    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night

    There is a religion for those so inclined as well.

    We still on for Friday, @Thunderfinger?

    Yes, right after prayer.
  • Posts: 14,840
    @NicNac I was thinking about something: although I don't think that in that hypothetical utopian Atheist Republic of Sodom and Gomorrah there would no longer be Sunday tea parties and little fetes for the elderly... If forsaking such celebrations was what it takes for everyone and especially children to receive the proper medical treatment (blood transfusion, organ transplant) to save a life and to have every pedophile priest put in jail for their crimes (and their accomplices) then I'd be tempted to say to hell with Sunday parties. But again I doubt it would be necessary even in a godless and anticlerical Pandemonium.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    Ludovico wrote: »
    @NicNac I was thinking about something: although I don't think that in that hypothetical utopian Atheist Republic of Sodom and Gomorrah there would no longer be Sunday tea parties and little fetes for the elderly... If forsaking such celebrations was what it takes for everyone and especially children to receive the proper medical treatment (blood transfusion, organ transplant) to save a life and to have every pedophile priest put in jail for their crimes (and their accomplices) then I'd be tempted to say to hell with Sunday parties. But again I doubt it would be necessary even in a godless and anticlerical Pandemonium.

    I’m with you on the paedo priests. Problem is, stripped of their positions they would still be paedos, and they would still find a way to attract victims. The bastards are everywhere unfortunately.

    Anyway, i agree, sans religeon garden fetes would still happen, old people would still find each other, kind people would continue to be kind. I just threw the thought out there for the sake of variety.

  • Posts: 9,779
    Yes and screw people like mother Teresa and Ghandi those religious idiots what have they done for society
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    edited May 2018 Posts: 23,564
    A non-theistic world must inevitably happen. Polytheistic religions have all but vanished. So will the monotheistic ones. Maybe not in 10 or even a 100 years, but one day. We become smarter and more sophisticated. Spiritual enlightenment takes new forms. Sooner or later the concept of an elusive god will sound as crazy as gods of thunder, seas, winds, fertility, music and agriculture. I'm not saying the world will be a better place, I'm not saying the alternative will be better either. But even spirituality is prone to trend shifts, no matter how resilient religion is.

    Studies have shown -- and take them for what they're worth -- that the more intelligent people get, the less likely it is they will adopt a theistic religion. I don't mean this as an insult to the religious. My point is, if we manage to survive as a species, it will be because we grow smarter, not less smart. If we grow less smart, we won't survive the many challenges that lay ahead of us. If we do survive them, it will be with increased intelligence. Sooner or later, god worshipers will then become a (possibly shunned) minority, eventually doomed, like polytheistic believers, to grow extinct.

    Again, other ideas may replace god, possibly even more upsetting or dangerous. But it is in fact very reasonable to assume that even the Abrahamic god will become a fossil, something of the past, one day in the distant future. Most ideas which remain unproven, obscure, contested and controversial do. Why would this one be any different? We burnt our witches ages ago, tossed the Scylla and Charybdis into the fire, stopped fearing solar eclipses as dragons eating the sun, ... Time and again, the supernatural must yield. No matter how "hip" it is today to resurrect some of these concepts just to sell a few books, reason eventually wins. The "end of the world" cults, the Flat Earth Societies, ... they are a twisted form of entertainment for us and little else. It'll take a little more time for today's gods to go away, but they too will. Man grows tired of waiting, of investing energy into something that stubbornly refuses to provide tangible merits. A few brave generations may suffice to reduce the religious superstructures of today to ashes, though again, I have no idea what they would use as a substitute, if anything.
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Yes and screw people like mother Teresa and Ghandi those religious idiots what have they done for society

    Mother Teresa?
    Oh wow, I guess you haven't done your research on her, @Risico007. She was a horrible woman.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 14,840
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Yes and screw people like mother Teresa and Ghandi those religious idiots what have they done for society

    Mother Teresa?
    Oh wow, I guess you haven't done your research on her, @Risico007. She was a horrible woman.

    Gandhi had his flaws too. And the good he did he could have done as an unbeliever. But yes Mother Teresa was a cruel, twisted, horrible bigot.

    @NicNac there will always be pedophiles and sexual predators but take away one institution that has been protecting them and the world will be better for it.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 9,779
    I still say you guys would love Stalin killed over a million Christians


    And again since Alexander the greats “biography” wasn’t written till 300 years after his life so I say he never existed prove me wrong

    Oh and look at Dr Francis Collins head of the human genome project surely someone whom everyone here thinks is an idiot right?

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    What a lot of fun you crazy kids have been having whilst some of us have been working.

    Time I stuck my oar in on some of this afternoon's points I think....
    NicNac wrote: »
    [
    But is religion that much different to anything else we believe in?
    We may believe our country is the finest on earth, but that doesn't mean it is.

    Why should we believe in invisible lines that separate one country from another? They don't really exist, but we believe in them all the same.
    What?

    Just because countries don't have white lines painted on the ground like on the map when you cross their borders doesn't mean they don't exist and are simply a construct in our minds on a par with the wholly made up one of religion.

    Try walking from here to Seoul and see how you get on with your 'belief' that borders aren't real. You might start off OK strolling nonchalantly through Merkel's borderless utopia but I'm sure the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans might have something to say when you fetched up at the border post and said 'I haven't got a passport or visa as I don't believe in borders'.
    NicNac wrote: »
    Borders are man made, but they aren't realities. You can't see the borders anymore than you can see God.

    Err yes you can. Are the Berlin wall and the DMZ separating the Koreas just something someone imagined?

    Poor old @Risico007 thought he had 'Most Ridiculous Comment' sewn up with any one of his posts but it looks like the trophy might have been snatched from his grasp here.
    NicNac wrote: »
    I used the term 'nutjobs' because I've seen it used enough times to describe people who kill indiscriminately. I simply can't see that a world without Gods will improve our situation. America will still have school massacres, Muslims (as are) in some parts of the world will still find reasons to decapitate women who have been raped, politicians will still find reasons to fight wars, both legal and illegal.
    And I don't think it would 'eliminate one point of irrationality that triggers and feed violence', because those who trigger that violence would find something else to commit the crime in the name of.
    Yes but take away the justification of religion which these cowards are allowed to hide behind, and when they stone a woman to death they would end up in prison like a common criminal for murder intsead of being absolved with the mealy mouthed platitude 'Well we have to respect their beliefs' that the weasel left like to extend to people who commit disgusting acts but who they can't bring themselves to condemn as critisicing religion is the one thing you can't do in our 'free' society.

    Risico007 wrote: »
    So then if eyewitnes testimony and of course observable evidence is garbage then how can we be honestly sure of anything after all the twin towers could still be standing world war 2 could of been “invented”
    Remarkably you raise an interesting point; I suppose even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    I myself can say unequivocally that I believe the twin towers existed because I went up them. And I can say that they no longer exist as I have been back to NYC and they aren't there any more.

    But can I say what caused them to be destroyed with the same certainty? No because I all I have to go on is the witness testimony of the footage, the reports, the eyewitnesses etc.

    So I believe in the twin towers being destroyed by planes flying into them because the evidence is very convincing. And that is the difference. The evidence for Jesus is restricted to the 2000 year old scribblings of some fishermen and goat herders only written years after the event. That might be enough to convince you but intelligent people need something far more substantial.
    NicNac wrote: »
    The problem with religion and its place in the 21st century is that, illogical as it all seems, it works for a lot of people. I don't just mean that it offers comfort to people, but it offers the only means of escape for some people, it gives a lot of elderly people somewhere to go, people to meet, things to do.
    So does bowls and Last Of The Summer wine. Should fans of Richard Corsie and Bill Owen be given special privilege over the rest of us or should all be told by the government that we have to respect them?
    NicNac wrote: »
    Assuming atheists (of which I am one btw) could rid the world of religion, what happens to those who need it? What do you intend to do for them?
    Nothing. They should grow the f**k up.

    I guess it's a nice story to tell children that when granny/Tiddles the hamster dies that they aren't really dead but have gone to live in a special place but if you are still clinging to this delusional rubbish as a grown adult you really need to sort yourself out.

    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.
    Cancer UK, The British Heart Foundation, Help For Heroes: they all organise this sort of stuff. The church doesn't have a monopoly on fetes and coffee mornings.

    And I don't like this insinuation that you can only do benevolent acts if you are affiliated with the church. Add up all the money raised through tombolas and whist drives and set it against the atrocities committed by religion over the centuries and it's thin gruel indeed.

    I can't decide if @NicNac is being serious here or just acting as devil's advocate by coming out with increasingly preposterous statements just for a laugh.

    And Jimmy Saville raised a shit load of money for charity so I'm afraid this holds no water at all when defending the need for religion to exist. But if all religion has got in its credit column is that it raises a few bob for charity by holding car boot sales then that is beyond pathetic. The Vatican could match all the money ever raised in every church fete ever by selling 1% of it's ill gotten assets if it really gave a toss about the poor and underprivileged.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.
    A talking snake on his knee during the press conference like Rod Hull and Emu would be nice too.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there
    Maybe it's time he did a refresher appearance. Why do only those people who were around in the 0030s get to see the revelation with their own eyes (and only if they happened to live in a small area of the Middle East)?

    In fact if the rest of us are just expected to believe in him as were the people in the Old Testament why did he send Jesus down at all? Surely the whole point of having faith in him is that you believe without proof.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night
    How quaint that he actually seems to believe that it's religion that civilises us despite that per head of population 'priest' seems to be both the job that is most religious and the one that has the most rapists signing up for it.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    @NicNac I was thinking about something: although I don't think that in that hypothetical utopian Atheist Republic of Sodom and Gomorrah there would no longer be Sunday tea parties and little fetes for the elderly... If forsaking such celebrations was what it takes for everyone and especially children to receive the proper medical treatment (blood transfusion, organ transplant) to save a life and to have every pedophile priest put in jail for their crimes (and their accomplices) then I'd be tempted to say to hell with Sunday parties. But again I doubt it would be necessary even in a godless and anticlerical Pandemonium.
    Good point. The loss of Songs of Praise and 'More tea vicar?' afternoons of cake and cucumber sandwiches is a price I think most sane people would pay to get rid of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the IRA and all the stuff you mention above.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Yes and screw people like mother Teresa and Ghandi those religious idiots what have they done for society
    We have youtube videos too look and unlike yours that are fronted by religious imbeciles this one features a veritable leviathan of religious debating:

    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say you guys would love Stalin killed over a million Christians
    Can't say it keeps me awake at night in all honesty.

  • Posts: 9,779
    What a lot of fun you crazy kids have been having whilst some of us have been working.

    Time I stuck my oar in on some of this afternoon's points I think....
    NicNac wrote: »
    [
    But is religion that much different to anything else we believe in?
    We may believe our country is the finest on earth, but that doesn't mean it is.

    Why should we believe in invisible lines that separate one country from another? They don't really exist, but we believe in them all the same.
    What?

    Just because countries don't have white lines painted on the ground like on the map when you cross their borders doesn't mean they don't exist and are simply a construct in our minds on a par with the wholly made up one of religion.

    Try walking from here to Seoul and see how you get on with your 'belief' that borders aren't real. You might start off OK strolling nonchalantly through Merkel's borderless utopia but I'm sure the Russians, Chinese and North Koreans might have something to say when you fetched up at the border post and said 'I haven't got a passport or visa as I don't believe in borders'.
    NicNac wrote: »
    Borders are man made, but they aren't realities. You can't see the borders anymore than you can see God.

    Err yes you can. Are the Berlin wall and the DMZ separating the Koreas just something someone imagined?

    Poor old @Risico007 thought he had 'Most Ridiculous Comment' sewn up with any one of his posts but it looks like the trophy might have been snatched from his grasp here.
    NicNac wrote: »
    I used the term 'nutjobs' because I've seen it used enough times to describe people who kill indiscriminately. I simply can't see that a world without Gods will improve our situation. America will still have school massacres, Muslims (as are) in some parts of the world will still find reasons to decapitate women who have been raped, politicians will still find reasons to fight wars, both legal and illegal.
    And I don't think it would 'eliminate one point of irrationality that triggers and feed violence', because those who trigger that violence would find something else to commit the crime in the name of.
    Yes but take away the justification of religion which these cowards are allowed to hide behind, and when they stone a woman to death they would end up in prison like a common criminal for murder intsead of being absolved with the mealy mouthed platitude 'Well we have to respect their beliefs' that the weasel left like to extend to people who commit disgusting acts but who they can't bring themselves to condemn as critisicing religion is the one thing you can't do in our 'free' society.

    Risico007 wrote: »
    So then if eyewitnes testimony and of course observable evidence is garbage then how can we be honestly sure of anything after all the twin towers could still be standing world war 2 could of been “invented”
    Remarkably you raise an interesting point; I suppose even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    I myself can say unequivocally that I believe the twin towers existed because I went up them. And I can say that they no longer exist as I have been back to NYC and they aren't there any more.

    But can I say what caused them to be destroyed with the same certainty? No because I all I have to go on is the witness testimony of the footage, the reports, the eyewitnesses etc.

    So I believe in the twin towers being destroyed by planes flying into them because the evidence is very convincing. And that is the difference. The evidence for Jesus is restricted to the 2000 year old scribblings of some fishermen and goat herders only written years after the event. That might be enough to convince you but intelligent people need something far more substantial.
    NicNac wrote: »
    The problem with religion and its place in the 21st century is that, illogical as it all seems, it works for a lot of people. I don't just mean that it offers comfort to people, but it offers the only means of escape for some people, it gives a lot of elderly people somewhere to go, people to meet, things to do.
    So does bowls and Last Of The Summer wine. Should fans of Richard Corsie and Bill Owen be given special privilege over the rest of us or should all be told by the government that we have to respect them?
    NicNac wrote: »
    Assuming atheists (of which I am one btw) could rid the world of religion, what happens to those who need it? What do you intend to do for them?
    Nothing. They should grow the f**k up.

    I guess it's a nice story to tell children that when granny/Tiddles the hamster dies that they aren't really dead but have gone to live in a special place but if you are still clinging to this delusional rubbish as a grown adult you really need to sort yourself out.

    NicNac wrote: »
    @Ludovico . Well, when the church arranges fetes, and garden parties, coffee mornings and of course services on Sunday morning, they are doing so for the community. No one is forced to attend, but usually the turn out is good.
    Cancer UK, The British Heart Foundation, Help For Heroes: they all organise this sort of stuff. The church doesn't have a monopoly on fetes and coffee mornings.

    And I don't like this insinuation that you can only do benevolent acts if you are affiliated with the church. Add up all the money raised through tombolas and whist drives and set it against the atrocities committed by religion over the centuries and it's thin gruel indeed.

    I can't decide if @NicNac is being serious here or just acting as devil's advocate by coming out with increasingly preposterous statements just for a laugh.

    And Jimmy Saville raised a shit load of money for charity so I'm afraid this holds no water at all when defending the need for religion to exist. But if all religion has got in its credit column is that it raises a few bob for charity by holding car boot sales then that is beyond pathetic. The Vatican could match all the money ever raised in every church fete ever by selling 1% of it's ill gotten assets if it really gave a toss about the poor and underprivileged.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.
    A talking snake on his knee during the press conference like Rod Hull and Emu would be nice too.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Saint @Risico007 , pray for us. Eye witness testimonies by themselves are insufficient. When it comes to the Bible you don't even have that. You have claims of eye witnesses. You have unverified stories of eye witness testimonies. That's pretty thin. 9/11 had a vast amount of evidence. If your hypothetical God was to manifest himself in such way I would no longer be an atheist. Whether or not I'd find him worthy of respect is an entirely different matter. Now if God was revealing himself to me privately, I would not expect anyone to believe me and would try to gather evidence to back up my experience.

    @NicNac Name me one positive thing that religion can do that cannot be achieved by secular means. Who needs religion and only religion to be happy? I don't think it can be eliminated from the world but IF it did through education and by having everyone becoming atheist... then who would still need religion? And by the way there's elderly who are atheists.

    What would be evidence for you

    Well God showing up in the sky for everyone to see surrounded by angels and saints would be a good start. I'd say that would be pretty compelling even. Maybe give a press conference while he's here.

    God did come down from heaven 1st century AD not my fault you weren’t there
    Maybe it's time he did a refresher appearance. Why do only those people who were around in the 0030s get to see the revelation with their own eyes (and only if they happened to live in a small area of the Middle East)?

    In fact if the rest of us are just expected to believe in him as were the people in the Old Testament why did he send Jesus down at all? Surely the whole point of having faith in him is that you believe without proof.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    No we would be condemned to hell have no moral center and be raping and pillaging again but hey maybe that’s your idea of a fun Friday night
    How quaint that he actually seems to believe that it's religion that civilises us despite that per head of population 'priest' seems to be both the job that is most religious and the one that has the most rapists signing up for it.
    Ludovico wrote: »
    @NicNac I was thinking about something: although I don't think that in that hypothetical utopian Atheist Republic of Sodom and Gomorrah there would no longer be Sunday tea parties and little fetes for the elderly... If forsaking such celebrations was what it takes for everyone and especially children to receive the proper medical treatment (blood transfusion, organ transplant) to save a life and to have every pedophile priest put in jail for their crimes (and their accomplices) then I'd be tempted to say to hell with Sunday parties. But again I doubt it would be necessary even in a godless and anticlerical Pandemonium.
    Good point. The loss of Songs of Praise and 'More tea vicar?' afternoons of cake and cucumber sandwiches is a price I think most sane people would pay to get rid of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Hezbollah, the IRA and all the stuff you mention above.
    Risico007 wrote: »
    Yes and screw people like mother Teresa and Ghandi those religious idiots what have they done for society
    We have youtube videos too look and unlike yours that are fronted by religious imbeciles this one features a veritable leviathan of religious debating:

    Risico007 wrote: »
    I still say you guys would love Stalin killed over a million Christians
    Can't say it keeps me awake at night in all honesty.


    I will say this you atheists are a strange and amusing bunch. ah yes all the religious zealots I posted
    Dr Francis Collins (head of the human genome project)
    Dr William Lane Craig
    Dr. Alexander ( a neurologist who came back from the dead)

    And you give me a failed American author who doesn’t have a master degree....


    Oh jeez wiz I am shaking in my boots oh wait nope your still showing me no evidence
  • DarthDimiDarthDimi Behind you!Moderator
    Posts: 23,564
    William Lane Craig could never help your case. Anything but. Even creationists poke fun at the guy. His arguments are ridiculous.
  • Posts: 14,840
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    William Lane Craig could never help your case. Anything but. Even creationists poke fun at the guy. His arguments are ridiculous.

    And "a neurologist who came back from the dead". Darth you forget that neurologist! Who came back from the dead! Just saying that gives weight to a believer's argument. And it sounds legit too.
  • edited May 2018 Posts: 4,602
    The fact that Mother T is still held up as an example of how religion can do good speaks volumes regarding how reality means little to those of faith.

    PS today's serving of bonkers...

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-europe-44242791/the-muslims-who-fast-for-22-hours-a-day-in-iceland#

  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,571
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Maybe not in 10 or even a 100 years, but one day. We become smarter and more sophisticated. Spiritual enlightenment takes new forms. Sooner or later the concept of an elusive god will sound as crazy as gods of thunder, seas, winds, fertility, music and agriculture. I'm not saying the world will be a better place, I'm not saying the alternative will be better either. But even spirituality is prone to trend shifts, no matter how resilient religion is.

    Studies have shown -- and take them for what they're worth -- that the more intelligent people get, the less likely it is they will adopt a theistic religion. I don't mean this as an insult to the religious. My point is, if we manage to survive as a species, it will be because we grow smarter, not less smart. If we grow less smart, we won't survive the many challenges that lay ahead of us. If we do survive them, it will be with increased intelligence. Sooner or later, god worshipers will then become a (possibly shunned) minority, eventually doomed, like polytheistic believers, to grow extinct.

    Again, other ideas may replace god, possibly even more upsetting or dangerous. But it is in fact very reasonable to assume that even the Abrahamic god will become a fossil, something of the past, one day in the distant future. Most ideas which remain unproven, obscure, contested and controversial do. Why would this one be any different? We burnt our witches ages ago, tossed the Scylla and Charybdis into the fire, stopped fearing solar eclipses as dragons eating the sun, ... Time and again, the supernatural must yield. No matter how "hip" it is today to resurrect some of these concepts just to sell a few books, reason eventually wins. The "end of the world" cults, the Flat Earth Societies, ... they are a twisted form of entertainment for us and little else. It'll take a little more time for today's gods to go away, but they too will. Man grows tired of waiting, of investing energy into something that stubbornly refuses to provide tangible merits. A few brave generations may suffice to reduce the religious superstructures of today to ashes, though again, I have no idea what they would use as a substitute, if anything.

    Very good post Dimster.

    But is believing in God really showing a lack of intelligence?

    The point I was trying to make earlier, at the obvious risk of ridicule, was that God, or at least Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, give comfort to so many Christians. It isn't about the power of the catholic church, paedophile priests, Islamic extremists or whatever, it's about one person finding something personal for themselves, from weekly worship.

    They aren't stupid. They aren't rejecting science. They just want that communication with something or someone to give them comfort or hope or whatever.

    And when the god worshipers reach the point of being shunned and doomed, what fate awaits them from the Spock like creatures who inhabit our earth?
    Gonna burn them at the stake? ;)
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited May 2018 Posts: 9,117
    Risico007 wrote: »

    I will say this you atheists are a strange and amusing bunch. ah yes all the religious zealots I posted
    Dr Francis Collins (head of the human genome project)
    Dr William Lane Craig
    Dr. Alexander ( a neurologist who came back from the dead)
    Don’t forget ‘noted’ particle phcysist (and ‘religious artist’whatever that might be) Isabel Piczek. We were all blown away by her revelatory work on the Turin Shroud.
    Risico007 wrote: »

    Oh jeez wiz I am shaking in my boots oh wait nope your still showing me no evidence
    As usual you fail to understand how logic works. We are making no claims whatsoever so therefore need to provide no evidence.
    patb wrote: »
    Haha brilliant. Would love it if they could dig out the lone Muslim Eskimo who lives near the North Pole and gets about 5 mins of sunset to wolf down a whole seal.
    NicNac wrote: »
    DarthDimi wrote: »
    Maybe not in 10 or even a 100 years, but one day. We become smarter and more sophisticated. Spiritual enlightenment takes new forms. Sooner or later the concept of an elusive god will sound as crazy as gods of thunder, seas, winds, fertility, music and agriculture. I'm not saying the world will be a better place, I'm not saying the alternative will be better either. But even spirituality is prone to trend shifts, no matter how resilient religion is.

    Studies have shown -- and take them for what they're worth -- that the more intelligent people get, the less likely it is they will adopt a theistic religion. I don't mean this as an insult to the religious. My point is, if we manage to survive as a species, it will be because we grow smarter, not less smart. If we grow less smart, we won't survive the many challenges that lay ahead of us. If we do survive them, it will be with increased intelligence. Sooner or later, god worshipers will then become a (possibly shunned) minority, eventually doomed, like polytheistic believers, to grow extinct.

    Again, other ideas may replace god, possibly even more upsetting or dangerous. But it is in fact very reasonable to assume that even the Abrahamic god will become a fossil, something of the past, one day in the distant future. Most ideas which remain unproven, obscure, contested and controversial do. Why would this one be any different? We burnt our witches ages ago, tossed the Scylla and Charybdis into the fire, stopped fearing solar eclipses as dragons eating the sun, ... Time and again, the supernatural must yield. No matter how "hip" it is today to resurrect some of these concepts just to sell a few books, reason eventually wins. The "end of the world" cults, the Flat Earth Societies, ... they are a twisted form of entertainment for us and little else. It'll take a little more time for today's gods to go away, but they too will. Man grows tired of waiting, of investing energy into something that stubbornly refuses to provide tangible merits. A few brave generations may suffice to reduce the religious superstructures of today to ashes, though again, I have no idea what they would use as a substitute, if anything.

    Very good post Dimster.

    But is believing in God really showing a lack of intelligence?
    Clearly. See @patb’s post above.

    To be fair I’ve got a sneaking bit of admiration for those guys as at least they stick by their beliefs to the hilt, however mental, unlike the Jews and their eruvs and gadgets to get round the sabbath or Christians who bang on about giving to the poor but all live in nice houses with two cars and a 55 inch Samsung telly.

    NicNac wrote: »
    The point I was trying to make earlier, at the obvious risk of ridicule, was that God, or at least Jesus Christ and the Virgin Mary, give comfort to so many Christians. It isn't about the power of the catholic church, paedophile priests, Islamic extremists or whatever, it's about one person finding something personal for themselves, from weekly worship.
    And I don't think any of us have ever said we have a problem with people doing that in the privacy of their own home.
    NicNac wrote: »
    They aren't stupid. They aren't rejecting science.
    When we have members on here who are happy to state they believe in the existence of talking snakes then I'm not so sure how accurate that statement is.
    NicNac wrote: »
    They just want that communication with something or someone to give them comfort or hope or whatever.
    Can it be classed as communication when it is always one way traffic. They pray and pray and never hear anything back from God. That's more like delusion to me. But again if that's what makes them happy fine. I don't really understand what people get out of trainspotting but I wouldn't ever suggest it is banned.
    NicNac wrote: »
    And when the god worshipers reach the point of being shunned and doomed, what fate awaits them from the Spock like creatures who inhabit our earth?
    Gonna burn them at the stake? ;)
    Why are you obsessed with thinking Atheism is akin to Nazism? All we want is religion to be reduced to the same status as the Flat Earth Society in terms of all it's special privileges granted by the state. If people want to pray on their knees to a guy who just killed their baby, starve themselves, not operate machinery on a saturday or even blow themselves up then as long as it doesn't impact on the rest of us and we aren't expected to give their beliefs any respect then fine, let them fill their boots.
  • MayDayDiVicenzoMayDayDiVicenzo Here and there
    Posts: 5,080
  • Posts: 14,840
    @NicNac I will add to what @TheWizardOfIce said that the (obviously highly improbable) death of all religions does not equal to the death of the religious practitioners. I know many believers like some Christians in this thread like to paint themselves as martyrs but they are making huge false assumptions. In the past some religions have been practically wiped out without a single of their believers be put to death: all it needs is for them to cease to believe in the God or gods they used to worship. Granted there are still worshippers of Zeus and Odin and plenty of neo Pagans but these are modern takes of old cults with little to no resemblance to their source. I did not need to die to stop being a Catholic. All I needed was to reject Catholicism.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    [quote="Ludovico;881789". In the past some religions have been practically wiped out without a single of their believers be put to death:[/quote]

    I think that has only happened when another religion aimed to take over. Which has happened quite a few times.
This discussion has been closed.