Once you get beyond all the bullshit, there's still the fundamental question lingering over everything we see. There's still the fact of occasional breakthroughs in the way we see and understand the universe. What is that saying? The most insane thing about it is that it makes any sense at all?

I just can't stand people who strut around proclaiming disbelief in anything God-related because when you look up at the vastness of space, I can't think of anything BUT God or at least a God concept. It's very likely that SOMETHING or some being far beyond our comprehension set things in motion and made it so that it all makes sense. To me, it's more likely that there is something than there isn't, because the latter leads to the conclusion that we very likely wouldn't even be here if it were that void of a God concept. It would mean that it's all just here and very likely wouldn't make that pesky 'sense' that it does. THAT'S the simplest explanation, NOT the explanation that it all just is here with nothing setting anything in motion. Then you come up against the pesky infinite universe (I guess one that has continuously expanded and collapsed? or one that is one of many that we're unaware of? both are possible, no?) or a universe that has a definite beginning. In that case, what was on the outside of that spec of matter and energy before the big bang? What did it expand into? How long was it sitting there?

I realize the quesitons of 'what was on the outside?' are brushed aside by physicists as unimportant to understanding THIS universe, the one we were given, but the question is still there, isn't it? And does anyone know the answer? Huh, Bill?

It just REALLY bothers me that he struts around yet doesn't address those questions that NONE of us have the answer to, and are the reason that a non-personal God concept still exists and must linger and always will until the true nature of the origins of the universe present themselves. I truly feel he has no idea about the intersection of religion and science, as many agnostics do not. They put the Christian, the Islamic, and the Jewish idols to sleep and think that the question is over, when really, it's only just begun.

That Larry Charles Quote on him hoping the film Changing a few opinions. Those people who's opinions it would change are wastes of life! If they can't come to that type of conclusion without a hand holder- I mean fuck it! I just wouldn't want to know that person. What else could a film make them change their minds on, or become focused with. Imagine that sad fuck who always says yeah "That Religious movie... man it changed my life."

And Quint I haven't seen the movie but what is up with this "There is no money" quote you said???? Please tell me that wasn't said somewhere in the film. This is that sheep shit I'm talking about. Is that a Eric/Quint quote from his mouth? Or is it a quote he thought was cool and he tossed it out there trying to impress his idol.

People, you need to believe in whatever it is you believe in, not because someone else tells you to, but because it's what you believe in, and the only one who should challenge you and you're belief system is yourself.

I don't believe in Any Man Made/Documented version of God, and I'm not weak or simple enough to let a movie educate me or change my opinion on such a subject.

It's a sad world we live in. Arm chair critics, people who follow trends to fit in, or simply because they lack a brain and it sounds smart or intelligent to them!

How about this: We don't know yet. Is that so hard to say? Why make up myths and fairytales to explain shit around us, and then kill each other over them?

It assumes there "must" be a reason, or a purpose, or an objective.

Why assume that? Nature just happens. You live, you have powerful and interesting experiences, you stop living.

It doesn't "mean" something. It just happens for a while.

Doesn't make it any less enjoyable and important for you.

Imagining a super-powerful entity (somehow excused from the laws of physics) which has a brain which allocates a "purpose" or "meaning" seems hard to justify as a matter of logic.

But you're perfectly entitled to think that if you like. There's nothing "wrong" with thinking like that. It doesn't matter much what anyone "thinks" about these things, including Maher.

The problem comes when people cause harm to others who don't share their beliefs. Like the Inquistion, or the Taleban, or Al Quaeda or the Nazis.

They're the people to watch out for.

I'm happy Maher did it with his dry sense of humor. I've not always been his biggest fan, but I respect his incisive approach.

Anyone interested in a decidedly more scientific and laugh out loud take on this subject should check out:

http://www.rifters.com/real/cr awl.htm (Scroll down to: "Understanding Sarah Palin: Or, God Is In The Wattles"). This is scientist and science fiction writer Peter Watts's blog, and it's well worth reading. If you think Bill Maher's take on religion is unsettling, Watts will open up a whole new can of worms on the subject. Great stuff.

"Religulous" might not do that well at the box office, but I don't really care. The fact it got made gladdens me. Thanks, Bill.

i myself think that religious texts should be taken with a grain of salt, but the statement (incorect) that there are not secular accounts of the life of jesus is like saying, 'there are no accounts of the life of jesus, except for all of those other thousands of accounts' and there are shit loads of contempory accounts (not thousands) there is here a presupposition that it is not real that colours the argument. what about this presuposion: the reason that there are very few secular accounts is that jesus was real. since he was the son of god people he interacted with belived him to be the son of god and consequently the only accounts of his life are non secular due to the reality of his divinity. I am not saying any of these arguments are suppior or more honest. I am saying that that it is dishonest of some to say that one or another of them is more intellectually honest. anyway i'm looking forward to this, even though i realise it's main idea is 'you are stupid'. here one for anyone shaking their head saying this guy is an idoit. tell me the classical proof that the earth travels around the sun. or for that matter why life is more abundant near the equator. Or the annual turnover of the worlds largest secular charity. Or why world vision and the red cross are active in almost every country despite the evil nature of their origins

So to defend Bill for a second, he was unfairly criticized and taken off of his successful ABC show after what he said about the 9/11 terrorists. And I'd argue that his HBO show is probably a lot more interesting (I was too young to really get into Politically Incorrect at the time)

It's hard to imagine any sensible adult, whether with religious beliefs or not, considering that religion should be taught as if it was science.

Certainly, in Kitzmiller v Dover Area School Board the (impeccably conservative) Judge thought that pretending that religion is science involves "breathtaking inanity". [http://tiny url.com/48mqoy]

As "Expelled" is only a promotional advertorial for the fraudulent activities of the Discovery Institute, it's hardly comparable to "Religulous" - which is just a documentary.

I used to be a very sincere, truth-searching Christian. One day, it hit me just how insane the whole idea of eternal torture in hell really is...then I began to question other things...then I thought, "OK, let me at LEAST be convinced that Jesus existed AS A MAN and I'll go from there."

Guess what? No evidence whatsoever. And it has NOTHING to do with lack of DNA evidence. There is NO MENTION OF HIM from the people who kept the records of that time. If the stuff in the New Testament was true, if someone existed named Jesus who caused so much turmoil and such an uprising in Israel, wouldn't SOMEONE have kept a record of it? They didn't.

The thing is...I WANT someone to prove me wrong...so do it. But as you do the research, you'll realize you can't. And then YOU'LL have to go from there.

Vices are products of humans, not what God allows.

You have free will. Do whatever you want to do. But here is where most people, religious or non-religious forget. There is accountability. Don't think you will rape a child and get away with it. I think there would be serious injustice if people get to commit murder and not go to hell for it. And I am hoping the first ones are the suicide bombers.

Maher is a hero for bringing these ideas to this great film.

Just sayin...

I believe the question stated above was: Why and how the fuck are we or anything else here?

Well, as it turns out, the simplest answer is not that some creature or lifeform beyond us set it all in motion billions of years ago. The simplest answer is in fact that the initial question is misleading in the fact that it presupposes an answer. We've learned a lot about our universe. It's 13.7 billion years old, and is around 14 billion lightyears wide. We know about relativity and quantum mechanics and string theory, and its cousin, loop-quantum gravity. We also know about BBNS (Big Bang Nucleosynthesis), and how it explains why a lot of the chemicals that make up your body cannot be manufactured by any process on Earth, but instead in the hearts of stars older than our sun. We know about the evolution of stars and more importantly, of man.

But, not one single answer as to "why" or "how." Perhaps the simplest answer to the query is this:

There is NO why or how. There is NO over-arching, cosmic "reason" for us to be here other than the words, "Shit happens."

But human arrogance isn't satisfied with that. No, human arrogance demands more. Feels it has a right to more. Alas, there ISN'T more, as far as we can figure, and we've figured out a LOT of shit. Instead, it's better to ask this question:

WHY do WE feel we NEED that big, overarching meaning, and all of the dogma that it entails?

If it's because we feel we "can't handle" being nothing but scurrying pieces of meaningless cosmic dust, the leftovers from some process far more ancient than us, then humanity need to grow the fuck up. I know I have. I do not need a bogeyman in my closet to make me stay in my bed. I do not need a "battle for heaven" to explain cosmic furies in the sky. I do not need archers in the stars nor saviors on crosses, nor do I need promises for an afterlife. This life will do me just fine, thanks. No need for an eternal paradise or neverending pain here. Nope. I'm fine.

All I need are my friends, my family, and the people and things that bring me fleeting pleasure as I hurtle around on this tiny, TINY globe in space, for whatever 50-80 years I get to be here. And when I lay down, and my eyes close, and the neurons in my head stop firing their electro-chemical impulses, I will smile. Because I will have lived. And I will have done it without the headfull of horseshit known as Christianity or Paganism or Islam or Judaism.

Nope, I'll die happier for not having to have dealt with all that shit, at least in my own life.

What others do is their own damn business.

Christianity depends on the following premises:
1. It is possible for a perfect Creator to be displeased by His own handiwork.
2. A displeased Creator can be pleased again if you murder something.
3. Anyone who doesn't see how perfectly sane and reasonable 1 and 2 are, deserves punishment.

I mean, it's not like beliefs are choices. To believe, means to think something is true. When something looks true, you believe it. When it doesn't, you don't. There's no choice involved.

Now we all know that it is unjust to punish people for things beyond their control, including beliefs. Even the Catholic church admits that it was wrong... MORALLY wrong... to punish Galileo for his sincere thoughts. But isn't that what Hell is? A punishment for sincere thoughts? What does that tell us about the morals of the God who created Hell? And the people who love Him?

Christian often tell me, "you can't get to Heaven by being good." Which makes me wonder: Why would someone who wants to be good, care about Heaven? Why would someone who wants to get to Heaven, care about being good? And, which one of those two desires would God prefer people to have?

Just some stuff to think about.

I also agree that Maher seems to give the Jews a pass. Most notably in his interview with the Rabbi who attended the Iranian Holocaust conference. He attacks this man, and maybe he deserves to be, but what does the fact that this man denies the Holocaust have to do with religion? Maher used it soley as a way to ONCE AGAIN pledge support for Israel. Apparently Maher doesn't see the hypocrisy in this sentiment--supporting Israel, a religious-based, and therefore undemocratic, state in a fil about doubting religous faith? Huh?

Really? I guess I'm in trouble. I don't know if there is a god but I also don't know if Pink Unicorns exist either. By your logic, the atheist should just accept the nonsense of the bible (written back when people had all the answers) to ensure that they will fly with the angels in the make-believe afterlife.

If god punishes intelligent people who question his existence in a fiery hell, then he’s just a big asshole. And if you read the bible, you will find the god character to be a vengeful, divisive prick. I don’t need any of that ancient crap in my life.

TallBoy66, agnosticism is the belief that absolute truth as to the existence of a higher power is, by definition, unattainable.