I must apologise: my reference, posted on February 15 was misplaced. I should have realised that The Skeptic is an Australian publication and, so, not easily available to others in this wide world. It is not fully on the internet. The article was too long as a forum comment but, briefly: all supernatural beings are products (figments) of human brains and as such are real. That is, they do play a real part in human behaviour. In that sense I believe in them. One can’t deny that billions of people respond when told that their particular god wants them to behave in a particular way. However, in recognizing that they only exist in thought, and cannot themselves exercise physical powers I do not believe in them in the same way that I believe someone who calls him/herself Boaz exists physically somewhere and can control a keyboard. I believe in the existence of the image but I do not believe in their physical reality; hence, atheist.

Does that explain, if not help?

JFW
thanx for that, it does explain much better.
Did I refer you to a read of Pauls letter to the Corinthians chapter 15 ? Its worth looking at in the light of your statements.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=15&version=31

This is a major critique of the idea that 'gods' were just 'invented' by human minds. All such gods would be for the 'moral and social convenience' of the inventors. Contrast that with Pauls experience and testimony. A reading of Acts chapter 6 thru to 9 inclusive gives the historical background of Pauls life to the 15th chapter to Corinthians. I just cannot comprehend why a guy would endure stoning (among other torments) knowing full well that it was based on a false idea. There are plenty of examples of people who believed this and that, and who suffered for it, but I think most of such belief is based on less testable ideas than 'The risen Christ appeared to me', as was Pauls experience, and I think that he would know well enuf whether it was 'real' enough for him to suffer thus.

KENNY... I had a look at 'Big Bang Never happened' and I'm not enuf of a try hard Astro physicist to engage very meaningfully with that debate. I don't find anything partcularly threatening in it though (for Creation I mean). The idea of a universe in flux may also be how God made it. No biggy :)


Keep it up.

I just cannot comprehend why a guy would endure stoning (among other torments) knowing full well that it was based on a false idea.

BOAZ_David there in lies the issues doesn't it. Many People of many faiths endued similar treatment as your chap did for beliefs that you believe to be untrue. The human mind has a great capacity for self delusion. A good example of this is a funny story told many times over many years may well have started out as a true event, but will eventually have a realty of it’s own as the story tellers remember the story and not the event.

Boaz_David

One of the great difficulties we humans have in understanding the world around us is the problem of recognising the image in our brain as an image and not reality itself. It helps if one accepts that everything evolves, including stars, organisms, societies and ideas or images in the brain. Belief in the death of Jesus and his resurrection was long preceded by belief in the murder, dismemberment and miraculous resurrection of Osiris, god of the Nile. Belief in the family of Zeus living on Olympus long preceded belief in the triumvirate of God the father, son and the Holy Ghost. The image has evolved but the reality has not. No-one ever took tea with Zeus, you can think about it but you can’t do it. You can discuss the nature of Zeus or the Christian God but if you understand that it is only an image created by human beings themselves in their own image then you are only discussing the nature of human beings themselves. That is a circular discussion which can only die in emptiness. St Paul discusses the mythical images in his brain as if they existed in the world outside, they do not.

The Jesus myth is as old as man itself. The Bible itself is merely a retelling of myths from ancient Egypt and the cult of Mithras. The difference is the pagans of ancient Egypt knew that these stories were myths. They believed in the truth of the message, but not in the story itself. The Christian Church of the 3rd century destroyed hundreds of thousands of texts which outlined just this fact. Their aim was to turn the myth into history and unfortunately they succeeded very well.

An excellent book on this subject is "The Pagan Christ" by Tom Harpur. Also see http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jcpa.htm which discusses this topic as well.

Bozzie.
you and JWT are a worry, my my myyyyyy.. that you guys would sink to such dubious and shabby sources, is regrettable, it makes serious and intelligent debate quite difficult. I checked those sources/references, and (forgive me for a bit of carnal nature here) after I got up off the floor from laughing for about an hour, (this was better than Frazier :) No, seriously, I took one look at the Egyptian myth, and just the very first claim, ( also I noted a good set of 'similarities' done for Horus and Hitler.. came out pretty close).... and the Myth of Isis and Osiris.. I mean..give me a break,
Isis was married to Osiris. We do not know for what length of time, but presumably the marriage was consummated. Whether it was or wasn’t doesn’t matter though. After Osiris is killed, Isis puts him back together again (he was hacked into 14 pieces) except for his penis which was tossed in a river or a lake. Iris fashions a substitute penis for him, humps him and here comes Horus. There is nothing virginal about that.
If that's the level of the 'scholarship' you guys are residing in, I strongly suggest u review your choice of reading material.

I just gasp that you guys would give even the slightest credibility to that kind of stuff.