Comments for Deon Barnard

Comment on You may be a religious fanatic if… by Basil

Basil — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 12:08:15 +0000

Deon I have not laughed that much since I was at Parkers comedy club in monte casino. You have described to me everything I absolutely HATE about religions as well as some things I did not even realise.

My reason for not being religious is the point that I could not only hang onto the good parts of something and ignore all of the negative stuff. Which means the system is flawed.

The amount of times I have ben told that I am going to hell and will burn in a lake of fire are too numerous to mention and I am glad that there is some perspective and someone brave enough to have their say.

I support you 100%!

Comment on You may be a religious fanatic if… by Soo Patterson

Soo Patterson — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 11:47:11 +0000

I have witnessed some of your debates, and I hold out little hope that this will penetrate any better than those did.. you will just get more sad head shaking and “you are lost brother.. but GOD still loves you!”…

*sigh*.. but thanks for trying – those of us on the other side of the madness appreciate your efforts.

Comment on You may be a religious fanatic if… by Brian Coughlan

Brian Coughlan — Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:26:44 +0000

You pretty much hit the nail on the head with “YOU MAY BE A RELIGIOUS FANATIC IF”, and then proceeded to hammer it about a metre into the wood:-) Thats a pretty good summary.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Evan Hurwitz

Evan Hurwitz — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:24:54 +0000

I can construct a well-reasoned argument Deon, but you’re asking me to move mountains. For that, apparently, you require Mohammed.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Deon Barnard

Deon Barnard — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 13:00:34 +0000

Nicely said Ed. The challenge of course is shaking people out of their stupor enough to even hear that beautiful piece of reasoning.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Evan Hurwitz

Evan Hurwitz — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 12:49:05 +0000

Nice article.

Specifically as an answer to Bash’s request (first reply to this post), unfortunately the request is backwards.

You do not set out to disprove the improbable (especially since it is virtually impossible to prove a negative, the limitation that stymies many people, trapping them in agnosticism) but rather need to prove the unlikely Hypothesis.

Example: I claim the Tooth Fairy exists. My father told me she’d take my tooth from under my pillow and leave me money (his gospel), and Lo and Behold it came to pass. I now put it to you to disprove the Tooth Fairy. sure you may find some fraudulent parents pretending to be the Tooth Fairy, but somewhere in the world the real Tooth Fairy is doing her good work.

Now obviously this hypothesis is preposterous. But the beauty of it is that it cannot be disproved – there is no reasonable way to examine every pillow in the world for a sodding tooth fairy. The logical fallacy here is that I’m asking you to disprove it – I’m putting forward an unlikely hypothesis, and therefore the burden of proof is on ME to prove my ridiculous claims. The same applies to proponents of the Creation Fairy – the burden of proof is on you to show (not necessarily even prove, simply show weight of probability if you can) that there is a god.

-Ed.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Deon Barnard

Deon Barnard — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 09:13:55 +0000

Great comment Richard. Yes, I have toned down on the fence sitting thing over the past few months and even when I wrote the article my intention was to get people to stand for a point of view. I’m more than happy with the agnostic point of view because it’s the only one that’s 100% valid. Having said that, I still see the evidence of growing scientific discovery vs. religious bullshit and my logical mind says that science will eventually work it all out – maybe not now, or in our lifetime, but distant future generations will not be agnostics and they will certainly not be religious. I agree with everything you’ve said.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Richard

Richard — Thu, 25 Feb 2010 08:37:44 +0000

Hi Deon, very interesting points of view – the main article and your response to the responses. I hear your view and definition of fence sitters, but would like to share this thought.
My reading has led me to the point where I think organised religion is the biggest con in mankind’s history. I have read many books on pre-history and we just don’t know, but there is compelling evidence that history as we ‘know’ it is wrong. Zacharia Stitchen who has translated the Sumerian tablets puts some serious light on our interpretation of the past, genetic engineering etc. Most of the early bible can be traced back to these tablets, but with very different interpretations. In more modern times the Catholic church was developed as the arm of the Roman Empire to control the populace. Much of Christian doctrine is based on this fact. For example the Council of Nicea (excuse spelling) in 300AD confirmed Christ as a deity, a bunch of old dudes decided he was a god 300 years after his death (+-). This was in line with Roman belief whereby their emperors were deemed deities as well. Much of the other myth of Christian belief links to Egyptian mythology. Christianity in fact became the catch all religion for the Empire and had to appeal to as many as possible. Add to it confession and the inquisition and you have full control of your populace.
Now to my fence sitting bit, there is something about spirituality that we don’t know and the science model as we know it is also flawed. (read books like Web of Life). Given this we just don’t know. We live consciously in a 3 dimensional space with a time line that does not behave according to our day to day lives. Can spirituality be the 4th, 5th or nth dimension. On thsi platform we just don’t know, but there is a lot of evidence that there is something else. Its not god and its not religion, but there is something there and that’s the space I am most interested in.

Comment on The insane power of self belief by john

john — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:45:55 +0000

Self belief is probably the greatest tool we have.Never give up on your dream.Great article.

Comment on Response to “Why Religion should be opposed” by Deon Barnard

Deon Barnard — Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:23:43 +0000

Grant, an interesting basket of ideas. I have let go of religion – I write about it in its own terms because its there and someone has to speak out about it.
Anger? Who cares? Not sure what your point is?
Religion is not new at all in terms of grouped societies – its over 6000 years old. Before that there were very few organised groups of any kind and based on what I see today religion was there back then too – probably some sort of animism or tribal type religions.
Armageddon? I though I was holding on to religion…