With God on Our Side: One Man's War Against an Evangelical Coup in

[cybercoma]

Thanks for being respectful, geoffrey. It's difficult to debate the topic with you because you've already conceded that theology and God lie outside the realm of reason and understanding.

I understand you feel it's unnecessary to prove the existence, but I cannot agree with that for all of the reasons I've listed over and over in these threads.

You may feel either you have "faith" or you don't, but it's very clear that the "faith" people choose is the one their parents followed. It happens, but it's pretty rare for someone who is raised by parents who believe religion X to grow up and believe religion Y.

I was raised in a Catholic family, so I understand the Bible from a Catholic view. As I got older and began questioning my faith, I studied other religions to see how they differ. I feel that religions are entirely incompatible with one another because they all believe they're 'saved' and everyone in the out-group will perish or suffer.

Personally, saying God lies outside the realm of scientific investigation and discovery makes the whole topic conveniently undebatable. It's what Russell was talking about in his teapot analogy when he said, "nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes." In the case of the teapot, if it can't be examined, then we have no reason to believe that it is there. In the case of God, if its existence can't be proven, then we have no reason to believe that it is there.

Now, when the idea of God has been the reason for so much torture, oppression and death it seems completely insane to me that people would continue to 'faith' based beliefs upon their children.

I know you're not going to sit here and try to prove the existence of God, but I felt it necessary to clarify why I don't believe and why I feel it would be beneficial for everyone to stop such irrationality.

[geoffrey]

Thanks for being respectful, geoffrey. It's difficult to debate the topic with you because you've already conceded that theology and God lie outside the realm of reason and understanding.

Exactly why I don't believe my religious values should have any impact on anything in the realm of reason and understanding. Belief in God isn't exactly the most rational viewpoint.

You may feel either you have "faith" or you don't, but it's very clear that the "faith" people choose is the one their parents followed. It happens, but it's pretty rare for someone who is raised by parents who believe religion X to grow up and believe religion Y.

I am far more faith oriented then my parents, who are Catholic but not practicing in any way. I'm not neccessarily a regular Church goer (I have alot of issues with the Church) but I do study the Bible and debate it theologically quite often, and I believe in God... but from a very different view as most Christians I suppose. If God is 'perfect', then he is rational, so rationality must be the way to do things.

I have a hard time calling myself Catholic... I recognize from a theological point of view the Church, but I struggle with alot of the teachings, at least at first glance. You'd find if you studied the high level theology of the Church, what is sin and what is not is far more grey then anything your told in Sunday school. I've read theology on sex outside of marriage being a moral act, as in something actually to be encouraged in some situations... stuff like that. You'll never hear ol' Father O'Mally saying it, but this has been proposed by some high level theologians as a reasonable interpretation.

Interestingly, I was very athestic through my early teenage years until I began to see faith and all that from my own side. I studied Church theology instead of listening to sermons, I studied the Bible. I suppose I'm far from the traditional Christian, but I think my study and reflection on all the materials available really has both increased my faith, and helped me get past the group-think of organized religion.

Trust me, the ritualist Catholics that show up for Church every week but don't really investigate anything being said are definitely far from my favourite people. I really do understand why alot of people dislike religion.

I was raised in a Catholic family, so I understand the Bible from a Catholic view. As I got older and began questioning my faith, I studied other religions to see how they differ. I feel that religions are entirely incompatible with one another because they all believe they're 'saved' and everyone in the out-group will perish or suffer.

I think that's a terribly irrational view unsubstaniated by anything in the Bible. If that was my feeling on religion, I'd be turned off too.

Personally, saying God lies outside the realm of scientific investigation and discovery makes the whole topic conveniently undebatable. It's what Russell was talking about in his teapot analogy when he said, "nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes." In the case of the teapot, if it can't be examined, then we have no reason to believe that it is there. In the case of God, if its existence can't be proven, then we have no reason to believe that it is there.

We also have no rational reason to believe in it's non-existence. It's a tough concept to grasp. You can't prove the existence of God, I will agree with you there until the end of time.

Now, when the idea of God has been the reason for so much torture, oppression and death it seems completely insane to me that people would continue to 'faith' based beliefs upon their children.

My belief in God hasn't led to any of that. People make mistakes and commit terrible things, not a religion. Peaceful enjoyment of religion is possible, and in fact most enjoyment of religion is peaceful.

When it's used for such negative purposes, I really don't blame religion or faith... it's definitely solely on the backs of individuals that have twisted an ideology to suit their purposes at the time.

I know you're not going to sit here and try to prove the existence of God, but I felt it necessary to clarify why I don't believe and why I feel it would be beneficial for everyone to stop such irrationality.

Your case will probably be convincing enough for many people, but I think most of the philosophical and theological community has agreed that it's not rational to argue the existence of God from a scientific view. It can't be done. Some of your points are interesting theological arguments, like why would God allow someone to suffer, ect. ect..

You may be suprised, but the Catholic Church has recognized evolution for some time now, and a number of other things that the evangelicals would not ever admit to. The Bible pounders of the South give us all a bad name.

You'll find lots of us that can clearly seperate our religious or spiritual beliefs with the rationality of science.

[cybercoma]

You can't disprove the existence of a flying spaghetti monster anymore than you can prove that it exists, so why not believe in that? When something can't be proven, we typically don't believe in it and people are often looked at as being eccentric or insane for such beliefs. For example, if I said there were little gnomes running around stealing people's socks out of their dryers, you'd be right to believe I"m wrong and/or nuts for that matter. You see, for every other subject aside from religion we disbelieve things or have no opinion until we're offered proof. If I can't show irrefutable evidence that these gnomes exist, most people are rightfully going to think I'm nuts.

So, you've accepted that this is the case and it is not necessary to argue in favour of the existence of God in light of this. You have a spiritual belief and not a religious one. You're picking and choosing what parts you like and dismissing those that don't suit what you believe. And although you say there are people that can seperate their religious/spiritual beliefs from reason, logic and knowledge, this clearly is not the norm. The examples are too numerous to mention, but I will point you towards the threads I made in the last two days about 'honor killings' and 'sikh riots'. People around the world are killing and dying because of their faith in unproven things.

To say that we might as well believe because you can't disprove the existence of God is totally irrational when those beliefs are resulting in murder and death. Now your own personal "spirituality" (I'd rather not say religion in your case), is not going to lead to that because it is personal. Remember that you also have a belief without reason and to say you're any more right for that belief than someone else who has a different belief without reason, is wrong. Since it is completely irrational to believe in things that are unproven, I think it's fair to say that those who do not believe since there is no proof, evidence or reason to do so are coming to the correct conclusion.

[Remiel]

Yeah, but you can logically theorize why God might exist. Not so for the Spaghetti Monster, so it is an invalid comparison.

If it is completely irrational to believe that which is unproven, then why is it not irrational to waste time and energy trying to prove things which may not be true? I would bet you that many scientists were driven by the irrational belief that what they were trying to prove was indeed true. Some were right, some were wrong, but without that irrational belief, would they ever have had the drive to find out?

[Slavik44]

I am not very surprised. Ever here the expression "There are no athiest in foxholes." While you sit safely in your homes watching the horror on the news and saying "How terrible" and then going back to your TV dinners, those of us who have seen duty in certain parts of the world like Africa and the middle east and have smelled the rotting dead corpses in the heat. Know two things for certain, A) there is a devil, because only he could inflict this kind of mind warping carnage and if theres a devil then there sure is a god.

[cybercoma]

Thanks for posting that link Slavik. I searched for awhile on YouTube, but I couldn't find it.

[betsy]

What’s certain, in any case, is that a lot of people in high and low places within the Bush administration — and in particular, the military — heard him literally, and regard the war on terror as a religious war:

“The enemy has got a face. He’s called Satan. He lives in Fallujah. And we’re going to destroy him,” a lieutenant colonel, according to a BBC reporter, said to his troops on the eve of the destruction of that undefended city in post-election 2004.

And what's wrong with that, may I ask????

Haven't you heard of RALLYING THE TROOPS?

In the old days, they used their king or their queen as a rallying cry!

I would say this colonel is quite smart! Yes, he used faith to spur his men....knowing the power of fighting for one's belief! The enemy uses the same tactic!

[betsy]

What’s certain, in any case, is that a lot of people in high and low places within the Bush administration — and in particular, the military — heard him literally, and regard the war on terror as a religious war:

You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!

It is a war between the Islamist fundamentalists who want to rid the world of all infidels (non-Islam believers) that includes the agnostics/atheists, and the infidels who want to maintain their rights to exercise their freedom and very existence!

People like you are actually caught in the middle. You want to play referee (leaning more towards the enemy).....well, I wish you'd all go have a good little parlay with the enemies and convince them to let you practice freely what you believe in (permissive sex and abortion, SSM, women's power..)!

If ever we end up being under the Islam fundamentalists and they are to choose who to exterminate pronto without batting an eye, based on their fundamental beliefs (in other words, who would they rather spare and have living among them)....who do you think will become extinct first? People like you (who represents all the corruptions that they see in a western world), or Christians?

[newbie]

I was raised in a Catholic family, so I understand the Bible from a Catholic view. As I got older and began questioning my faith, I studied other religions to see how they differ. I feel that religions are entirely incompatible with one another because they all believe they're 'saved' and everyone in the out-group will perish or suffer.

I think that's a terribly irrational view unsubstaniated by anything in the Bible. If that was my feeling on religion, I'd be turned off too.

But the Bible is the problem geoffrey, ala Catholic Bible, New World Translations (J.W.'s), Book of Mormon (so-called additive to the King James) and on and on. And these religions or Christian variants believe essentially what cybercoma has described hence the incompatibility.

[M.Dancer]

But the Bible is the problem geoffrey, ala Catholic Bible, New World Translations (J.W.'s), Book of Mormon (so-called additive to the King James) and on and on. And these religions or Christian variants believe essentially what cybercoma has described hence the incompatibility.

That is far from true on so many different levels. First off, the bible doesn't say anywhere that Catholics are saved but anglicans are not. Secondly, Rome doesn't say that Catholics are saved but Anglicans are not.

[Figleaf]

What’s certain, in any case, is that a lot of people in high and low places within the Bush administration — and in particular, the military — heard him literally, and regard the war on terror as a religious war:

“The enemy has got a face. He’s called Satan. He lives in Fallujah. And we’re going to destroy him,” a lieutenant colonel, according to a BBC reporter, said to his troops on the eve of the destruction of that undefended city in post-election 2004.

And what's wrong with that, may I ask????

You can't be serious. What's wrong is:

1. Satan doesn't exist.

2. If he did exist, he isn't some petty earthly warlord.

3. Demonizing the enemy with absurd mythological references puts blinders on your own ability to perceive and act correctly.

The colonel was uttering purest crapshit, and seems to me to lack the desireable level of professionalism.

... he used faith to spur his men....knowing the power of fighting for one's belief!

IF his men believe in Satan and IF his men believe that Satan is a man who lives in Fallujah, then maybe he was motivating them to fight for their beliefs. If not, he was clouding their minds and sapping their motivations by inflicting his personal views.

[Figleaf]

You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!

It is a war between the Islamist fundamentalists who want to rid the world of all infidels (non-Islam believers) that includes the agnostics/atheists, and the infidels who want to maintain their rights to exercise their freedom and very existence!

It may be a religious war in the eyes of the extremists, but I think it would be a sad mistake for us to adopt their faulty and counterproductive worldview. George Wealth-destroyer Bush has already blundered by calling this challenge a 'war'. It's not a war. It's the responsible states of the world acting against criminal nutbars. Calling it war gives them a level of credibility they don't deserve.

[newbie]

But the Bible is the problem geoffrey, ala Catholic Bible, New World Translations (J.W.'s), Book of Mormon (so-called additive to the King James) and on and on. And these religions or Christian variants believe essentially what cybercoma has described hence the incompatibility.

That is far from true on so many different levels. First off, the bible doesn't say anywhere that Catholics are saved but anglicans are not. Secondly, Rome doesn't say that Catholics are saved but Anglicans are not.

Well, I'll grant you the Catholic church doesn't necessarily feel that way anymore, but their bibles are different and smack of exclusivity. The Mormons and J.W.'s undoubtedly exercise religious isolationism and believe that they are "right" and others are not.

[kuzadd]

And what's wrong with that, may I ask????

Haven't you heard of RALLYING THE TROOPS?

In the old days, they used their king or their queen as a rallying cry!

I would say this colonel is quite smart! Yes, he used faith to spur his men....knowing the power of fighting for one's belief! The enemy uses the same tactic!

so then you are equating the american armed forces to fanatical terrorists? priceless!

[kuzadd]

You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!

It is a war between the Islamist fundamentalists who want to rid the world of all infidels (non-Islam believers) that includes the agnostics/atheists, and the infidels who want to maintain their rights to exercise their freedom and very existence!

People like you are actually caught in the middle. You want to play referee (leaning more towards the enemy).....well, I wish you'd all go have a good little parlay with the enemies and convince them to let you practice freely what you believe in (permissive sex and abortion, SSM, women's power..)!

If ever we end up being under the Islam fundamentalists and they are to choose who to exterminate pronto without batting an eye, based on their fundamental beliefs (in other words, who would they rather spare and have living among them)....who do you think will become extinct first? People like you (who represents all the corruptions that they see in a western world), or Christians?

"You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!"

NO, it is not! The" war on terror", is a sales pitch a slogan to sell the war to the western audience.

It's like the "war on drugs" useless sloganeering.

There os NO such thing as a religious war, never has been, never will be. Religion is used to rally the people, particularily extremists.

War is/has always been fought for geo/strategic /political/ resources as the reasons.

Be it a useful river or canal, gold, diamonds, land, and oil, yes, OIL ! etc.,

But not religion, only an extremist would buy into that.

[betsy]

What’s certain, in any case, is that a lot of people in high and low places within the Bush administration — and in particular, the military — heard him literally, and regard the war on terror as a religious war:

“The enemy has got a face. He’s called Satan. He lives in Fallujah. And we’re going to destroy him,” a lieutenant colonel, according to a BBC reporter, said to his troops on the eve of the destruction of that undefended city in post-election 2004.

And what's wrong with that, may I ask????

You can't be serious. What's wrong is:

1. Satan doesn't exist.

2. If he did exist, he isn't some petty earthly warlord.

3. Demonizing the enemy with absurd mythological references puts blinders on your own ability to perceive and act correctly.

The colonel was uttering purest crapshit, and seems to me to lack the desireable level of professionalism.

Are you for real???

This is war!

Who cares if Satan is real or not! The colonel could just as well shout and spur his men on with the fierce battlecry, "Let's get the Toothfairy!" If that would spur the men...why not? Hey, whatever works!

You should see the movie Braveheart for a good sample of good old fashion troop rallying!

Wait a minute....don't tell me there's a provision in the Geneva Convention saying anything about "misrepresentation?"......against uttering "purest crapshit?"

Holy tamolly....did you say professionalism????? Dealing with barbarians???? LOL!

Unbelievable....

[kuzadd]

[

You can't be serious. What's wrong is:

1. Satan doesn't exist.

2. If he did exist, he isn't some petty earthly warlord.

3. Demonizing the enemy with absurd mythological references puts blinders on your own ability to perceive and act correctly.

The colonel was uttering purest crapshit, and seems to me to lack the desireable level of professionalism.

... he used faith to spur his men....knowing the power of fighting for one's belief!

IF his men believe in Satan and IF his men believe that Satan is a man who lives in Fallujah, then maybe he was motivating them to fight for their beliefs. If not, he was clouding their minds and sapping their motivations by inflicting his personal views.

thank goodness for a reasonable response, take a bow!

hearty applause!

[betsy]

"You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!"

NO, it is not! The" war on terror", is a sales pitch a slogan to sell the war to the western audience.

It's like the "war on drugs" useless sloganeering.

There os NO such thing as a religious war, never has been, never will be. Religion is used to rally the people, particularily extremists.

War is/has always been fought for geo/strategic /political/ resources as the reasons.

Be it a useful river or canal, gold, diamonds, land, and oil, yes, OIL ! etc.,

But not religion, only an extremist would buy into that.

You may want to cling to what YOU THINK....but that doesn't mean it is so.

Why would some words of some author be taken as fact? His is just a theory! One thing very clear is the very reason behind the suicide bombers willingness to die....MARTYRDOM in the name of Allah! That, my dear, is fact!

[betsy]

You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!

It is a war between the Islamist fundamentalists who want to rid the world of all infidels (non-Islam believers) that includes the agnostics/atheists, and the infidels who want to maintain their rights to exercise their freedom and very existence!

It may be a religious war in the eyes of the extremists, but I think it would be a sad mistake for us to adopt their faulty and counterproductive worldview. George Wealth-destroyer Bush has already blundered by calling this challenge a 'war'. It's not a war. It's the responsible states of the world acting against criminal nutbars. Calling it war gives them a level of credibility they don't deserve.

Eh?

If it's a criminal act and not war, maybe we can throw them all in jail!

Maybe we can open a jail in Cuba.

It's obviously a war.

If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck....it probably is a duck.

[Figleaf]

You may want to delude yourself into thinking otherwise, but the fact is the war on terror is actually a religious war!

It is a war between the Islamist fundamentalists who want to rid the world of all infidels (non-Islam believers) that includes the agnostics/atheists, and the infidels who want to maintain their rights to exercise their freedom and very existence!

It may be a religious war in the eyes of the extremists, but I think it would be a sad mistake for us to adopt their faulty and counterproductive worldview. George Wealth-destroyer Bush has already blundered by calling this challenge a 'war'. It's not a war. It's the responsible states of the world acting against criminal nutbars. Calling it war gives them a level of credibility they don't deserve.

Eh?

If it's a criminal act and not war, maybe we can throw them all in jail!

Maybe we can open a jail in Cuba.

It's obviously a war.

If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck....it probably is a duck.

Ever heard the term 'self-fulfilling prophesy'?

[jbg]

That is far from true on so many different levels. First off, the bible doesn't say anywhere that Catholics are saved but anglicans are not. Secondly, Rome doesn't say that Catholics are saved but Anglicans are not.

Certainly, the Bible, which I define to include only the Old Testament, does not.

[betsy]

It's obviously a war.

If it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, and quacks like a duck....it probably is a duck.

Ever heard the term 'self-fulfilling prophesy'?

Explain please.

[betsy]

Okay, I just want to know where you guys (Kuzadd and Figleaf), are coming from, obviously your rabid anti-religion (specifically anti-Christianity) is quite intriguing....and on numerous times, quite baffling.

I know Jbg is a Jew. And I think if I'm not mistaken, so is M.Dancer. And correct me if I'm wrong, Cybercoma is an Atheist.

Newbie is Agnostic. And as you well know, I'm a Christian.

But what about you, Figleaf and Kuzadd?

Are you Agnostics or Atheists? Or are you Muslims?

[kuzadd]

Okay, I just want to know where you guys (Kuzadd and Figleaf), are coming from, obviously your rabid anti-religion (specifically anti-Christianity) is quite intriguing....and on numerous times, quite baffling.

I know Jbg is a Jew. And I think if I'm not mistaken, so is M.Dancer. And correct me if I'm wrong, Cybercoma is an Atheist.

Newbie is Agnostic. And as you well know, I'm a Christian.

But what about you, Figleaf and Kuzadd?

Are you Agnostics or Atheists? Or are you Muslims?

"obviously your rabid anti-religion (specifically anti-Christianity) is quite intriguing.

yet, I am not anti-religion! And was raised Roman Catholic, inc 9 yrs of Catholic school indctrination.

."..and on numerous times, quite baffling"

it is your assumption that I am anti-religion, that is baffling you.

"Are you Agnostics or Atheists? Or are you Muslims?'"

all and none at the same time!

Is that clearer?

Question for you , why do you have to label and compartmentalize everyone, does it make it easier for you?

editted to add:

Question for you? if you are christian, why then do you not believe God, created all of humanity in his image?

I believe that.( ONE human family)

It seems you do not.

You seem to believe that only certain persons are God's creations.

clarify?

[betsy]

Okay, I just want to know where you guys (Kuzadd and Figleaf), are coming from, obviously your rabid anti-religion (specifically anti-Christianity) is quite intriguing....and on numerous times, quite baffling.

I know Jbg is a Jew. And I think if I'm not mistaken, so is M.Dancer. And correct me if I'm wrong, Cybercoma is an Atheist.

Newbie is Agnostic. And as you well know, I'm a Christian.

But what about you, Figleaf and Kuzadd?

Are you Agnostics or Atheists? Or are you Muslims?

Question for you , why do you have to label and compartmentalize everyone, does it make it easier for you?

Eh? Come again?

editted to add:

Question for you? if you are christian, why then do you not believe God, created all of humanity in his image?

I believe that.( ONE human family)

It seems you do not.

You seem to believe that only certain persons are God's creations.

clarify?

No, you clarify.

Why do you say that?