Lisa Jones wrote on Sep 29^th, 2023 at 12:03pm:


Oh, God, not another ID to add to the list. I'm not Mattyfisk nor any other ID you've mistaken me for Lisa. Can you hear me scream NO in cyberspace?

In respect of some of the other posts:

1. The burden of proof exists on the person making a claim about gods. The Atheist only has to show whether the evidence offered by the Theist is insufficient or not well supported.

2. As an Atheist I'm not making a claim about gods one way or another, I'm open to the Theist providing evidence for his/her claim. If s(he) successfully discharges that burden, then you'll have a convert in me.

Linus wrote on Sep 29^th, 2023 at 1:01pm:


I’m not into converting or convincing people.

I’m into SHARING my personal story/journey with those few genuine people who might be interested in knowing about it.

I’ve stated previously ... converting and convincing others isn’t in my job description. It’s in those who listen to my story/journey and it specifically occurs as they process its application and relevance to their own lives.

As I’m married to an atheist I know that debating the existence of God does not work. It only causes conflict and tension. No relationship needs that.

The understanding/knowledge/awareness regarding God’s existence can only come about outside the realms of formal debate.

Unfortunately it’s a process which takes time, patience and it takes circumstances (especially difficult challenging ones). I’ve slowly come to accept that this is how it is with atheists. For whatever reason they just cannot see what we theists can readily see. It’s frustrating for me as a believer in particular because I’m a caring wife and mother so I would like nothing more than to keep my family safe and together both here and in the next life. I’m not sure that’s going to happen. As much as I love my husband I don’t think he’s going to make it through Heaven’s door and I pray for him all the time too. He’s got a good heart but he’s afflicted and addicted to his belief that God doesn’t exist. And it’s not just that...my husband seriously believes that God CANNOT exist UNLESS his Heavenly Father - the Almighty God who created both Heaven and Earth agrees to bow down to his demands, expectations wrt scientific proof.

And what usually follows such “discussions” are never ending arguments about scientific methodology, scientific proofs, scientific hypotheses, scientific theories....oh and the 2nd law of thermodynamics usually makes an appearance as we discuss entropy etc until it all culminates with a loud exothermic reaction which involves him sleeping on the sofa bed. For 2 nights. While I calm down.

Does this make sense to you...Brian ??

Why is there something rather than nothing?

Empirical evidence only, please, both as to cause and purpose.

MeisterEckhart wrote on Sep 29^th, 2023 at 3:05pm:



Seems to me much more assumption and theory laden than, say, Spinoza's idea of there being only ONE substance (god) of which everything that exists is an attribute. And Spinoza's idea is also the fruit of scientific, logical reasoning.

I am a 'Spinozist' like Einstein. (I don't mean to bask in reflected glory, merely to illustrate the company. (Well, ok, perhaps a little one-upmanship on Dawkins))

Linus wrote on Sep 29^th, 2023 at 1:01pm:


Do not be concerned - Larry accuses everyone who disagrees with anything he is saying of being a multi ID troll etc. As far as I know he has never got it right.

Dnarever wrote on Sep 29^th, 2023 at 8:15pm:


DNA is correct! It is sort of funny, the way Larry never gets it right but it gets bloody boring as he does this almost daily.

Frank wrote on Sep 28^th, 2023 at 9:57pm:


This is of course, ridiculous.

If a child is raised without belief in any kind of god, the idea of one when they confront it eventually would be novel. Their underlying nature long preceding the god Frank supposes they are reacting to.

This misunderstanding of Frank stems from two thing: one he thinks his preferred ideal is superior .. and two, that "a" as a prefix means against and not without.

He is quite wrong on both points.

See, Frank and Larry's idea of a god may be more palatable if it weren't so classist and superior. It absolutely defeats the purpose of what they profess to believe. As does all of their behaviour on this forum and, i've little doubt, in the outside world.

I don't like religion at all but i really like Jesus. Frank and Larry are nothing like Jesus.

mothra wrote on Sep 30^th, 2023 at 10:11am:

Bringing up a child without teaching him religion is of course possible.
But the time will come when he realises that his parents deliberately shielded  him from it and that the world beyond his childhood is steeped in religion, now and in the past. He will realise that he cannot understand history, art, literature, philosophy without understanding the role of religion in the history of his own culture.
He will then understand that his parents made a conscious atheist stance against religion, for whatever reason. He will understand that his parents acted by excluding something from his education, making it incomplete. He will then decide for himself to maintain an atheist stance or he will embrace religion to some degree. In any case, he, like his parents and everyone around him,  will take a stance IN RELATION TO  religion.