This looks as good a place as any.

To all those on the forum who I have disagreed with, agreed with, insulted, lampooned, ridiculed, made fun off, offended, thought were as crazy as me in 2012 I wish YOU ALL a happy holiday season and a great new year. Looking forward to more of the same in 2013.

All the best Paul.

p/s I should also thank our great political leaders including The Bimbo, The Mad Monk, Bob Browneye, Swany, Slippery Pete etc for without them this forum truly would be boring.

Shockadelic,

“No, you dismiss the evidence. There are a myriad of reported supernatural experiences, by people all over the world, in every era and culture.

You just ignore it.”

That is not evidence of supernatural reality. That is evidence that a myriad of people report supernatural experience.

How about we alter the sentence slightly and see if you agree to your original statement still.

“No, you dismiss the evidence. There are a myriad of reported alien abduction experiences by people all over the world, in every era and culture.
You just ignore it.”

Does that make alien abduction real? Does that mean we should indoctrinate children with the idea that alien abduction is real and if they don’t believe it reinforce the idea that the aliens will torture them forever in a galaxy far, far away? Does that mean governments should lavish huge amounts of money on alien abduction devotees? Does that mean that alien abduction devotees should be controlling those of us who do not accept aliens abduct people by way of parliaments?

Change supernatural or alien abduction to other popular supposed beings like Bigfoot, the Lock Ness monster, ghosts etc. To exclude these as somehow different is to use the fallacious argument known as special pleading.

Your sentence is not the result of any critical thinking at all. This is common and no one should be admonished for doing that. But once pointed out and it still continues, then that is another matter.

David

David>> A rapidly growing number in this demographic are declaring they are atheists. Others call themselves humanist, agnostics etc.<<

Dave, religions have always been the tool of the powerful. During the Russian communist revolution they shipped most of the Russian Orthodox priests to sunny Siberia. Only the old still worshipped in secrecy. Twenty years later Hitler pops up and Stalin opens the churches and brings back what was left of the priests from Siberia to give the people hope. After Russia’s victory he toes the communist line again and religion is tolerated but not allowed to flourish.
Religions do not start wars, the powerful do and it has always been about gain.

David>>Some religious persons claim the knowledge of the supernatural comes from within. That is fine except as AJ Philips points out, they still belong to the club that is causing strife at various levels in civilisation.<<

Again Dave your willingness to blame religions for the arrogance and greed of the powerful is simplistic. If your corrupted logic holds true then without religions we would have had no wars throughout our history. Are you aware of Jane Elliott’s brown eyes/ blue eyes experiment? Alternately have you heard of the Milgram experiments with electric shocks?

Both these exercises abundantly exhibit the inherent human anti social condition that lives in most of us. I can’t take anything you say seriously as you are reading from someone else’s song book. You have found your little cause and you hang onto it like a terrier. You are a carbon copy of the religious zealots that you degrade……not an original thought in your head.

David>> This is child abuse especially when the terror of hell is instilled into children if straying is even contemplated let alone achieved.<<

Yes David and you employ intellectual abuse….it certainly abuses my intellect when you babble on about the surety of no creator. Nobody knows....except you ofcourse.

sonofgloin,

My name is David.

“Religions do not start wars, the powerful do and it has always been about gain.”

Who said religions start wars directly as a result of religion although that has happened in history. The indisputable fact is that many wars are demarked by religion with each side praying to their particular god to kill the enemy. If I need to point out examples, I will be disappointed in your powers of perception.

The blue eye brown eye experiment is very relevant to religion. Religions scapegoat a particular trait in the human race, whether that is gender, sexuality, other religions etc. and then using their authority, (like the white coats situation in the said experiment) they create a prejudice against those categories.

Confusing zealotry with rationality and critical thinking is not something I personally would be proud of. This is called lashing out because you have run out of arguments. That is what you should be concentrating on. I'm not intolerant of opposing views but I will argue against them if they are shown to be faulty. Don’t look now, but the mirror might show who really is acting in a zealous manner.

I really wish you would read these posts. Where have I ever said that there is “the surety of no creator”? Until you point that out, please do not come back with other nonsense.

David

sonogloin,

"...You are a carbon copy of the religious zealots that you degrade..."

...which was the point that I was making earlier - before the tactic was employed to call me a "stalker".

It's the tenor of "crusade" that sounds loud and clear.

Any movement born of opposition to something will attract that sort of criticism, especially if it fashions itself along similar lines and employs similar rhetoric.

David,

I admit that my earlier post lacked respect and apologies are probably in order there, however, you should be mindful that any enthusiastic "movement" can't help but convey sentiments that are similar in their basic expression to the movements they oppose - we all seek satisfaction from our causes.

Talking about aliens:

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-12-21/french-mayor-says-stay-away-from-apocalypse-shelter/4439320

OzSpen,

Those are great sources, and they show that the idea of a mythological Jesus is not taken seriously, even among the predominantly atheistic bible scholar community. Even Richard Dawkins admits the existence of a historical Jesus:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fRg0AIiGAyQ

There is actually more evidence for the existence of a historical Jesus than Socrates or Plato! If we use the methodology that historians use to determine the historical reliability of ancient documents, then we are forced to conclude that the evidence for Jesus is overwhelming.

We also have the evidence of fulfilled prophecy. Isaiah 53 predicts the coming of the suffering Messiah, describing the life and ministry of Jesus to a T, and it was written 700 years before His time. It is so clear that people immediately recognize it is about Jesus when it is read to them.

There is also the prophetic fulfillment of the destruction of Jerusalem which was predicted by Jesus, and also the reformation of Israel which happened in 1948. We see the fulfillment of signs in Matthew 24 in these times like no other generation in history. There is really no shortage of reliable evidence which points to Jesus being the Savior of the world and the bible as the word of God.