Webb Simpson - does he have a mind of his own?

[newtogolf]

You ignored my last post, so last try, explain to us that are ignorant how the first single cell organism (which we eventually evolved from) came to life.

Originally Posted by Shorty

With respect (and I know that that will come off as sounding funny, ) how can it be "personally offensive" to you that a person states as a belief that there is obviously no God?

I can understand you being disturbed - because it is obviously discomforting to be put in a position where one can't defend an irrational position.

Why not boldly explain to me why I am wrong? I respect difference, opinion and individuality, by I certainly do not respect "beliefs" which are not really beliefs at all, but a recycled bunch of ideas which have been spoon fed since early childhood and never questioned?

And---it's not enough to say that you have questioned them and found that they stand up to scrutiny.

I am not saying that religion per se is nonsense, I am saying that religions where people in modern society place a belief in ideas that have never ever been supported by any form of evidence.

For example - miracles, people rising from the dead, etc. I challenge anyone on this forum to actually come out and say they belive in the resurection and that God exists.How can one possibly take seriously the idea that an adult in this century would believe these things.  If you were to admit that you believed these things rather than shying away and putting your beliefs in the "personal" box, again that's a convenient way of avoiding the issue. In the absence of any evidence, I will continue to question faith based on rumours and imagination which are perpetuated and swallowed whole down the centuries.

I am not expecting to convert believers to atheism - I'm not that naive - but I would love to read something that could actually make a sane atheist (most of us probably are sane, perhaps not all  ) reconsider his/her position. Please direct me to something - ANYTHING that might stand up to some sort of evidence based scrutiny. And please spare me the "intelligent design"nonsense about jet planes suddenly manufacturing themselves randomly.

On the other hand, why wouldn't a sane Christian be questioning his/her belief on an hourly basis - oh that's right, I must look at a flower to know that God exists.

On the other hand, given that my position is that there is no evidence at all to suggest the existence of a deity, why is it that "believers" are so thin skinned and easily offended?

If it was easy to ridicule an atheist, people would do it, but they can't - all they can do is go on about them having wretched, meaningless lives and being a sad mass of chemicals.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

You ignored my last post, so last try, explain to us that are ignorant how the first single cell organism (which we eventually evolved from) came to life.

Perhaps you need to read your Stephen Hawking a little more thoroughly.

You would know that there is no simple explanation.

I hardly think that in the absence of a simple answer to the question it is reasonable to say "God made it.",

because that would put you in the uncomfortable position of being asked "Who made God?".

[tristanhilton85]

Just a couple of points that I'm sure won't change anybody's mind one way or another but here it goes.

1.  The mere definition of faith is a belief in something that can be proven 100%.  That is exactly what Christianity is... to us, we see the world around us, and in our eyes see evidence of God, and while not being able to prove it 100% believe in it.  The above poster got it right when he said that the fact that we can't prove God exists doesn't prove that He doesn't.

2.  Calling Christianity (or any religion at all) a fairytale does come across as offensive, rude, and ignorant.  Whether you meant it to be or not is irrelevant; it came across that way (at least to me, and I'm assuming others).  We are not talking about Cinderella or Snow White here, these are peoples beliefs and calling them fairytales is disrespectful.

3.  I'd say the reason that Webb Simpson has that Scripture in a place where everybody can see it is that he feels it is important.  He is trying to share it without "ramming it down your throat."  It is simply embroidered where you can see it, it is up to you whether or not you want to take a look at what it says.

[mck]

Originally Posted by Shorty

With respect (and I know that that will come off as sounding funny,) how can it be "personally offensive" to you that a person states as a belief that there is obviously no God?

I can understand you being disturbed - because it is obviously discomforting to be put in a position where one can't defend an irrational position.

Why not boldly explain to me why I am wrong? I respect difference, opinion and individuality, by I certainly do not respect "beliefs" which are not really beliefs at all, but a recycled bunch of ideas which have been spoon fed since early childhood and never questioned?

And---it's not enough to say that you have questioned them and found that they stand up to scrutiny.

I am not saying that religion per se is nonsense, I am saying that religions where people in modern society place a belief in ideas that have never ever been supported by any form of evidence.

For example - miracles, people rising from the dead, etc. I challenge anyone on this forum to actually come out and say they belive in the resurection and that God exists.How can one possibly take seriously the idea that an adult in this century would believe these things.  If you were to admit that you believed these things rather than shying away and putting your beliefs in the "personal" box, again that's a convenient way of avoiding the issue. In the absence of any evidence, I will continue to question faith based on rumours and imagination which are perpetuated and swallowed whole down the centuries.

I am not expecting to convert believers to atheism - I'm not that naive - but I would love to read something that could actually make a sane atheist (most of us probably are sane, perhaps not all ) reconsider his/her position. Please direct me to something - ANYTHING that might stand up to some sort of evidence based scrutiny. And please spare me the "intelligent design"nonsense about jet planes suddenly manufacturing themselves randomly.

On the other hand, why wouldn't a sane Christian be questioning his/her belief on an hourly basis - oh that's right, I must look at a flower to know that God exists.

On the other hand, given that my position is that there is no evidence at all to suggest the existence of a deity, why is it that "believers" are so thin skinned and easily offended?

If it was easy to ridicule an atheist, people would do it, but they can't - all they can do is go on about them having wretched, meaningless lives and being a sad mass of chemicals.

Well, to borrow your own worldview for a moment, my answer to everything you’ve said on this thread is SO WHAT!  None of this means anything, you, me, web simpson, and even deer hunters across the world, we’re all just rearranging the seats on the titanic.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

Seems odd that, as an atheist, you would spend time in church on Sundays.  Else, why would you know what "most of the services are centered around"? And why would you assume that spiritual people go to church? I think your prejudices may be showing a bit.

I don't waste one nanosecond of my time in church on Sundays. I didn't get married in a church, I don't celebrate any religious holidays etc. I'm usually at work or playing golf. You don't have to go to church every Sunday to know what's going on in church. Unfortunately, there too many religious people trying to "show me the treasure" for me not to know. Btw, I am not trying to hide my prejudices. I am 100% non-religious. I want to make it clear on which side of the fence I'm on so people can understand where I'm coming from.

[Harmonious]

Originally Posted by Shorty

On the other hand, why wouldn't a sane Christian be questioning his/her belief on an hourly basis - oh that's right, I must look at a flower to know that God exists.

If it was easy to ridicule an atheist, people would do it, but they can't - all they can do is go on about them having wretched, meaningless lives and being a sad mass of chemicals.

I can't speak for anyone else, but I imagine that lots of "believers" got to where they are by continually questioning the world around them.  Not, as you so derisively state, by blindly following some dogma or other that was force-fed to them.

If anyone has closed his mind to outside ideas, it would seem to be you. And so far, the only ridiculing has been done here has been by you and some of the other atheists. And done with such a fervor that I have to wonder what it your collective pasts has made you so bitter toward others.

[The_Pharaoh]

Originally Posted by Harmonious

If anyone has closed his mind to outside ideas, it would seem to be you. And so far, the only ridiculing has been done here has been by you and some of the other atheists. And done with such a fervor that I have to wonder what it your collective pasts has made you so bitter toward others.

Nothing in my past has made me bitter towards believers. And I have been no more bitter towards them than they have towards me. Personally, I think the debate has been rather civil. Some of you feel my replies have hit a nerve. Quite the contrary, I have had this type of debate a million times and I am very comfortable with my stance on this subject.

I just find it incredible that in this day and age, there are still so many people more inclined to believe that a God they cannot explain just put us here for the crack, rather than the possibility that we evolved over millions and millions of years from a more simple lifeform.

[newtogolf]

I've read Hawking and others a few times actually and as you finally admitted, science can't explain it.  Given the absence of scientific proof we can simplify the arguement down to:  You "believe" there isn't a god, they "believe" there is a god but since neither side is able to prove their belief it means you both exhibit faith in your beliefs.

Originally Posted by Shorty

Perhaps you need to read your Stephen Hawking a little more thoroughly.

You would know that there is no simple explanation.

I hardly think that in the absence of a simple answer to the question it is reasonable to say "God made it.",

because that would put you in the uncomfortable position of being asked "Who made God?".

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

we can simplify the arguement down to:  You "believe" there isn't a god, they "believe" there is a god but since neither side is able to prove their belief it means you both exhibit faith in your beliefs.

Only you forgot to add the bit where those who believe in God base their "belief" on an entirely constructed and manufactured set of fables.

I don't seek to explain things I don't understand by inventing ludicrous stories about people rising from the dead and Noah's ark and seas being parted.

There's a bit of a difference.

Even you would have to admit that if someone believed in Noah's ark they would, by definition, be completely stupid.  Surely...

[newtogolf]

I was a catholic long enough to learn about religion.  I approach the bible in the same way I do Aesops fables.  They are both parables used to teach people life lessons and the importance of showing kindness, generosity, sacrifice, sympathy and empathy to others.  I don't view the commandments as the word of god, I see most of them as guidelines to how we should treat others and how we should conduct ourselves in society.  The god part has typically been a symbol of fear that has been used over time to control peoples behavior so they can live in harmony with the rest of society.

To answer your question, I don't believe there was an ark but I do understand the underlying message of the story.  What do you personally gain by calling someone stupid who's faith leads them to believe there is an ark other than some false sense of superiority?

Originally Posted by Shorty

Only you forgot to add the bit where those who believe in God base their "belief" on an entirely constructed and manufactured set of fables.

I don't seek to explain things I don't understand by inventing ludicrous stories about people rising from the dead and Noah's ark and seas being parted.

There's a bit of a difference.

Even you would have to admit that if someone believed in Noah's ark they would, by definition, be completely stupid.  Surely...

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by newtogolf

I was a catholic long enough to learn about religion.  I approach the bible in the same way I do Aesops fables.  They are both parables used to teach people life lessons and the importance of showing kindness, generosity, sacrifice, sympathy and empathy to others.  I don't view the commandments as the word of god, I see most of them as guidelines to how we should treat others and how we should conduct ourselves in society.  The god part has typically been a symbol of fear that has been used over time to control peoples behavior so they can live in harmony with the rest of society.

To answer your question, I don't believe there was an ark but I do understand the underlying message of the story.  What do you personally gain by calling someone stupid who's faith leads them to believe there is an ark other than some false sense of superiority?

You have explained that you see these things as metaphors. That's a perfectly reasonable explanation. One which I both accept and respect.

I am not interested in "personal gain". Why should I be?

I do believe though, that people should be capable of justifing beliefs - especially ones which are plainly absurd. And that's why these people suddenly become silent when the "Who made God" question arises. It is self evident that a person who believes in the ark is stupid. Unless they are a child. My problem lies with those who pick and choose which parts of the bible to take literally and which they see as metaphors.

You will notice that they can't engage in debate. They resort to accusing people of having "sad and miserable lives" and think that there must be some kind of trauma which they are trying to compensate for.  You will probably agree with me when I say that some of the grimmest and most miserable people you meet are those who are "deeply" religious.

[makaveli]

I have never liked famous people who try too hard to show they are religious. Thank god there are not much in my country, and I am from Italy (where the Pope actually is) which is pretty weird...

p.s. (yeah I know the Vatican is another country but I am sure you get my point)

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by makaveli

I have never liked famous people who try too hard to show they are religious. Thank god there are not much in my country, and I am from Italy (where the Pope actually is) which is pretty weird...

p.s. (yeah I know the Vatican is another country but I am sure you get my point)

Given that the Pope protects pedophiles it's no wonder you don't respect him.

The Catholic church is possibly the most corrupt and disgusting organisation on the planet.

[iacas]

Originally Posted by Shorty

Given that the Pope protects pedophiles it's no wonder you don't respect him.

Okay, at the very least that's off-topic.

From my opinion, you're doing yourself no favors by continuing to post, Shorty. The people who wanted to see this thread closed should almost be pleased that it continues because every time you post it helps make some of their point(s).

[newtogolf]

I'll agree that  many people have turned to religion when faced with personal tragedy or challenge they didn't feel capable of facing alone.  You and I question things that most religious people won't even consider questioning because their faith is so strong they would fear such doubts would make their god unhappy with them.

Originally Posted by Shorty

You have explained that you see these things as metaphors. That's a perfectly reasonable explanation. One which I both accept and respect.

I am not interested in "personal gain". Why should I be?

I do believe though, that people should be capable of justifing beliefs - especially ones which are plainly absurd. And that's why these people suddenly become silent when the "Who made God" question arises. It is self evident that a person who believes in the ark is stupid. Unless they are a child. My problem lies with those who pick and choose which parts of the bible to take literally and which they see as metaphors.

You will notice that they can't engage in debate. They resort to accusing people of having "sad and miserable lives" and think that there must be some kind of trauma which they are trying to compensate for.  You will probably agree with me when I say that some of the grimmest and most miserable people you meet are those who are "deeply" religious.

[Shorty]

Originally Posted by iacas

Okay, at the very least that's off-topic.

From my opinion, you're doing yourself no favors by continuing to post, Shorty. The people who wanted to see this thread closed should almost be pleased that it continues because every time you post it helps make some of their point(s).

I know - I'm like a dog returning to its own vomit. Can't help myself.

Like most people, I'm now officially "done" with this thread.

[indybuckeyefan]

well

we get another chance to see if god favors webb or ben

[Jmdmbike]

I know - I'm like a dog returning to its own vomit. Can't help myself.

Like most people, I'm now officially "done" with this thread.

I had a dog who used to do that ( see my avatar). Also ate his own poop occasionally when the mood struck him. Otherwise, his manners were impeccable. I'll give him a pass on his after dinner belching and farting, after all was a guy. Hey, as long as were not talking about golf, I thought I'd throw that one out there......