@josephw said
I see your logic. Well put, except it's riddled with your opinion.

I appreciate the feedback as I am always looking for new ways to produce an irrefutable logic. I will look more closely at your last paragraph.

There's no opinion about it. You and I could meet on either side of a table and enjoy tea and biscuits together, and I'm sure we would agree that existential discussion notwithstanding, the table exists. So that's my bit done, and now I ask you to prove that your god (or any god for that matter) exists. Gods and tables are different.

The tea and biscuits are on me.

@josephw said
"If you know something is true, you don't need belief."

That doesn't seem logical.

Belief, or unbelief, requires an object, or the lack there of. In the case of your statement above, "something true" is the object. "Knowing" something is true, belief then follows, whether for or against, but the results is belief, or unbelief.

In the end, one chooses belief or ...[text shortened]... r or not a thing is true of false.

Otherwise it's not a choice, but blind obedience to ignorance.

Well, you may not see the logic, but the logic is irrefutable.

We are not talking here about an 'object' such as a table, which setting aside existential discussion as to whether anything actually exists, is there for all to see and drink a cup of tea on.

The 'object' to which you refer is a supernatural being, which cannot be seen, or proven to exist, but can only be imagined. There is no 'evidence' for any god, save the written word, which is notoriously unreliable.

In other words there is no 'knowledge' that a god exists, there is only belief, which is the other side of the coin entirely, and never the twain shall meet, and an atheist such as myself will say that all religion is indeed blind obedience to ignorance.

@josephw said
"Believing" isn't a matter of choice.
Obviously one doesn't choose to believe without knowing something is true.
Choosing to believe without knowledge is ignorance.
A choice made without knowledge is folly.
Believing blindly is worse than not believing at all.

It says in the Bible that "we walk by faith and not by sight."

It would be ignorant to suggest that that m ...[text shortened]... hat we chose to believe blindly without a cause?

The Spirit cannot be measured by physical means.

'Obviously one doesn't choose to believe without knowing something is true.'

If you know something is true, you don't need belief.

'If I would have' is dreadful English anyway.

@fmf said
I have no trouble tailoring my speech to suit the circumstances viz a viz the decorum a given context demands or the sensibilities of those present, but relaxing with friends, talking about certain things, maybe on the outside of a grog or two, I have been known to swear like a trooper, as have the friends I hang out with. It all stops if a stranger sits down with us, until... they turn out to have a potty mouth too, and everyone reverts.

Do you use much profanity?

I think we know each other well enough that this requires no private answer, but so as to contribute, I do tend to swear quite a bit, rarely in anger, I rarely get angry, but it's more often in 'mock anger'. Mostly I tell my closest friends to F off, if I tell you to F off, you're in....I'm always politeness itself to strangers.

@fmf said
Gosh. 1962 is a long time ago. Women still held back or subjugated. Black people not treated as equal citizens before the law. Lord Mountbatten sleeping with children. Homosexuals facing imprisonment. Masons spying for the Soviets. The Beatles and The Rolling Stones still mere covers bands. etc. etc.

And atheists still not allowed to join...Damn it, I'd already filled in the application form.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Yetis or unicorns, never ghosts.

Suffice to say, Oliver has gout.

@fmf said
We commemorated two years since the passing of my father-in-law today with a mass in the nearest Catholic church (where he went, not the one where I was married) and then off we went to the next city along [his birthplace] to pay our respects at his graveside.

He was very active in the church and community and was admired and loved by many.

He believed in the healing power ...[text shortened]... rch and waiting at the side looking in were numerous Muslims and several people I knew to be Hindus.

In a general sense I'm sure we've experienced similar aspects of religious belief in Indonesia. My neck of the woods is predominantly Christian, in the most populous Muslim country in the world, and in twenty years of living here I've not seen one instance of inter - faith tension. For general consumption and not for yours, since you already know, inter - faith marriages are common here, someone can go to bed a Christian and wake up a Muslim, or visa - versa. People in my small village go to (Protestant) church on Sundays, but if pressed they readily admit that the 'old beliefs' hold sway. Our housekeeper is a case in point; he's active in the church and a faith - healer, having six of the seven 'eyes' which constitute a complete healer, and he understands the workings of the human body better than anyone I've met. I get a dodgy back sometimes and a couple of sessions with him and I'm right as ninepence. He's also by the by an ex professional boxer, which can come in handy sometimes, nobody messes with us when he's around. Anyway religious tolerance is the thing, we even locally have that which I believe is the only Synagogue in Indonesia; it's a widely held belief that there are no Jews living in Indonesia, but we've got some, and nobody gives a hoot what anybody else 'is'; other countries could learn from this, I feel....

@kellyjay said
I was talking to you

Actually you weren't talking to me, you were talking to mike69. You may have been talking ABOUT me, or you may have meant to say 'I wasn't talking to you.', or perhaps 'Was I talking to you?' It's a very simple sentence, have another go at writing it, practice a bit before you go public.

@kellyjay said
Not sure why you trouble yourself with these guys, they will treat you the same way if you respond to them not, and they will follow you around different threads, and different forums just to speak about you. It doesn't matter if these threads have nothing to do with you, that is just who they are. The only thing you will do by engaging with them is find yourselves in an i ...[text shortened]... they are in where it has more to do with insults than discussions, they live for that no much more.

So why do you continue to engage with us, then?

@kellyjay said
You realize you just described yourself to a tee, you don't put up an argument you talk about what you call folklore in snakes as if that alone is enough, so you bypass every opportunity to use facts to support or take down any argument. If you know this is bad by what you have just said, why do you continue to do it? Use logic, proclaim what you think are factual argument ...[text shortened]... r custom is and disappear until the conversation has moved on to something else as you typically do.

Are we back on talking snakes again? Just for the record, you raised the subject, not me. You think that snakes can talk, I am using the fact that snakes can't talk to 'take down' the fact that you think snakes can talk. That is my logic and factual argument.

@mike69 said
As mentioned, small mind, inability to look beyond self, many post with no substance. No effort to understand, get along, and grow as a person. Have a good day superstar.

You go too far, sir; modesty forbids that I see myself as a 'Superstar', but I do thank you for the compliment.

@mike69 said
@Indonesia-Phil
Besides what’s in your own little bubble do you ever have anything of substance to say? All I ever read from you are insights into this small world and your inability to look beyond it…

I actually have a keen, laypersons' interest in Astronomy.

@mike69 said
Seems like you’re auto filling a ton of stuff like Suzanne. Why don’t we talk first about what you actually know about me and go from there. Try asking a question instead of making stuff up for instance.

What are you on about, I wasn't talking to you.

@mike69 said
I was responding about a crap filled post about me and the person who has done it many times. I have emotions, they are temporary, I have nothing against her they are facts, your hate has been witnessed many times.

Well then perhaps you should attempt to get your emotions under control before you post here, you know, make what you say a bit more permanent....What are 'facts', and what 'hate' have you witnessed so many times?