I'm puzzled, please explain.

[regulo]

Let me put this out for discussion. A couple meet, marry, and have 25 years of happiness. The husband dies. After a few years the widow meets, marries, and has a further 25 years of happiness with her 2nd husband. He then dies. The wife has loved both men equally, and they her. In any afterlife, with which one shall she spend eternity? What if she must choose? What becomes of the "rejected" husband? Your thoughts much appreciated in advance.

[naomi24]

Mmmm ...... maybe you're right, Wiz. It sort of matches your eyes after a few beers perhaps? (Err.... I'm being diplomatic here). ;o)

Everton, If we're two sides of the same coin, why not criticise him equally?

And yes, it does have to be your God because he's the God of the Abrahamic religions and he is the one to whom Christians, Jews and Muslims give their allegiance. In truth, nothing proves the existence of a God, and no one knows if a God exists - and any rational atheist will tell you that. However, in my humble opinion, if there is a God you people are giving credit to the wrong bloke.

[naomi24]

This debate might go on, but I do think we ought to apologise to regulo for going off track. Sorry regulo. No excuses. It's par for the course around here.

[Old_Geezer]

Surely a rational atheist will say God doesn't exist. A rational agnostic will say no one knows.

[naomi24]

Old Geezer, I was just off to bed when you pulled me back from the brink. A rational atheist does not believe in the existence of God, but since there is no absolute proof, he cannot definitely discount the possibility.

Night all. Sleep tight. x

[regulo]

Naomi24,

No need to apologise, I thought my question might inflame a few people! Whenever I have put this question to any group of people, the discussion has usually become very fiery, to say the least. As I previously said, although I personally fall into the atheist persuasion, I would never attempt to sway any person from their own belief. I feel the late comedian Dave Allen had it right when he signed off with, "May YOUR God go with you". Whatever you believe, if it helps you through your life day by day, and harms no other, go on and believe.

[Old_Geezer]

Naturally a rational religionist will say God does exist. With the emphasis on anything you like.

Yes I've heard people who describe themselves as atheists claim they do not discount the possibility of God existing, but that claim doesn't fit the definition.

For example, from the Concise Oxford Dictionary:
atheism n. the theory or belief that God does not exist. atheist. n. atheistic adj. atheistical adj. [French athéisme from Greek atheos 'without God'

For the definition to be otherwise there would be insufficient difference between an atheist and a agnostic. It is my guess that some folk who are agnostic like to describe themselves as atheist because they consider it to have more kudos. But I may be wrong.

Ah Dave Allen. Really used to like his TV shows when I was a lot younger.

[naomi24]

Hello again Old Geezer, the claim does fit the definition because atheists do not believe in the existence of God, which means there is a great deal of difference between an atheist and an agnostic. An atheist bases his belief on a total lack of evidence, but being rational, he cannot discount the vague possibility that at some time in the future he might be proven wrong. Hence the slogan on the Atheist Bus - 'There's probably no God'.

http://i.telegraph.co...eist-Bus_1217553c.jpg

Incidentally, a rational religionist is, in my opinion, a contradiction in terms.

[naomi24]

regulo, the problem is that religion does harm people.

I liked Dave Allen too.

[123everton]

I don't understand what you're on about there Wiz.

[jno]

from a Christian point of view, what Jackthehat said way back. Heavenly bliss is on a different plane from marital bliss. You'll be happy with everyone.

[rojash]

"Everyone will live happily and in unity. "

Not sure I want to spend all eternity on a caravan site.

http://www.hru.co.uk/home