It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
That's not what @TheWizardOfIce said. But of course it's easier to build a strawman. And of course the Bible (among other holy books) condemns unbelievers to hell BECAUSE they are unbelievers. Whatever the personally held belief of a specific Christian.
But tell us @Escalus5 what do you believe in and why? You're so eager to defend people of faith I am curious to know where you stand on such topic.
We do know that every effect has a cause, just as every cause has an effect. It is people s perception of time that is flawed.
Oh and "those billions"? You don't belong to "those billions", friend. Because those billions don't exactly get along. It's easier for a Muslim family to live and practice their religion amidst atheists than it is for them to live amidst Christians or Jews. I always have to laugh when religious people talk about "us" versus the atheist crowd. You don't have to worry about the atheist crowd. We don't pick a fight, burn or decapitate people or put magic spells on you. The "religious" form a far more disjointed mix than any other "community" of people. Put yourself in a room full of atheists, and people will probably leave you alone. Put yourself in a room full of Muslims, and I challenge you to get out unscathed. If I put myself in a room full of conservative Christians, I mightn't get out unscathed either. You see, atheists aren't the ones bringing their unproven "truths-to-die-for" to the game. Most of the time we simply don't care. Until challenged, e.g. in this thread, we're more or less happy to live and let live.
When you talk about "those billions", you might as well be talking about sand pebbles, raindrops and beetles. You can collect billions of them indeed, but there's no cohesion, friendship or respect whatsoever. Us, atheists, are far more united. We don't put our faith in anything supernatural. "Those billions" do, except that they disagree about almost every single detail, which leaves their group in shambles much more than ours.
Oh, and you're right. Not every man or woman of faith carries the belief that others who don't follow their doctrine should burn in hell. But, alas, many among them do and some of those pack some heavy guns and shoot the place up. I haven't heard of too many atheists feeling the need to do so. So you can get angry at the exaggeration alright, but it is still closer to the truth than when you turn the tables and call us the haters.
Let me make another demonstration. This thread has been going quite well for 63 pages. Occasionally, someone drops a "That's it, I'm out, this thread is abysmal, I've said all I have to say, ..." sentiment. Pay close attention please to who those "angry quitters" are. Not the atheists, for sure. We're just here, you know, @Ludovico, @TheWizardOfIce, @patb, @0BradyM0Bondfanatic7, myself, and others, occasionally, to pick up some astonishing wild ideas, reason against them and wait for the next good laugh. It's not us who get emotional, who take these things far too seriously, who rather run than continue what I call a fruitful debate. That, to me, proves, that some--I hope you appreciate my nuance--religious people still haven't lost that ancient "holy fire" burning inside them, that restlessness associated with an irrational belief in something unnatural; the frustration that develops in response to having nothing to work with other than "but it's what I belieeeeeeve!!!" and the knowledge that science keeps making progress, keeps rendering the god-concept more and more obsolete and there's nothing that can be done about that except burn down laboratories and such. But then aggression truly is a sign of accepting one's inferiority.
Lastly, yes, there are billions on this planet who would call themselves religious folks. Billions indeed. There are also billions on this planet without a decent education, to no fault of their own I might add. And while I'm not accusing someone who grew up in poor conditions and never got a chance to go to school for not being able to apply advanced scientific models to their view of the cosmos, I trust you are aware that atheism thrives among the higher educated, whereas religion thrives, on average--again, I hope you will appreciate the nuance--among the less educated. There's a link, you see, and it is to be expected that if formal education, totally free from religious infusion, would reach more people on this planet, religion would plummet down fast. There are forces at work which keep religion alive. I'm not necessarily implying conspiracies; merely circumstances, such as poverty, political situations and more. If every person on this planet could go to a free-spirited college and study hard for many years, it's likely religion would be rendered all but extinct within one or two generations. Some deep-thinking religious folks would no doubt still be around, and I'm sure few of us would mind. I'm not exactly equating religion to a lack of intelligence or something similar. But some statistical correlation seems to exist...
Either way, I agree with @TheWizardOfIce. The worst that is to be expected from us, atheists, is a bit of scoffing, maybe indeed a lack of respect. That is still far better than total aggression. And while you, @Escalus5, are correct in that not every single one of "those billions" are violent aggressors, you will, I'm afraid, have to concede that quite a few are. Atheists don't burn down churches, religious madmen burn down embassies. Over a cartoon I might add. Atheists don't decapitate "infidels", religious nutters do, and they televise it. Atheists don't destroy cinemas for showing gay relationships on film, well, you know the rest, don't you... We make fun, we are possibly disrespectful. But that's the worst atheists are known to do. We prefer to keep this an intellectual fight. I'm sorry if some lack the tools to participate and resort to other, less civilised means...
What is the correct perception then. Science was never my strong point.
Ending his evidence, he repeated his apology to survivors, saying he "grieved for the loss of access to faith that this has often resulted in".
Just take in the implications of the last statement. So its "their loss" that the survivors can no longer have faith. And he grieves over that. Oh, it's so sad they will never have faith again. Patronising and way off target re the real issues. Self centred as usual. No realisation or consideration that the victims maybe better off out of the CoE.
No, time is money.
Actually, it's been my experience that atheists (not all, but many) are always the first to announce their worldview to anyone who will listen. Blind faith is stupid, anyone who practices a religion should be labeled an idiot, et cetera, ad nauseam, big yawn. Which is basically what you've been doing in this thread along with your stooges.
The funny thing is, I'm actually a skeptic and have agreed with some of your points. I just can't stand bullies, and I despise smug narcissists, so I felt inclined to come in here to defend Dragonpol.
Carry on.
There were no money before the big bang, then. Is this verified?
You may say that. I couldn't possibly comment.
There was but you couldn't buy anything with it.
The Kremlin and the Vatican spilt it between them. They have both always existed.
The real reason for the big bang.
The tills just exploded. In fact, it's actually the origin of the phrase, 'Money makes the world go round'.
We've expressed our opinions openly, we defended them with arguments, we called on whoever made a claim about God. That's actually proper scepticism.
I am aware yes. But it's a pretty accurate example of children's logic regarding God.
I had loads of questions as a child about God, Jesus & all that which I never seemed to get answered satisfactorily. Probably why I've been an atheist since I was about 8 years old. Too many questions, not enough answers.
Of course not. But it certainly wouldn't hurt your cause if you expressed your opinions in a less condescending and obnoxious tone.
Go back and look at the contributions from bondjames. He's an atheist (I assume), but he has an empathetic approach to other views, and he's persuasive because he doesn't act like an a**hole, but like a gentleman.
I would have called bondjames an atheist (soft) but from his most recent interventions here I am not so sure. He could be an agnostic deist just as easily. In any case that's beside the point: what matters is the intrinsic quality of an argument and I was not shy of refuting arguments from him and others when they were poor (appeals to popularity, refusal to define the word God, etc.). A tone, that's pretty vague. And people making unsubstantiated claims don't give them some kind of immunity because it's a religious claims.
But its Atheists who are the bad boys: with their harsh language and obnoxious tone. How dare we actually say what we think. How dare we say such harsh things. Those poor sensitive religious people. Poor them.
Keep trolling, dude. You have absolutely nothing of substance to add, and you know it.
He happens to be right. You drape yourself in virtue but your accusations are everything but substantiated.
You keep claiming the moral high ground but you're the only one to come on here throwing personal insults about (although to be fair 'pomposity, arrogance and obnoxiousness'? You're just listing my best features there).
If you're happy to appease religion and indulge their childish fantasies that's up to you but forgive the rest of us if we're sick of treating religion with kid gloves and just want to expose it to the same scrutiny everything else in the universe is subject to.
We haven't belittled or 'bullied' anyone in here merely given them more and more and more rope for them to hang themselves. Statements that there's 'loads of evidence' for the existence of God or 'I believe in talking snakes' need to be backed up with more than 'I'm tired of this debate I'm leaving'. If anyone is guilty of turning someone into a laughing stock it's the self inflicted logical seppuku the religionists perform by digging themselves into an inescapable black hole which they can then only then extricate themselves from by running away.
If we are guilty of ripping the piss out of religion's lack of logic, inconsistencies and general ridiculousness it's because religion is inherently ridiculous. Sorry that we had the temerity to point it out but don't shoot the messengers.
I'm just wondering if your default position is to also respect Holocaust deniers or the KKK or ISIS or flat earthers as well? If one automatically respects the religious simply because they hold fervently held beliefs and ignore reason and evidence then why not other groups who follow the same pattern of behaviour?
Respect should be earned not given away like Smarties.
Praise indeed from the master - how many posts have you made in here now and I've still yet to see anything that resembles something that furthers the debate about the matter under discussion.
That's substance son. Feel free to counter with something that perhaps has a bit more heft than 'hey atheists stop being so mean to religion' or 'keep trolling, dude.'
Excellent and eloquent as ever post earlier about the universe and the pre Big Bang state of the universe too Darth. Food for thought that really got the grey cells pondering some big questions. The exact opposite of religion in fact which aims to have people bumbling around in a state of blind ignorance akin to the end of Invasion of the Body Snatchers (the original version obviously, although the Donald Sutherland one is reasonable. The less said about the Daniel Craig version the better).
You can see this in the way that Dawkins has been criticised within his own support base for being too honest. Some feel that atheists whould be more subtle in their approach.
Great, perceptive quote in this video: "I felt you more than I heard you". Feelings are being hurt and the reaction comes from that rather than actually listening to the words being said and make a genuine appraisal of those words. And we should not be surprised at that: after all the words of the Bible etc are equally not properly considered. They are interprested on the emotional level rather than the rational level. The words within the Bible are interprested in a different way that the words within "The Origin of the Species".
But God either exists or he doesn't and there is either evidence to support his existance or their isn't. It's not a sliding scale.
So honest atheists are accused of being rude, bullying etc simply for speaking their minds. (nothing more, just words, no Transit vans on pavements, AK47s or suicide vests, just words - but we are the bullies) The religious have been speaking their mind for thousands of years. Constructing special buildings all over the country, putting on their "sunday best", sounding large bells and meeting regularly to confrim and re-enforce their beleifs.
Can you imagine the outcry from the religious community if athiests built similar buildings (tax free?) and once a week got together and sang songs all about how religion is a load of tosh!
And how about setting up schools where, every morning, all the kids meet in the hall and listen to the Head tell them that religion is a load of tosh. (funded by the state)
I have no problem with any believe, well except fans of SF & SP they are plain nuts, even JC steers clear from that I am told. ;)
Well, you've just about dismissed the entire forum membership as dicks and nuts in a few short sentences.
That has to be quite an achievement
I expected more from St. Mark.
It was easier than you would expect actually. I totally disrespect organised religion and dislike atheist in their disrespect. They tend to be on the opposite sides and forget all the grey colours in between.
If you read this thread you find the atheist argument rather dick-like and the arguments against them are not that grand either.
I also do not expect all the seemingly more "aggressive" atheists on this board to be of the kind that go around preaching their non-gospel actively, but I am also not surprised that they react the way they do on a discussion board like this, since I really don't see any valid arguments on the side of the believers either...and otherwise we wouldn't have a discussion in the first place.