Hero put his faith in God to rescue woman drowning after she fell from Southend Pier (From Echo)

He deserves a medal........he's one in a thousand, for saving in such menacing conditions.

if i where to jump off Southend pier I would be praying to odin as well.

it has nothing to do with this man's bravery and selfless commitment to save another human life in the face of any danger to himself. A god gets all the credit.

jayman wrote:
if i where to jump off Southend pier I would be praying to odin as well.

it has nothing to do with this man's bravery and selfless commitment to save another human life in the face of any danger to himself. A god gets all the credit.

Translate into english please...

The 26-year-old was strolling down the pier shortly after 4pm on Friday afternoon with his girlfriend and they began to discuss what they would do if they had to rescue someone from the water. At that moment, they were unaware a woman was about to fall from the pier followed by a companion trying to rescue her. .........

seems like it was set up nicely for him!

Let's not forget the Pier Staff, especially ( 'manager?) Richard S. who alerted coastguards and rescue services while at the same time managed to keep the persons in the water under CCTV surveillance in diificult circumstances i.e. tidal drift, and thus enabling the rescue teams to find them quickly. Well done!

God, Allah, Buddha, Vishnu, Odin, Vodka - whatever it takes is alright by me.

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

Tone-Fu wrote:
God, Allah, Buddha, Vishnu, Odin, Vodka - whatever it takes is alright by me.

Well said! Wonderful story isn't it....

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Maybe they should have been doing their tests in Southend then?

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

I think that your statement does indeed highlight pure ignorance - your own!

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Ridiculous comment. If prayers worked we would know it because it would show up clearly in the statistics, but it doesn't because god is a fallacy. Prove me wrong if you can.

Are you a superhero, rescuing people along coastlines with your cape and your pants on the outside of your wetsuit?

mikepaterson wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Maybe they should have been doing their tests in Southend then?

How do you 'test' whether prayer works?

Aint it just the truth wrote:

mikepaterson wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

I think that your statement does indeed highlight pure ignorance - your own!

If you want your peurile statements to be taken seriously then you should give us the evidence to justify your opinion. Can you do that? Thought not. What does that say about you?

It's 'puerile'. Reminds me of Rick from The Young Ones....

Who was who said...
.
"You cannot sail upon the oceans and not believe in a God".

I bet the god squad are rubbing their hands together. What would a sane minded rational atheist think in this situation? I guess it's lucky for the woman that some one had the courage to jump in and try and help but I find it ridiculous that anyone could think that praying to god is of any more use than believing in the tooth fairy. When something good happens bible bashers can't wait to praise the lord. When there is a disaster, god moves in mysterious ways and we just have to accept it. What a load of rubbish. Sorry to disappoint anyone there is no god.

Well done, the hero. But religion; is for those not happy/satisfied with the real world.

for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

btw truthy got a spare ticket for biblical fancy dress party tomorrow. me and mrs asbo going as lot and lot's wife. thought you might be the pillar of salt?

LibbyJ wrote:

mikepaterson wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Maybe they should have been doing their tests in Southend then?

How do you 'test' whether prayer works?

scientific experiment testing the power of prayer

method; One Tory (they all are) male, 48 years of age who attends church every Sunday to say sorry for a weeks worth of wicked things he has done upon his fellow man. We placed him in a rigged steal, airtight box and slowly removed the pressure by 1 PSI every hour from 14.7 psi to zero PSI. A bible and some right wing literature was placed in the artificially lit space.

Observation; after a period of five hours the test subject began to feel dizzy and no longer displayed the ability to be ultra judgemental or self righteous. the subjects complexion began to turn blue-ish. at this stage in the experiment the pressure was returned to 14.7 PSI and the door was opened. the test subject was released from the experiment, free to pursue his hate offsetting church activity.

Conclusion; there where no divine variables of factors that influenced the outcomes of the test. As expected, hypoxia was observed in the test subject due to the scientific method of pump assisted pressure removal from an airtight space.

conclusion summery;

1, prayer is not effective
2, life is the process of the co-occurrence of birth and death and all the moments experienced therein are the subject of earthly variables, both dependant and interdependent of the actions of men and mankind.
3, there is no entity, spiritual being or creature that exists that can be defined by the name god (or its variants)

The man who rescued the person in the water did so based on two factors.

1) personal bravery 'for jumping in in the first place'
2) luck/skill 'for not drowning himself'

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

And incidently non delusionists do heroic things every day too. But they are doing them out of a sense of humanity.

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

haha. only in your head.... now who's delusional? i was not intending it to be read as an either or but you can interpret it that way if you so wish.

Hannah Foster wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

And incidently non delusionists do heroic things every day too. But they are doing them out of a sense of humanity.

whatever fills your test tube dearie. 9 out of 10 people don't. ever thought that religion adds to peoples' sense of humanity? of course not...there's no scientific evidence (yawn)

asbo industries inc wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

And incidently non delusionists do heroic things every day too. But they are doing them out of a sense of humanity.

whatever fills your test tube dearie. 9 out of 10 people don't. ever thought that religion adds to peoples' sense of humanity? of course not...there's no scientific evidence (yawn)

Humanity and religion are two entirely separate things.
Humanity is
1.
all human beings collectively; the human race; humankind.
2.
the quality or condition of being human; human nature.
3.
the quality of being humane; kindness; benevolence.

Religion is

1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions.

Patronising use of the term 'Dearie' just illustrates that your nature is to attempt to put people down with passive aggression. Nine out of ten people wouldn't show any humanity according to you, yet by people's own admission in the census far more than one out of ten people identified themselves as Christians. This would logically imply that there are lots of god botherers that would walk on by too. Science is not a way of life for me. I simply understand scientific principles and when headline writers come out with such stupid headlines rational opinion and logic need to be expressed. I always try and do what I can to help other human beings. I don't need to believe in fairy tales to be a civilised compassionate member of the human race thank you very much.

asbo industries inc wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo industries inc wrote:
for some there is worship of god and for others there is worship of the cannabis plant. this godfearing man found inner strength from his beliefs to his immense credit. for the heathens i guess worm food is a dish best served stone cold.

Not only are the bible bashers smug and self satisfied they are also quite happy to make derogatory comments about anyone with the sense to know that they are talking out if their backsides. I don't take drugs, never have. I am not some fruit cake new age white witch. I am a rational, sensible, scientist. God is for those that can't make sense of the world for themselves and need to rely on a delusion. Then they gather together in colonies of like minded simpletons to whip up fire and brimstone fantasies to try and justify themselves.

And incidently non delusionists do heroic things every day too. But they are doing them out of a sense of humanity.

whatever fills your test tube dearie. 9 out of 10 people don't. ever thought that religion adds to peoples' sense of humanity? of course not...there's no scientific evidence (yawn)

Oh and I have enough confidence in my thought process to use my own name rather than hide behind an alias.

windy, witless and dull. if you're only thought process is the science text book good luck.

asbo industries inc wrote:
windy, witless and dull. if you're only thought process is the science text book good luck.

I suggest you actually read what I wrote, there is more to me than a text book, or I might add a bible. I' rather feel the wind in my hair than the wiff of bulls**t coming from the mouth of a coward who is to frightened to be identified. You are all to ready to post your views on a number of topics. I notice that most people that quote your comments think you talk rubbish too.

I am neither. Your insult throwing sounds like the cries of a person who knows they have lost the arguement. Well done to the brave person who saved the woman. Humanity is a wonderful thing.

what insults? now say 10 hail marys' - go now and sin no more.

This is the first and last post I will make on this article.

1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact).

2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so.

3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love.

4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

that would be an ecumenical matter

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Hannah, take no notice of Asbo, he is a classic troll who insults everyone and never ever has anything sensible to say about anything. The poor fellow seems unable to think for himself on any subject but he thinks he is being clever when he quotes from the bible or repeats the sort of intellectually void views perpetrated by the most ignorant tabloid press. His comments above, supporting the god squad, just confirm his complete lack of intellectual vigour. Sadly there are a lot of people who would agree with Asbo's religious beliefs but all the polls tell us that these sad, gullible people are disappearing at the rate of half per generation as most sensible people see straight through the god myth, thank goodness.

Thanks for your support. I have decided that I will not be engaging in conversation with Asbo anymore!

danielthedreamer wrote:
This is the first and last post I will make on this article.

1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact).

2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so.

3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love.

4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

I agree with you, the rescuer was selfless. He saw a woman in distress an he did a very commendable thing by risking his own life. If he wants to use god as justification that is up to him. In the same way that some people commit atrocities in the name of faith some people do great things. The fact remains it was his free will and he deserves the praise.
I love the arts, in particular music. Bach is one of my favourite composers, in fact I love to sit in Durham cathedral and listen to the beautiful choral music rising up into the roof. Bach was an exceptionally talented musician and the choristers train long and hard to produce the sound that they do. It has nothing nothing to do with any god.
My life experiences have taught me that we are responsible for our own path in life. We should live ethically and responsibly and treat other people the way we wish to be treated. Sadly I have very little time or respect for people who claim the existance of god to be a fact. It is a belief. There are lots of beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny but if it gives someone comfort go ahead and cling to it, just don't use it as justification for your actions good or bad.

oh dear oh dear oh dear

Hannah Foster wrote:

danielthedreamer wrote:
This is the first and last post I will make on this article.

1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact).

2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so.

3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love.

4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

I agree with you, the rescuer was selfless. He saw a woman in distress an he did a very commendable thing by risking his own life. If he wants to use god as justification that is up to him. In the same way that some people commit atrocities in the name of faith some people do great things. The fact remains it was his free will and he deserves the praise.
I love the arts, in particular music. Bach is one of my favourite composers, in fact I love to sit in Durham cathedral and listen to the beautiful choral music rising up into the roof. Bach was an exceptionally talented musician and the choristers train long and hard to produce the sound that they do. It has nothing nothing to do with any god.
My life experiences have taught me that we are responsible for our own path in life. We should live ethically and responsibly and treat other people the way we wish to be treated. Sadly I have very little time or respect for people who claim the existance of god to be a fact. It is a belief. There are lots of beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny but if it gives someone comfort go ahead and cling to it, just don't use it as justification for your actions good or bad.

apparently it is not up to him. the atheists have done nothing but put the boot in on a good news story.

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

danielthedreamer wrote:
This is the first and last post I will make on this article.

1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact).

2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so.

3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love.

4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

I agree with you, the rescuer was selfless. He saw a woman in distress an he did a very commendable thing by risking his own life. If he wants to use god as justification that is up to him. In the same way that some people commit atrocities in the name of faith some people do great things. The fact remains it was his free will and he deserves the praise.
I love the arts, in particular music. Bach is one of my favourite composers, in fact I love to sit in Durham cathedral and listen to the beautiful choral music rising up into the roof. Bach was an exceptionally talented musician and the choristers train long and hard to produce the sound that they do. It has nothing nothing to do with any god.
My life experiences have taught me that we are responsible for our own path in life. We should live ethically and responsibly and treat other people the way we wish to be treated. Sadly I have very little time or respect for people who claim the existance of god to be a fact. It is a belief. There are lots of beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny but if it gives someone comfort go ahead and cling to it, just don't use it as justification for your actions good or bad.

apparently it is not up to him. the atheists have done nothing but put the boot in on a good news story.

Actually most people including myself have commended the hero of the hour. What people are discussing is whether god had anything to do with it. Anyone can believe what they like but if they express their views in a newspaper people are entitled to express their opinions and discuss the ideas that have been put forward. What is wrong with that?

As they say in the US.

"In God we trust"

"Everyone else pays cash"

banque worms sa

the boy done good

My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

Shrimper Nation wrote:
My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

not to mention more than a bit chippy! no god seems to equal no sense of humour

Shrimper Nation wrote:
My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

I have no need to convert anyone. I am not a religious nutcase looking for extra points to path my way to heaven. Nor am I atheist. I am agnostic. I don't have any reason to be angry because I am comfortable with my views and happy to discuss them.
As for arrogance, i don't think my views hold anymore weight than anybody elses. They just happen to be my considered thoughts on the subject. What exactly was your method of scientific analysis? I suspect your comment is just a load of old bluff because you clearly have nothing to add to the discussion. My sense of humour is good enough to have a good giggle at your apparent stupidity. Why is it that all these vitriolic trolls don't have the courage to use their real names I wonder?

Why is it that all these vitriolic trolls don't have the courage to use their real names I wonder?
.
Are you the Hannah Foster who goes to the Southend Methodist or the one that attends the hippy commune, or the one that experiments on live animals in the name of science, or the one that.....
.
Doesn't work on the Internet does it.

We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Shrimper Nation wrote:
My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

Scientific analysis? What a load of old ...
.
Btw atheism is NOT a religion, it is simply the most compelling conclusion of a proper scientific analysis of the evidence. If it looks like a duck, sorry myth, then ...
.
If you want to talk about arrogance the church is in a league of it's own, it has claimed to have a monopoly on the truth for centures, fighting every rational scientific advance tooth and nail only to be proven wrong every time. Trouble is you lot are getting desperate now as you have almost run out of things that you can claim are the work of god. True? ;o)

It cheers me up no end to know that there are other people with common sense.

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

i see free speech is yet to arrive in hadleigh. this post will be deleted in 5,4,3,2....

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

I'm more than comfortable thanks. If you care to investigate my name and address were recently submitted to the Thank You column in the echo. I'm not the touchy one. What is the point of a paper asking for readers views? If you want to slate me feel free. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it as am I. I simply make the choice to refrain from personal attacks.

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

A rose by any other name....

The only god I personally worship is my (endearingly) ‘backward dog’ - who's so stupid he thinks I'm writing this post to praise his cleverness!

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

Utter Prat!

Essex Medja wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

A rose by any other name....

While it doesn't matter to me if those who want to put others down are to frightened to do so publicly it would be interesting to see how spiteful they would be if they were unmasked.

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

You`ve got a BIG chip on your shoulder, and your assertions that many tests in the US have " proved" that prayer doesn`t work are flawed, as there will always be many other tests, worldwide in fact that " prove" that it does.
Prayers are THOUGHTS, combined with FEELINGS, a powerful combination by anybody`s standards, and as thoughts are also electrical impules, how do you know whether they connect with something or not, and you are not even a scientist, just an ordinary know it all lay person.
And, so they say, God can neither be proved or disproved, and anyway, what exactly IS your definition of " God"?
You`d be surprised how many people, even those who believe, are not really that clear on how they would define him/her/the force, call it what you will.
And finally, WHATEVER your views are any decent person would not mock another`s beliefs, he did a brave thing and good on him that he believed in something. Belief is a POWER in its own right, it doesn`t matter what you believe in, you could believe in a stone, and the power of your own beliefs would work for you. or against you if it was a negative belief.
And l wonder what you would have done in the same circumstances - -!

Lastlaugh... wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

Utter Prat!

Speaks the voice of experience and sense.

mikepaterson wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

I think that your statement does indeed highlight pure ignorance - your own!

Completely agree with your comment!

Almeda11 wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

You`ve got a BIG chip on your shoulder, and your assertions that many tests in the US have " proved" that prayer doesn`t work are flawed, as there will always be many other tests, worldwide in fact that " prove" that it does.
Prayers are THOUGHTS, combined with FEELINGS, a powerful combination by anybody`s standards, and as thoughts are also electrical impules, how do you know whether they connect with something or not, and you are not even a scientist, just an ordinary know it all lay person.
And, so they say, God can neither be proved or disproved, and anyway, what exactly IS your definition of " God"?
You`d be surprised how many people, even those who believe, are not really that clear on how they would define him/her/the force, call it what you will.
And finally, WHATEVER your views are any decent person would not mock another`s beliefs, he did a brave thing and good on him that he believed in something. Belief is a POWER in its own right, it doesn`t matter what you believe in, you could believe in a stone, and the power of your own beliefs would work for you. or against you if it was a negative belief.
And l wonder what you would have done in the same circumstances - -!

If you believe in a stone you also need psychiatric help. It does not take anything away from the mans bravery to say that. They are separate issues. A good person can hold misguided beliefs just as a criminal can perform a kind act.

Aint it just the truth wrote:
Evidence Asbo evidence!!!
.
It's really not a good idea to let the trolls know who you are Hannah although that doesn't mean that people you know and trust shouldn't know.
.
Greatly appreciate your comments but you shouldn't feel we are unusual as recent surveys have shown that between a third and a half now reject the idea of god (I suspect the latter figure is more realistic as the results depend on how the questions are framed and christians cheat by asking loaded questions). There is also a clear trend for half of all believers to reject their faith every generation, as they should do because mankind has a difficult future ahead and the last thing we need is to be encumbered with irrelevant ancient superstitions.

the dating site's elsewhere. don't worry i won't let sarah know.

Shrimper Nation wrote:
My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

Perhaps there are no cannabis threads for them to post on demanding legalisation...makes them bitter you see...or does one poster in particular..."aint that the truth" aka "The Moon Ranger on dope"

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

I'm more than comfortable thanks. If you care to investigate my name and address were recently submitted to the Thank You column in the echo. I'm not the touchy one. What is the point of a paper asking for readers views? If you want to slate me feel free. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it as am I. I simply make the choice to refrain from personal attacks.

it appears you have a pretty low bar for touchyness. calling your posts chippy is a statement of fact and not an insult

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

I'm more than comfortable thanks. If you care to investigate my name and address were recently submitted to the Thank You column in the echo. I'm not the touchy one. What is the point of a paper asking for readers views? If you want to slate me feel free. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it as am I. I simply make the choice to refrain from personal attacks.

it appears you have a pretty low bar for touchyness. calling your posts chippy is a statement of fact and not an insult

It's your opinion. I don't share it. Chippy means touchy and irritable, so one persons irritable may be another persons considered. It's a subjective thing. I could call you pompous, to me your views are. You might think them justified and not pompous at all. If I describe myself as a female with two eyes and ten fingers that is an observable fact.

Hannah Foster wrote:

Lastlaugh... wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

Utter Prat!

Speaks the voice of experience and sense.

I have indeed had experience of the prat in question and have the sense to recognise him as such.

It may be sense you will yourself acquire in time with the same experience.

Were you around in the 60s and 70s? If so said prat would scoff at any denial that you didn't indulge in drug taking...because "everybody did and those who say they didn't are scumbag liars"

Welcome to the mindset of your allie!

Hannah Foster wrote:

danielthedreamer wrote: This is the first and last post I will make on this article. 1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact). 2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so. 3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love. 4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

I agree with you, the rescuer was selfless. He saw a woman in distress an he did a very commendable thing by risking his own life. If he wants to use god as justification that is up to him. In the same way that some people commit atrocities in the name of faith some people do great things. The fact remains it was his free will and he deserves the praise. I love the arts, in particular music. Bach is one of my favourite composers, in fact I love to sit in Durham cathedral and listen to the beautiful choral music rising up into the roof. Bach was an exceptionally talented musician and the choristers train long and hard to produce the sound that they do. It has nothing nothing to do with any god. My life experiences have taught me that we are responsible for our own path in life. We should live ethically and responsibly and treat other people the way we wish to be treated. Sadly I have very little time or respect for people who claim the existance of god to be a fact. It is a belief. There are lots of beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny but if it gives someone comfort go ahead and cling to it, just don't use it as justification for your actions good or bad.

Hannah,

l have been reading your comments on here, and you come across as one of the more intelligent on here,believe in what you are saying, and also with an interest in science.

My views are very unusual, although l don`t like religions, any of them, l do believe in a higher power, and would like to put my views on here.

For the scoffers: These are MY views, l really don`t care if anyone agrees with them or not, they are my beliefs, not facts, so l would like people to respect that.

This is the view, expressed in an email to someone l wrote to, and l would be interested to hear your views on what l`ve written.



Hallo,
l was interested to hear that you do not believe in religion, but l wondered if you believe in a higher power, a God or by whichever name you want to call it ie , cosmic consciousness/intell
igence or simply a process. l actually write poetry and have had 5 published in various anthologies, but l can only write when l feel inspired. l hope you don`t mind but l`d like to share one of them with you.
This is it:

There is no Division.

There is no division
between science and religion
Either there is an external God,
who created everything,
Or an internal force
of pure consciousness,
intelligence, energy and organisation.


This internal force
resides within every atom,
Regulating and organising
with accuracy and intelligence,
And is the outward manifestation
Of a divine force or God.

l hope you like it. Almost every time l read an article on any aspect of science, including the formation of the universe l also read that most scientists deny the existence of a God
Although l, like you, am not religious, believing that religions cause all the suffering and wars in this world, because people are not intelligent or mature enough to agree to differ on matters of belief, l certainly acknowledge, not believe, that for the universe and everything contained in it to have evolved and to exist in its present form, that there must be an intelligent, organising force at work and l am sure that all scientists would agree with that.
lt seems to me as a non scientific but intelligent human being that either this force is A, outside of everything, controlling, organising, regulating ect, with accuracy and intelligence, an external "God" if you like, or B, is within every particle of every piece of matter as its intrinsic, organising principle ie. the essence of everything, self regulating.
One could make a comparison with a computer. l don`t think anyone who knows how it works would say that there was no designer or someone who input information. lf, hypothetically, that was proved not to be the case, then people would look at the possibility that the computer was self-organising and intelligent.
lt may not be that good a comparison but l think that you get the "gist" ( idea) of it --- it can only be one or the other --- it has to be.
l also think that a lot of confusion/misconcept
ion surrounds the perception of the word "God". ls " he" really an old man with a white beard and mysterious ways, controlling our destiny? Or do more people see "him" as a force , or form, of energy, intelligence and organisation which is intrinsic in and the essence of, everything?
What we call it is irrelevant --- it is what it is, and to me it seems more like a process in action than a person, to which all living things can connect, through thought, prayer ect, in fact one huge mass of universal consciousness, which, as scientists do not reall know where exactly consciousness resides ie, only in the brain ---- l don`t think so -- is as good a hypothesis as any.
l hope my views have given some food for thought as l know the very difficult and ultimate search, by myself and others as well as scientists worldwide,is for the "Truth". However l know that "truth" is relative but l also hope it is universal and conclusive. ( one day! )

Lastlaugh... wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

Lastlaugh... wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

LibbyJ wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

A curse? Is that all you can say? What primitive hatred you display! Someone has risked their life to save another, all worked together to make the rescue. They all deserve our admiration at the least! Prayer, by definition, can only be positive, and has a tremendously positive effect on the mind. Unlike scratchy, itchy, primitive little curses.......

As someone who has recued several people from the sea in the estuary and off the south coast I applaud this young man's effort but if he thinks some sort of god helped him then he is sadly deluded. I do not hate anyone but I do detest ignorance and religion is pure ignorance. Prove me wrong if you can.

Utter Prat!

Speaks the voice of experience and sense.

I have indeed had experience of the prat in question and have the sense to recognise him as such.

It may be sense you will yourself acquire in time with the same experience.

Were you around in the 60s and 70s? If so said prat would scoff at any denial that you didn't indulge in drug taking...because "everybody did and those who say they didn't are scumbag liars"

Welcome to the mindset of your allie!

Just to clarify, I was agreeing with Ain't it just the truth. He makes a good point. The ferocious rate of reply seems to have left things a little out of sync. Everybody didn't and still doesn't take drugs by the way. Only the sheep. Drugs are for losers. Always have been and always will be.

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

I'm more than comfortable thanks. If you care to investigate my name and address were recently submitted to the Thank You column in the echo. I'm not the touchy one. What is the point of a paper asking for readers views? If you want to slate me feel free. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it as am I. I simply make the choice to refrain from personal attacks.

it appears you have a pretty low bar for touchyness. calling your posts chippy is a statement of fact and not an insult

It's your opinion. I don't share it. Chippy means touchy and irritable, so one persons irritable may be another persons considered. It's a subjective thing. I could call you pompous, to me your views are. You might think them justified and not pompous at all. If I describe myself as a female with two eyes and ten fingers that is an observable fact.

more of your scientific claptrap. try closing the textbooks for just a second. you can call me whatever you like. i really don't give a rat's testicle. i have no interest if you are hannah foster or hanna barbera - you engaged me if you recall.

Almeda11 wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

danielthedreamer wrote: This is the first and last post I will make on this article. 1. This man risked his life to save two others, in fact as he said in the article, he was prepared to die for them, because of his belief in God. The man was very heroic, and instead of heaping all the praises on himself he gave them to God (who didn't even want his name being known). That to me is the picture of selflessness (whether you believe in God doesn't change that fact). 2. Christianity (this man's obvious religion) is not for ignorant people, and it is easily proven by the many brilliant men and woman throughout history who espoused belief in Christ. William Wilberforce fought slavery with a passion, because he believed man was made in God's image. Rembrandt painted religious and realistic art, because he believed in a Creator who loves creativity. Bach wrote music for the same reason. Kepler, Newton, Boyle, men of scientific standing and men who had great faith. All of these believed in an unchanging and rational God whose creation reflected His nature, in believing that the universe is based upon a divine unchanging order they could effectively study it and come to lasting conclusions about it. This my friends is what started the scientific revolution. Even Albert Einstein, while never coming to a belief in a personal God, rejected atheism and believed in a God that harmonized with the known and understood universe. Ignorance? I don't think so. 3. Many Christians are persecuted around the world for their faith (in over 50 countries people are hostile toward the gospel). Instead of retaliation and violence, they decide to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. To make such blanket statements about us being angry simpletons who like making derogatory and self-satisfied comments, shows that you do not see (and possibly do not wish to see) that there are many Christians who actually walk out their lives in love. 4. In conclusion (because I will not be making another post), bashing religion is easy, but it doesn't take much thought. This man has shown great humility and nearly sacrificed his life, and all you can worry about is that he believes in and gives glory to God. What does that reveal about the coldness of love in your hearts? Because at the end of the day, when your scientific theories, your beliefs, your "facts", and your logic are taken away what stands naked before truth? I believe your own responses testify to who you really are.

I agree with you, the rescuer was selfless. He saw a woman in distress an he did a very commendable thing by risking his own life. If he wants to use god as justification that is up to him. In the same way that some people commit atrocities in the name of faith some people do great things. The fact remains it was his free will and he deserves the praise. I love the arts, in particular music. Bach is one of my favourite composers, in fact I love to sit in Durham cathedral and listen to the beautiful choral music rising up into the roof. Bach was an exceptionally talented musician and the choristers train long and hard to produce the sound that they do. It has nothing nothing to do with any god. My life experiences have taught me that we are responsible for our own path in life. We should live ethically and responsibly and treat other people the way we wish to be treated. Sadly I have very little time or respect for people who claim the existance of god to be a fact. It is a belief. There are lots of beliefs that don't hold up to scrutiny but if it gives someone comfort go ahead and cling to it, just don't use it as justification for your actions good or bad.

Hannah,

l have been reading your comments on here, and you come across as one of the more intelligent on here,believe in what you are saying, and also with an interest in science.

My views are very unusual, although l don`t like religions, any of them, l do believe in a higher power, and would like to put my views on here.

For the scoffers: These are MY views, l really don`t care if anyone agrees with them or not, they are my beliefs, not facts, so l would like people to respect that.

This is the view, expressed in an email to someone l wrote to, and l would be interested to hear your views on what l`ve written.



Hallo,
l was interested to hear that you do not believe in religion, but l wondered if you believe in a higher power, a God or by whichever name you want to call it ie , cosmic consciousness/intell

igence or simply a process. l actually write poetry and have had 5 published in various anthologies, but l can only write when l feel inspired. l hope you don`t mind but l`d like to share one of them with you.
This is it:

There is no Division.

There is no division
between science and religion
Either there is an external God,
who created everything,
Or an internal force
of pure consciousness,
intelligence, energy and organisation.


This internal force
resides within every atom,
Regulating and organising
with accuracy and intelligence,
And is the outward manifestation
Of a divine force or God.

l hope you like it. Almost every time l read an article on any aspect of science, including the formation of the universe l also read that most scientists deny the existence of a God
Although l, like you, am not religious, believing that religions cause all the suffering and wars in this world, because people are not intelligent or mature enough to agree to differ on matters of belief, l certainly acknowledge, not believe, that for the universe and everything contained in it to have evolved and to exist in its present form, that there must be an intelligent, organising force at work and l am sure that all scientists would agree with that.
lt seems to me as a non scientific but intelligent human being that either this force is A, outside of everything, controlling, organising, regulating ect, with accuracy and intelligence, an external "God" if you like, or B, is within every particle of every piece of matter as its intrinsic, organising principle ie. the essence of everything, self regulating.
One could make a comparison with a computer. l don`t think anyone who knows how it works would say that there was no designer or someone who input information. lf, hypothetically, that was proved not to be the case, then people would look at the possibility that the computer was self-organising and intelligent.
lt may not be that good a comparison but l think that you get the "gist" ( idea) of it --- it can only be one or the other --- it has to be.
l also think that a lot of confusion/misconcept

ion surrounds the perception of the word "God". ls " he" really an old man with a white beard and mysterious ways, controlling our destiny? Or do more people see "him" as a force , or form, of energy, intelligence and organisation which is intrinsic in and the essence of, everything?
What we call it is irrelevant --- it is what it is, and to me it seems more like a process in action than a person, to which all living things can connect, through thought, prayer ect, in fact one huge mass of universal consciousness, which, as scientists do not reall know where exactly consciousness resides ie, only in the brain ---- l don`t think so -- is as good a hypothesis as any.
l hope my views have given some food for thought as l know the very difficult and ultimate search, by myself and others as well as scientists worldwide,is for the "Truth". However l know that "truth" is relative but l also hope it is universal and conclusive. ( one day! )

Thanks. I'll read it properly and give it some thought. I am a neuroscientist by training and the whole area of consciousness is a fascinating one that we are a long way from fully understanding. Whether I find that I agree or disagree or otherwise with your thoughts it's nice to have the opportunity to have a sensible conversation.

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:
We are known by our names because they are our accepted means of identification. They will be on the electoral register. They are the legal means of identification we have to provide for registering births, deaths and marriages or obtaining a passport or driving licence. If they are are good enough for that that are surely good enough for a local newspaper. When I write into the newspaper with an opinion I give my address so that should anyone have reason to I may be contacted. The Internet is no different from the letters to the editor of the Times in that respect. The reason that I give my name and others don't is that I am happy to defend myself. I bet half of the trolls that litter these comment threads are not even known to their family and friends because they would be too embarrassed. The fact that there may be more that one Hannah Foster is no different to the fact that there may be another Essex Medja with a number 1 after it. You are anonymous to all but those you actively identify yourself to. it's not your legally recognised name is it. So your point seems slightly futile.

nobody cares who you are. hannah foster is odds on a bogus name. perhaps you should stick to writing chippy letters to the times as you're clearly uncomfortable with this forum.

I'm more than comfortable thanks. If you care to investigate my name and address were recently submitted to the Thank You column in the echo. I'm not the touchy one. What is the point of a paper asking for readers views? If you want to slate me feel free. It is your opinion and you are entitled to it as am I. I simply make the choice to refrain from personal attacks.

it appears you have a pretty low bar for touchyness. calling your posts chippy is a statement of fact and not an insult

It's your opinion. I don't share it. Chippy means touchy and irritable, so one persons irritable may be another persons considered. It's a subjective thing. I could call you pompous, to me your views are. You might think them justified and not pompous at all. If I describe myself as a female with two eyes and ten fingers that is an observable fact.

more of your scientific claptrap. try closing the textbooks for just a second. you can call me whatever you like. i really don't give a rat's testicle. i have no interest if you are hannah foster or hanna barbera - you engaged me if you recall.

Maybe I was hoping for a sensible debate. I can see that you are not capable. So you won't have to worry that I will bother in future. Life is too short.

Hannah Foster wrote:

Almeda11 wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

You`ve got a BIG chip on your shoulder, and your assertions that many tests in the US have " proved" that prayer doesn`t work are flawed, as there will always be many other tests, worldwide in fact that " prove" that it does. Prayers are THOUGHTS, combined with FEELINGS, a powerful combination by anybody`s standards, and as thoughts are also electrical impules, how do you know whether they connect with something or not, and you are not even a scientist, just an ordinary know it all lay person. And, so they say, God can neither be proved or disproved, and anyway, what exactly IS your definition of " God"? You`d be surprised how many people, even those who believe, are not really that clear on how they would define him/her/the force, call it what you will. And finally, WHATEVER your views are any decent person would not mock another`s beliefs, he did a brave thing and good on him that he believed in something. Belief is a POWER in its own right, it doesn`t matter what you believe in, you could believe in a stone, and the power of your own beliefs would work for you. or against you if it was a negative belief. And l wonder what you would have done in the same circumstances - -!

If you believe in a stone you also need psychiatric help. It does not take anything away from the mans bravery to say that. They are separate issues. A good person can hold misguided beliefs just as a criminal can perform a kind act.

My god, talk about DENSE!!! l said belief was A POWER IN ITSELF, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN, ( a stone was used as an EXAMPLE)-- AND YOU DIDN`T GET IT, maybe you, with your defensive attitude are the one who needs psychiatric help!!!

But l agree with your other comments, and there are many sides to all of us, which come out in different circumstances.----- Happy New Year,--- and no, l`m NOT being funny, l just felt like saying it so l did!

Shrimper Nation wrote:
My scientific analysis of the comments on this article has found that those who follow the atheist religion come across as very angry and very arrogant. Not a good way to try to win converts!

How can atheismn be classed as a religion, as they believe in nothing?

Almeda11 wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

Almeda11 wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

You`ve got a BIG chip on your shoulder, and your assertions that many tests in the US have " proved" that prayer doesn`t work are flawed, as there will always be many other tests, worldwide in fact that " prove" that it does. Prayers are THOUGHTS, combined with FEELINGS, a powerful combination by anybody`s standards, and as thoughts are also electrical impules, how do you know whether they connect with something or not, and you are not even a scientist, just an ordinary know it all lay person. And, so they say, God can neither be proved or disproved, and anyway, what exactly IS your definition of " God"? You`d be surprised how many people, even those who believe, are not really that clear on how they would define him/her/the force, call it what you will. And finally, WHATEVER your views are any decent person would not mock another`s beliefs, he did a brave thing and good on him that he believed in something. Belief is a POWER in its own right, it doesn`t matter what you believe in, you could believe in a stone, and the power of your own beliefs would work for you. or against you if it was a negative belief. And l wonder what you would have done in the same circumstances - -!

If you believe in a stone you also need psychiatric help. It does not take anything away from the mans bravery to say that. They are separate issues. A good person can hold misguided beliefs just as a criminal can perform a kind act.

My god, talk about DENSE!!! l said belief was A POWER IN ITSELF, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN, ( a stone was used as an EXAMPLE)-- AND YOU DIDN`T GET IT, maybe you, with your defensive attitude are the one who needs psychiatric help!!!

But l agree with your other comments, and there are many sides to all of us, which come out in different circumstances.----- Happy New Year,--- and no, l`m NOT being funny, l just felt like saying it so l did!

I absolutely did get your point. There are people who believe that inanimate objects giving them power, and they are nuts. I don't know that a belief is a power.
Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.
A dodgy psychological premise may well be in need of psychiatric help. I haven't called you dense because I don't need to defend anything or put anyone down. I am looking for informed debate.

Hannah Foster wrote:

Almeda11 wrote:

Hannah Foster wrote:

Almeda11 wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote:

Essex Medja wrote:

Aint it just the truth wrote: Prayer may have given this young man the confidence to act but if he thinks god answered his prayer he is off with the fairies. God only exists in the minds of men and many tests in the US have shown that prayer does not work.

Peace be with you brother.

And a curse on you and people like you who continue to sustain the lies of a primitive bronze age myth that should have been eradicated decades ago. In my experience the only people who continue to believe this nonsense are either of below average intelligence, weak minded, ignorant about science and/or elderly. Deny it if you can.

You`ve got a BIG chip on your shoulder, and your assertions that many tests in the US have " proved" that prayer doesn`t work are flawed, as there will always be many other tests, worldwide in fact that " prove" that it does. Prayers are THOUGHTS, combined with FEELINGS, a powerful combination by anybody`s standards, and as thoughts are also electrical impules, how do you know whether they connect with something or not, and you are not even a scientist, just an ordinary know it all lay person. And, so they say, God can neither be proved or disproved, and anyway, what exactly IS your definition of " God"? You`d be surprised how many people, even those who believe, are not really that clear on how they would define him/her/the force, call it what you will. And finally, WHATEVER your views are any decent person would not mock another`s beliefs, he did a brave thing and good on him that he believed in something. Belief is a POWER in its own right, it doesn`t matter what you believe in, you could believe in a stone, and the power of your own beliefs would work for you. or against you if it was a negative belief. And l wonder what you would have done in the same circumstances - -!

If you believe in a stone you also need psychiatric help. It does not take anything away from the mans bravery to say that. They are separate issues. A good person can hold misguided beliefs just as a criminal can perform a kind act.

My god, talk about DENSE!!! l said belief was A POWER IN ITSELF, REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN, ( a stone was used as an EXAMPLE)-- AND YOU DIDN`T GET IT, maybe you, with your defensive attitude are the one who needs psychiatric help!!!

But l agree with your other comments, and there are many sides to all of us, which come out in different circumstances.----- Happy New Year,--- and no, l`m NOT being funny, l just felt like saying it so l did!

I absolutely did get your point. There are people who believe that inanimate objects giving them power, and they are nuts. I don't know that a belief is a power.
Belief is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.
A dodgy psychological premise may well be in need of psychiatric help. I haven't called you dense because I don't need to defend anything or put anyone down. I am looking for informed debate.

....I am looking for informed debate.
.
No, like the Truth person you just want to pour scorn and vilify those that have a belief and a faith.
.
And that is a provable fact.

science says that everything is questionable.

religion says 'magic' and any questions relating to the above mentioned 'magic' will result in your attached 'magic' (soul) spending an eternity in a pit of boiling sulphur.

but remember! God loves you. This is why god has representatives in the house of lords. Because despite of his Omnipotent abilities he still needs to get his reps to dabble in law making.

There was an often used phrase in some armies. "There are no atheists in a trench".
.
Perhaps we should shoot at scientists a bit more?
.
They just don't get it do they and they like to think they are sooooo superior and on a higher intellectual level. It's about faith and belief, something BILLIONS worldwide buy into. It is not about test tubes and the periodic table.

Well I heard that a local vicar had gone fishing, at the end of Southend pier, and in the surf he saw the image of Christ, next thing he was reeling in 40 fish....

Sorry, I take that back about Nessie!

Aint it just the truth wrote:
You are off with the fairies, there used to be a scientists christian organisation but it folded because the numbers dwindled so much. And for belief you should either write "assumption" or the "placebo effect" but assumptions are stupid and nearly always wrong and placebos are just a manifestation of the physical links between brain (ie mind) and body. Don't you know anything? You are grasping at straws with false arguments because thats all you christians have left isn't it? A hundred years ago we thought almost everything was the work of god but now you lot are reduced to claiming that your god might be behind the big bang, the one place that no information can flow from or to. Pathetic.

Why do you keep picking on christians/ its not just they that believe in a God.

from the monty python film 'the meaning of life'

Exec #1: Item six on the agenda: "The Meaning of Life" Now uh, Harry, you've had some thoughts on this.
Exec #2: Yeah, I've had a team working on this over the past few weeks, and what we've come up with can be reduced to two fundamental concepts. One: People aren't wearing enough hats. Two: Matter is energy. In the universe there are many energy fields which we cannot normally perceive. Some energies have a spiritual source which act upon a person's soul. However, this "soul" does not exist ab initio as orthodox Christianity teaches; it has to be brought into existence by a process of guided self-observation. However, this is rarely achieved owing to man's unique ability to be distracted from spiritual matters by everyday trivia.
Exec #3: What was that about hats again?
Exec #2: Oh, Uh... people aren't wearing enough.
Exec #1: Is this true?
Exec #4: Certainly. Hat sales have increased but not pari passu, as our research...
Exec #3: "Not wearing enough"? enough for what purpose?
Exec #5: Can I just ask, with reference to your second point, when you say souls don't develop because people become distracted...

Exec #5: Has anyone noticed that building there before?

oh well played truthy. you and your in the military brother have gone and decimated the thread

asbo. just the truth wrote:
oh well played truthy. you and your in the military brother have gone and decimated the thread

They just disappeared into thin air. It is a miracle.

Nebs wrote:

asbo. just the truth wrote:
oh well played truthy. you and your in the military brother have gone and decimated the thread

They just disappeared into thin air. It is a miracle.

divine intervention and vengeance being wreaked on the atheists....

Now now Nebs you are better poster than that cheap jibe.

If the headline had read "brave hero saves woman from sea" how different would the responses from readers have been! There would have been universal commendation for his action and that would have been that. Instead, as a result of the mention of religious belief we have this lengthy "robust discussion" about the rights or wrongs of maintaining a belief in a deity.
I don't suppose the woman who was saved gives a flying, erm, fig, about the religious views of her rescuer.

I really must direct my pastor to this thread. I fear he will need counselling for anxiety and depression after reading it, seeing how he has his work cut out "spreading the Word" to people with views like those expressed here, lol. (And now I wait for renewed explosions of rage and fury at my temerity in thinking that we deluded believers have the right to annoy other people with our lunatic beliefs.) Should I very helpfully go along and lynch myself on the nearest lampost to save you the time and effort?

Essex Medja wrote:
Now now Nebs you are better poster than that cheap jibe.

I thought it was mildly amusing rather than a cheap jibe. I've already done the god debate on the stained glass window thread.

Fair enough Nebs, I was probably more concerned that anything remotely religious would bring out the zealous sceptics.

JoMilton wrote:
If the headline had read "brave hero saves woman from sea" how different would the responses from readers have been! There would have been universal commendation for his action and that would have been that. Instead, as a result of the mention of religious belief we have this lengthy "robust discussion" about the rights or wrongs of maintaining a belief in a deity.
I don't suppose the woman who was saved gives a flying, erm, fig, about the religious views of her rescuer.

I really must direct my pastor to this thread. I fear he will need counselling for anxiety and depression after reading it, seeing how he has his work cut out "spreading the Word" to people with views like those expressed here, lol. (And now I wait for renewed explosions of rage and fury at my temerity in thinking that we deluded believers have the right to annoy other people with our lunatic beliefs.) Should I very helpfully go along and lynch myself on the nearest lampost to save you the time and effort?

Hang on a tick. Who said anything about lynching? its a bit extreme.

I hold the view that all religions should be laughed at for the doctrine and practice of going about trying to 'save' the 'non-believers'

I have travelled 27 thousand air miles and been to some of the most troubled and war torn places in the world. The only thing I have felt near my heart is acid indigestion.

i put my faith in the tooth fairy! at least I got a couple of quid from her. I could place my faith as a Jehovah's witness but I would really like it if myself or my children could have a blood transfusion if required. I would place my faith as a catholic but I cant afford that many children. I would place my faith as a protestant but I cant force myself to vote Tory. I would put my faith in devil worship but to do that I would have to believe in god first.

you know what. I think I will just keep it simple. 'be a good person' 'trust my instincts and my abilities' when things go right I will 'congratulate myself' when things go wrong I will 'blame myself' because 'I am responsible' for my actions and when I die I will fall into nothingness (oblivion)

it is my legacy that I leave behind to my children. I don't ask that they believe in me. I don't say to them "I am the light and the way" and I don't "work in mysterious ways" I work in practical ways that they can understand so they don't become confused by what i actually said and start fighting amongst themselves..

peace be to you :)

JoMilton wrote:
If the headline had read "brave hero saves woman from sea" how different would the responses from readers have been! There would have been universal commendation for his action and that would have been that. Instead, as a result of the mention of religious belief we have this lengthy "robust discussion" about the rights or wrongs of maintaining a belief in a deity.
I don't suppose the woman who was saved gives a flying, erm, fig, about the religious views of her rescuer.

I really must direct my pastor to this thread. I fear he will need counselling for anxiety and depression after reading it, seeing how he has his work cut out "spreading the Word" to people with views like those expressed here, lol. (And now I wait for renewed explosions of rage and fury at my temerity in thinking that we deluded believers have the right to annoy other people with our lunatic beliefs.) Should I very helpfully go along and lynch myself on the nearest lampost to save you the time and effort?

Hang on a tick. Who said anything about lynching? its a bit extreme.

I hold the view that all religions should be laughed at for the doctrine and practice of going about trying to 'save' the 'non-believers'

I have travelled 27 thousand air miles and been to some of the most troubled and war torn places in the world. The only thing I have felt near my heart is acid indigestion.

i put my faith in the tooth fairy! at least I got a couple of quid from her. I could place my faith as a Jehovah's witness but I would really like it if myself or my children could have a blood transfusion if required. I would place my faith as a catholic but I cant afford that many children. I would place my faith as a protestant but I cant force myself to vote Tory. I would put my faith in devil worship but to do that I would have to believe in god first.

you know what. I think I will just keep it simple. 'be a good person' 'trust my instincts and my abilities' when things go right I will 'congratulate myself' when things go wrong I will 'blame myself' because 'I am responsible' for my actions and when I die I will fall into nothingness (oblivion)

it is my legacy that I leave behind to my children. I don't ask that they believe in me. I don't say to them "I am the light and the way" and I don't "work in mysterious ways" I work in practical ways that they can understand so they don't become confused by what i actually said and start fighting amongst themselves..

peace be to you :)

asbo will prevail. btw truthy is your brother in the navy?