What Does People Mean When They Say They Do Not Believe In God

[ANDY-J3]

Originally posted by arty71

Isn't it true that all the major religions of the world have the same "Golden Rule"? Some version of "Do onto others. . . ?" Didn't Jesus and Buddha and Mohammed all encourage peace, forgiveness and tolerance? Buddah and Jesus were known to be men of peace, in much the same way as Ghandi...the same could not be claimed of Mohammed...he was a warrior, fighting many battles for his new found religion, beheading many enemies personally. He also did not encourage tolerance in any shape or form...homosexuals were to be killed without question to name but one intolerance, and one which is still common practice in Muslim countries to this day...

No it's to be found in the teachings of Mohammed as well - "No man is a true believer unless he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself." which amounts to the same as do unto others as you would have them do unto you. In most philosophies and religions you find some teachings which seem immoral but Islam has a lot of moral precepts that are quite enlightened although obviously some of its doctrines aren't compatible with modern democratic values.

[pwilky]

This is one of Christopher Hitchens most famous quotes;

Faith is the surrender of the mind; it's the surrender of reason, it's the surrender of the only thing that makes us different from other mammals. It's our need to believe, and to surrender our skepticism and our reason, our yearning to discard that and put all our trust or faith in someone or something, that is the sinister thing to me. Of all the supposed virtues, faith must be the most overrated.

I think that is what many atheists mean when they 'dont believe in God'...remarkable claims requires remarkable evidence and, there aint none so far!

[hiorta]

All this guff about this or that exalted being saying or having said something or other, is absolutely worthless in argument and for enlightenment.

No one can legitimately say that so and so said this or that, unless they were present and heard it said. If it is claimed it were said in a foreign tongue, they would need to demonstrate a working knowledge of that language at the time.

Otherwise, they destroy their point as it is only hearsay (X many times) or it is believed to have been said.

Which is not quite the same thing