 |
The Political Asylum
When it comes to lively debate, we're not just committed - we're certifiable!
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Michele
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2007 11:57 pm Post subject: Christ's Ascension in Doubt - Possible Tomb of Jesus Found |
 |
|
| Quote: | This week the Discovery Channel, together with HarperSanFrancisco, announces the release of "The Jesus Family Tomb," a television documentary and a book that aim to show that the tomb next door to Tova Bracha's apartment, located in a nondescript suburb called East Talpiot, is, well, the family plot of Jesus Christ. Spearheaded by a well-known TV director named Simcha Jacobovici, and produced by "Titanic" director James Cameron, "The Jesus Family Tomb" is—both in book and movie form—a slick and suspenseful narrative about the 1980 discovery of a first-century Jewish burial cave and the 10 bone boxes, or ossuaries, found therein.
With the help of statisticians, archeologists, historians, DNA experts, robot-camera technicians, epigraphers and a CSI expert from New York's Long Island, Jacobovici puts together a case in which he argues that the bones of Jesus, Mary and Mary Magdalene, along with some of their lesser-known relatives, were once entombed in this cave. James Charlesworth of the Princeton Theological Seminary consulted with Jacobovici on the project and is intrigued: "A very good claim could be made that this was Jesus' clan." Faced with the controversial theological and historical implications of what he calls his "rediscovery," Jacobovici is sanguine. "People will have to believe what they want to believe," he says. |
Read full article here:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17328478/site/newsweek/
I'll tell you one thing, this won't do much to change people's minds. Most believers will doubt the evidence, and those who DO believe the evidence will point out that they interpret the New Testament to say Christ's spirit ascended, and not his actual body. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vintage Girl
Moderator
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 3434
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm sure it will make fascinating viewing but, as you say Michele, I doubt whether anyone will be changing their minds because of it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michele
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I'm going to watch because I want to know what in the heck they're talking about regarding the DNA evidence. How could that be? They admit that just because the tombs say - Jesu, Joseph, Mary, Mary and Matthew - doesn't mean much because they're common names. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlueEmperor
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1065
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2007 12:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
It is very difficult to be open-minded when you're faith is at stake. Despite myself, when Mum was watching a programme on similar lines a little while ago, I remained entirely incredulous and even found myself saying something highly dogmatic: "This is heresy". I guess the problem is that 'faith' is more than mere 'belief'. It's something you feel you know to be true and that continues to be true even if people think they've 'proven' you wrong because, no matter what the evidence, you have 'faith' in what you believe to be true. I know that probably sounds nuts but I think it's how a lot of Christians feel. I don't even know if that makes any sense but I guess the point is, I don't need "proof" that God exists for me to believe in Him. I don't need 'proof' that God doesn't exist to make me stop believing in Him either. I don't believe that faith like that is something that can be proved or disproved. You've either got it or you haven't. I think it's as simple as that.
B.E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodbrit
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 859
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I saw an interview with some ppl including a cleric, on richard and judy of all things-and as we know, they know all about fraud lol.
I was impressed by the cleric who essentially confirmed to me what many already exists-the death and resurection was wat really matters, and the bible has for many people always been a metaphore.
_________________
Manchester, when death isnt enougth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 6:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BlueEmperor wrote: | | I guess the problem is that 'faith' is more than mere 'belief'. It's something you feel you know to be true and that continues to be true even if people think they've 'proven' you wrong because, no matter what the evidence, you have 'faith' in what you believe to be true. I know that probably sounds nuts but I think it's how a lot of Christians feel. I don't even know if that makes any sense but I guess the point is, I don't need "proof" that God exists for me to believe in Him. I don't need 'proof' that God doesn't exist to make me stop believing in Him either. I don't believe that faith like that is something that can be proved or disproved. You've either got it or you haven't. I think it's as simple as that. |
Blue you've just explained and articulated everything about faith which makes it illogical, dangerous and ultimately wrong.
What you have just said is that if someone could prove God doesn't exist in perfectly rational terms well within your comprehension and before your very eyes. You'd still refuse to believe them.
This is the dogmatic nature of religion, its essentially irrational.
"When one person suffers from a delusion, it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called Religion."
-Robert Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlueEmperor
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1065
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | | What you have just said is that if someone could prove God doesn't exist in perfectly rational terms well within your comprehension and before your very eyes. You'd still refuse to believe them. |
No, my whole point was that you can't 'prove' it.
B.E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BlueEmperor wrote: | | AngryLiberal wrote: | | What you have just said is that if someone could prove God doesn't exist in perfectly rational terms well within your comprehension and before your very eyes. You'd still refuse to believe them. |
No, my whole point was that you can't 'prove' it.
B.E. |
But if we could prove God didn't exist you wouldn't accept it anyway... that's what you just said really wasn't it?
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlueEmperor
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1065
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
My point was that scientists would doubtly think that they had "proved" it but I would probably disagree. No doubt Prof Richard Dawkins feels that he has "proved" God doesn't exist but I disagree with him too. He also seems to think that Darwinism is proven, undeniable "truth", but I disagree with that too.
B.E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 7:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
OK - Lets go hypothetical for a minute. Say someone could prove God didn't exist. I know that's a big ask but humour me. Lets say the entire global community, the UN, world governments, scientists and the general population concurred on this point.
Would you believe it or would you still have to faith?
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 8:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | OK - Lets go hypothetical for a minute. Say someone could prove God didn't exist. I know that's a big ask but humour me. Lets say the entire global community, the UN, world governments, scientists and the general population concurred on this point.
Would you believe it or would you still have to faith? |
What a stupid thing to say.
It's like saying "imagine the UN and world scientists decided that 2 + 2 = 6, would you agree with them or still maintain that 2 + 2 = 4?"
- God cannot be disproved so its impossible to imagine it happening or what you would think.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BlueEmperor
Moderator
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1065
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What Wakey said.
B.E. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SilverMiniCooperS
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 09 Jan 2007
Posts: 195
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 10:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I also agree with Wakey. It is also impossible to determine that these remains are those of the Holy family. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodbrit
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 859
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Little bit of perspective here-these remains were found in an ancient burial area in 1980. There have been tombs top no less than 70 Jesus found there-it was a very popular name.
_________________
Manchester, when death isnt enougth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
I actually think Blue already answered the question without indulging the hypothetical.
| BlueEmperor wrote: | | My point was that scientists would doubtly think that they had "proved" it but I would probably disagree |
So I'll rephrase my question to narrow him down a bit further...
Are you saying you would probably disagree because you'd expect there to be wholes in the "proof" offered (though this would make it inherently unproven), or because you'd simply refuse to believe it in spite of any evidence?
For those of you think this line of questioning is pointless it isn't. Yes its academic because we all know its logically impossible to prove the non-existence of something which doesn't exist. So if god doesn't exist then no proof of his non-existence can exist either. However, leaving that aside for a moment, Blue's answers give an insight into the Religious psyche and personally I find them fascinating. This is what I'm interested in.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzyQ
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
I find the need to disprove other peoples faith unecessary and disturbing, to be honest.
It's like I don't believe therefore you shouldn't....that is dogma if ever there was one.
You can't pretend to be tolerant and liberal then decide which lifestyles and beliefs you are going to be tolerant and liberal to.
_________________
If it ain't broke................hit it again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzyQ
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | However, leaving that aside for a moment, Blue's answers give an insight into the Religious psyche and personally I find them fascinating. This is what I'm interested in.
|
No, it gives you an insight into Blues mind. Blues psyche was developed long before his religious beliefs.
You find 'them' fascinating.  Not sure what to make of that.
A question AL, if the existence of God were proven, would you believe it?
_________________
If it ain't broke................hit it again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
I find people "with religion" interesting, I honestly want to understand what makes otherwise critical-thinkers like Blue, accept something so wholly and completely, even though there is no real evidence to support their choice of belief.
People interest me Suzy, sorry if you find that disturbing.
| Quote: |
I find the need to disprove other peoples faith unecessary and disturbing, to be honest.
It's like I don't believe therefore you shouldn't....that is dogma if ever there was one. |
Well the obvious response to that is why should belief in religion get special protection from critical questions, when debate over some topical political matter does not?
If I were to assert that Maggie Thatcher was a bitch and did nothing for the country I'd expect to be taken to task over it, what's wrong with doing the same for people who express religious beliefs? Why is it sacrosanct?
| Quote: |
You can't pretend to be tolerant and liberal then decide which lifestyles and beliefs you are going to be tolerant and liberal to. |
I'm perfectly tolerant of people with religious views, I just think such views are potentially dangerous. But more over I think they are illogical and I'm very interested to understand what it takes for otherwise critically thinking individuals to accept something like religion on faith alone.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks.
Last edited by AngryLiberal on Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:43 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michele
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:39 am Post subject: |
|
|
There very well could be a God. Heaven knows we humans seem to have evolved in leaps and bounds. To think that just 4 thousand years ago, we developed writing, is astounding! And again, we still don't know where all of *this* comes from.
*But* I choose to use Christianity as a guide rather than a religion. I believe in the Jesus who said he was the Son of Man, rather than the John 3:16 part. His preachings, rather than his divinity, are more interesting to me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michele
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| By the way, I had the craziest dream last night that my deceased grandfather texted me! If I told you what the text was about, you would laugh, but let's just limit it to he said something about a recent Burger King order, ok. Hilarious, right? Yes, to me now, but I took it so seriously in my dream. I was telling everyone, "I have proof of an afterlife!!!!" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Michele wrote: | | There very well could be a God. Heaven knows we humans seem to have evolved in leaps and bounds. To think that just 4 thousand years ago, we developed writing, is astounding! And again, we still don't know where all of *this* comes from. |
I'm not sure why it would be logical to pin human invention on God... its very easy to argue that religion has had a very regressive impact on scientific and social development. One only needs to look at the fact that is the largely secular west which is at the forefront of Modern technology and innovation and it is devoutly religious Muslin countries who are struggling to catch-up.
I'm reminded of a joke I heard prior to the invasion of Afghanistan. Colin Powell told the Taleban leaders:
"Hand over Bin Laden or we'll bomb you back to the stone age."
To which the Taleban leaders replied:
"Stone Age? Hey! Upgrade!"
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks.
Last edited by AngryLiberal on Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:50 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzyQ
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | I find people "with religion" interesting, I honestly want to understand what makes otherwise critical-thinkers like Blue, accept something so wholly and completely, even though there is no real evidence to support their choice of belief.
People interest me Suzy, sorry if you find that disturbing. |
Oi, you know that's not what I found disturbing. 
People are all different, those "with religion" too. There are so many different ways people believe stuff. Some are critical and still believe, some believe whole heartedly without reservation. I don't think you can understand until you realise there is something you believe in when there is little or no factual evidence. (Like loving someone or them loving us.)
Many scientific theories are taken as fact then disproved later. How can any of us be sure that anything we are told is true is actually true. Maybe in the future they will laugh at us for thinking that global warming was our fault or laugh that we didn't think of making energy from cockroach droppings. Who knows!! 
_________________
If it ain't broke................hit it again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michele
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | | Michele wrote: | | There very well could be a God. Heaven knows we humans seem to have evolved in leaps and bounds. To think that just 4 thousand years ago, we developed writing, is astounding! And again, we still don't know where all of *this* comes from. |
I'm not sure why it would be logical to pin human invention on God... its very easy to argue that religion has had a very regressive impact on scientific and social development. One only needs to look at the fact that is the largely secular west which is at the forefront of Modern technology and innovation and it is devoutly religious Muslin countries who are struggling to catch-up.
I'm reminded of a joke I heard prior to the invasion of Afghanistan. Colin Powell told the Taleban leaders:
"Hand over Bin Laden or we'll bomb you back to the stone age."
To which the Taleban leaders replied:
"Stone Age? Hey! Upgrade!" |
I'm not saying it, I'm just using an example. Some things about existence just amaze me, and make me wonder.
Yeah, Afghanistan was shocking. It's one thing if they were on a remote island but damn! That's why I don't think we should have any presence in the Middle East. It's not something Westerners can step in and change just like that (snapping fingers.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SuzyQ wrote: |
People are all different, those "with religion" too. There are so many different ways people believe stuff. Some are critical and still believe, some believe whole heartedly without reservation. I don't think you can understand until you realise there is something you believe in when there is little or no factual evidence. |
Well as I've not being there yet, I can only try to understand through asking other people.
| Quote: |
Many scientific theories are taken as fact then disproved later. How can any of us be sure that anything we are told is true is actually true. Maybe in the future they will laugh at us for thinking that global warming was our fault or laugh that we didn't think of making energy from cockroach droppings. Who knows!! |
But this is where Science and Religion diverge. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers and constantly updates and revises exactly what it believes through rigorous research and analysis.
Religion in contrast claims to know everything without any research or analysis.
The fact that Science can get things wrong, isn't a weakness, its strength, because unlike religion, science can admit its wrong and correct itself. Religion can't do that. What's more science has accurately explained more of the world around us in 500 years of modern methods than religion has done in millennia.
Of course mainstream Christianity no longer claims to explain the universe, its trying very hard to leave that to the scientists, though there are fundamentalists elements who still believe in genesis creationism. Where Religion still holds the cards over Science is in morality and ethics, which science doesn't really pretend to cover... science is amoral (though not immoral).
Though equally Science doesn't need to be moralistic because animals (particularly humans) are instinctively moral creatures. We are all capable of making moral decisions without the guidance of religion. Arguably we make better moral decisions when we disregard religion, particularly in relation to issues like homosexuality. Why are we instinctively moral creatures? Because as social animals there is a clear evolutionary advantage in behaving in a moral and ethical way.
Think about it.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Michele
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In a way, yes, we all find a good humanitarian sexy, but I know that people who acted in their own interests, without regard to morals and ethics, were more likely to reproduce successfully. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzyQ
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
You have gone off the point you were making earlier. You couldn't understand why Blue would not believe something if it were proved to him. I was pointing out why people don't always believe what is supposed to be proved.
Religions move on, as does science, some people don't or choose not too as with science. Homosexuality is only a problem for the more conservative religious people as with the conservative non religious people.
Religion does not claim to know everything. Research and analysis has always been a big part of religion, Theology to give it it's name.
You seem to approach this as one who has made up his mind and tries to prove his theory and ideas with very general and uninformed statements.
_________________
If it ain't broke................hit it again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 2:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
The absence of religion is also repsonsible for some totally immoral acts, particularly in communist countries.
Authoritarianism is more dangerous than religion. An authoritarian claims to know the truth, and/or how people should think/live, they could be religious or an atheist.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| SuzyQ wrote: | | You have gone off the point you were making earlier. You couldn't understand why Blue would not believe something if it were proved to him. I was pointing out why people don't always believe what is supposed to be proved. |
Well its that "why" which I am interested in and no offence Suzy but I don't think you gave a why, only a statement of how it was.
| Quote: | | Religions move on, as does science, some people don't or choose not too as with science. Homosexuality is only a problem for the more conservative religious people as with the conservative non religious people. |
So you are saying conservatism is at fault for homophobia not religion?
To a certain extent I can accept that because one of the most homophobic groups in Britain are children, teenagers are also amongst the least religious. But the teenage hang ups about homosexuality tend to come from illthoughtout arguments and their tendency to pick on non-conformists, both of which can and are being challenged with rational arguments. The same cannot be said for people who believe homosexuality is immoral because it says so in some book written 2000-4000 years ago
| Quote: | | Religion does not claim to know everything. Research and analysis has always been a big part of religion, Theology to give it it's name. |
Hmm.. sorry to find another whole in that theory, but Theology seeks answers in biblical scriptures, written by superstitious men with little or no scientific objectivity, thousands of years ago. Now this doesn't teach us anything about the world today, only about how these people thought about the world back then.
| Quote: |
You seem to approach this as one who has made up his mind and tries to prove his theory and ideas with very general and uninformed statements. |
Really??? Have you being reading my posts? Firstly I don't think I've really articulated any theory. Earlier in the thread I made a statement in response to something Blue said. But I haven't announced any great theories. My responses I feel have been well informed, well reasoned and have addressed the points raised. So you final comments bemuse me.
I sense maybe you are uncomfortable with my point of view and would rather not hear it, (in which case don't read the thread), but please don't attack my contributions just because you don't like them.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wakeyboy wrote: | | The absence of religion is also repsonsible for some totally immoral acts, particularly in communist countries. |
Communism became in itself a kind of religion, so this is a poor example. Belief in the communist system and the communist party was so heavily indoctrinated into the citizens that it completely replaced religion as the social ideologue. Never since the days of the inquisition has a population been so indoctrinated with an ideology than during Soviet Russia.
The reason communism trigged many immoral acts was not because of the absence of religion, but because it was the religion, the religion of the people.
| wakeyboy wrote: |
Authoritarianism is more dangerous than religion. An authoritarian claims to know the truth, and/or how people should think/live, they could be religious or an atheist. |
Religion is by its very nature a form of Authoritarianism, look at the way the Politics of the Catholic Church & the Vatican work. The Bishops elect a new pope from one of their own number. The Pope then ultimately appoints all the Bishops. Now that doesn't really stand-up to most measures of democratic accountability, yet these people lead millions of Catholics around the world.
The Pope then establishes doctrine and makes the proclamations on how Catholics should live their lives. In essence he dictates. The only thing separating the pope from a regular despot is he no longer has armies of the faithful who like during the Inquisitions enforced his will. Catholics now enjoy freedom to accept or reject the doctrines of their faith. But as so few actually leave communion, this does not really cause the Vatican any major problem.
Adherent Catholics live under a form of voluntary authoritarianism.
This is the very essence of Catholicism and its what prevents it being twisted by the popular will. Unlike democratic systems, its authoritarianism which keeps the church free of the danger of being swayed by popularist notions and keeps the original values intact.
The point is Wakey, its not that Authoritarianism is more dangerous than Religion, Religion is a form of authoritarianism. It is worth pointing out that applies to most if not all major religions and not just Catholicism, I'm using Catholicism as an example not to demonise it but because a) I know more about it, b) it lends itself very easily to the example.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SuzyQ
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 24 Dec 2006
Posts: 132
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 1:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | | SuzyQ wrote: | | You have gone off the point you were making earlier. You couldn't understand why Blue would not believe something if it were proved to him. I was pointing out why people don't always believe what is supposed to be proved. |
Well its that "why" which I am interested in and no offence Suzy but I don't think you gave a why, only a statement of how it was.
| Quote: | | Religions move on, as does science, some people don't or choose not too as with science. Homosexuality is only a problem for the more conservative religious people as with the conservative non religious people. |
So you are saying conservatism is at fault for homophobia not religion?
To a certain extent I can accept that because one of the most homophobic groups in Britain are children, teenagers are also amongst the least religious. But the teenage hang ups about homosexuality tend to come from illthoughtout arguments and their tendency to pick on non-conformists, both of which can and are being challenged with rational arguments. The same cannot be said for people who believe homosexuality is immoral because it says so in some book written 2000-4000 years ago
| Quote: | | Religion does not claim to know everything. Research and analysis has always been a big part of religion, Theology to give it it's name. |
Hmm.. sorry to find another whole in that theory, but Theology seeks answers in biblical scriptures, written by superstitious men with little or no scientific objectivity, thousands of years ago. Now this doesn't teach us anything about the world today, only about how these people thought about the world back then.
| Quote: |
You seem to approach this as one who has made up his mind and tries to prove his theory and ideas with very general and uninformed statements. |
Really??? Have you being reading my posts? Firstly I don't think I've really articulated any theory. Earlier in the thread I made a statement in response to something Blue said. But I haven't announced any great theories. My responses I feel have been well informed, well reasoned and have addressed the points raised. So you final comments bemuse me.
I sense maybe you are uncomfortable with my point of view and would rather not hear it, (in which case don't read the thread), but please don't attack my contributions just because you don't like them. |
The only thing I'm uncomfortable about is people who are intolerant to another beliefs and lifestyle. You have shown that you are.
I don't dislike your contributions I do find them uniformed soundbites and simplistic reasoning.
I didn't say you had articulated a theory, I said your approach was that of someone who has a theory and then tries to prove it. You do not sound like someone with an open mind who is looking for answers.
_________________
If it ain't broke................hit it again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redlunar
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:21 pm Post subject: Bible Truths |
|
|
For those who are interested, have a look on this website:
http://bible-truths.com/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| SuzyQ wrote: |
The only thing I'm uncomfortable about is people who are intolerant to another beliefs and lifestyle. You have shown that you are. |
In what way? Please elaborate.
I think you must be really misreading my posts if you believe I am intolerant of other people's lifestyles. I'm a great advocate of multiculturalism, I'm a strong advocate of gay rights, whilst I'm not gay myself I have a very alternative sexual orientation in so much as I'm an S&Mer. Seems odd that you would accuse me of intolerant of alternative lifestyles.
I'm also happy for people to have their own religious beliefs, I'm a great advocate of freedom of religious belief (within the law.) I just feel very strongly that religion is a matter for the individual, not the Nation. So I'm strongly opposed to any state sponsorship of religion. However, my personal belief is that religious freedom cannot be absolute, because it must always be subject to secular laws.
| Quote: |
I don't dislike your contributions I do find them uniformed soundbites and simplistic reasoning. |
With respect Suzy, that sounds like something someone says when they have nothing to come back with. Don't try to discredit my arguments by calling them ill-informed or simplistic without challenging them with arguments of your own.
| Quote: |
I didn't say you had articulated a theory, I said your approach was that of someone who has a theory and then tries to prove it. You do not sound like someone with an open mind who is looking for answers. |
Yes and No, I have already made my mind up to be an Atheist and I'm as confident as anyone can be that there is no god, and I make that assumption on the following basis: There is no evidence of a god, therefore there is no reason to believe in a god. Belief without evidence is simply invention, a subscription to a massive celestial maybe which would have no bearing on my life. So, unless the evidence for God's existence changes, my mind will not.
This is not being closed minded, I leave the door open to anyone to prove God's existence and you will make a believer out of me.
However, having my own mind made up, (for the time being at least) doesn't prevent me from being interested in WHY people believe.
I am very interested in this and in particular why people's level of critical thinking changes between topics. You see, I think of myself as an inherently logical creature, this may not be a common trait amongst humans, and I probably assume it to be a more widely held trait than it really it. But what baffles me (and I say that without prejudice as I'm still trying to understand) is why people will willingly believe in God, but not in the tooth fairy or a Russell's teapot.
Or to put it another way: Why does the burden of proof lie on the advocate in all areas of human study except when it comes to religion?
You might want to read about Russell's Teapot on Wikipedia to understand where I am coming from.
[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot[/url]
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| AL wrote: | | Why does the burden of proof lie on the advocate in all areas of human study except when it comes to religion? |
Religious people dont need proof to believe what they believe thats why.
Also, why don't atheists give us the proof that God doesn't exist?
You believe that there is no god, now show me the concrete evidence as to why you have no belief in God...
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redlunar
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 8:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I thought this might be interesting to read:
"[In response to a lengthy email about evolution, Ray Responds]
Charles Darwin had a personal purpose for trying to find an explanation for the creation with a Creator. It was almost a "vendetta" if you will. He despised the evil teachings of Christendom (as do I), believing what is taught by Christendom really IS the religion of the Scriptures. BOTH his theories were wrong!
That there is "evolution" going on in biology as well as in industry is not in question, not with me at least. It is EASY to see the evolution of the dog as well as the automobile. I believe that all honest thinking people can agree on that. The real philosophical question, however, is WHAT DOES IT PROVE?
So in a broader discussion of "evolution," the origin of the species DOES come to mind, and so how does TRUE biological science deal with this question? Facts of biological science are not always easy to use in either projections for the future or explanations for the past. If the percentage of change in mans' height the past fifty years were run backward, it would be but a few thousands years that man would have had to been no taller than an ant. Project the same percentage of change into the future, and in only a few thousand years the average man will be as tall as skyscrapers! So what is the TRUE application of the fact that man has increased in height dramatically in the past fifty years? Does it in any way prove that God did not create the universe, earth, and man upon it?
Sincerely,
Ray"
Source: http://bible-truths.com/email5.htm#evolution |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodbrit
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 859
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| redlunar wrote: | I thought this might be interesting to read:
"[In response to a lengthy email about evolution, Ray Responds]
Charles Darwin had a personal purpose for trying to find an explanation for the creation with a Creator. It was almost a "vendetta" if you will. He despised the evil teachings of Christendom (as do I), believing what is taught by Christendom really IS the religion of the Scriptures. BOTH his theories were wrong!
That there is "evolution" going on in biology as well as in industry is not in question, not with me at least. It is EASY to see the evolution of the dog as well as the automobile. I believe that all honest thinking people can agree on that. The real philosophical question, however, is WHAT DOES IT PROVE?
So in a broader discussion of "evolution," the origin of the species DOES come to mind, and so how does TRUE biological science deal with this question? Facts of biological science are not always easy to use in either projections for the future or explanations for the past. If the percentage of change in mans' height the past fifty years were run backward, it would be but a few thousands years that man would have had to been no taller than an ant. Project the same percentage of change into the future, and in only a few thousand years the average man will be as tall as skyscrapers! So what is the TRUE application of the fact that man has increased in height dramatically in the past fifty years? Does it in any way prove that God did not create the universe, earth, and man upon it?
Sincerely,
Ray"
Source: http://bible-truths.com/email5.htm#evolution |
then why is evry piece of info ive ever read about Darwin, at pains to emphasie the immense conflict he went through reconcilling his theiry to the beliefs he still held at the end of his life
_________________
Manchester, when death isnt enougth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wakeyboy wrote: | | AL wrote: | | Why does the burden of proof lie on the advocate in all areas of human study except when it comes to religion? |
Religious people dont need proof to believe what they believe thats why. |
Yet they require proof before they believe in anything else... Why?
| wakeyboy wrote: |
Also, why don't atheists give us the proof that God doesn't exist?
You believe that there is no god, now show me the concrete evidence as to why you have no belief in God... |
I don't need to. This is the point Bertrand Russell was making with his Celestial Teapot. The burden of proof does not lie with the sceptic.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
You'll need to copy and paste that exact URL into your browser because the apostrophe in the URL corrupts the link. Here's the crux of it:
| Quote: |
Russell's teapot, sometimes called the Celestial Teapot, was an analogy first coined by the philosopher Bertrand Russell, intended to refute the idea that the burden of proof lies upon the sceptic to disprove unfalsifiable claims of religions. In an article entitled "Is There a God?," commissioned (but never published) by Illustrated magazine in 1952, Russell said the following:
"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time."
|
Point: If you assert something exists, you have to prove it, the sceptics don't have to disprove it, that's the nature of reason.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 3:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Faith is independent of proof, so while you may think that the burden of proof doesn't fall on the sceptic is doesn't fall on the faithful either.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 12:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| wakeyboy wrote: | | Faith is independent of proof, so while you may think that the burden of proof doesn't fall on the sceptic is doesn't fall on the faithful either. |
Why does religion get an exemption from the burden of proof, but nothing else? Why is religion or faith independent of proof? Why should it get away without having to prove itself? Sounds to me like you are resting your critical mind and letting religion off the hook. Why?
If I told you I believed in Russell's Teapot, you would rightly think me deluded, why therefore should you not think the same about people who believe in god?
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Vintage Girl
Moderator
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 3434
Location: Essex, England
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Surely that's the point. It's in the nature of religion and faith that there is no proof. You either believe or you don't and there is nothing that can influence you either way. It comes from within.
Your question is a bit like asking someone to prove that their depressed. You can't prove that they're not and they can't prove that they are. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 2:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vintage Girl wrote: | | Surely that's the point. It's in the nature of religion and faith that there is no proof. You either believe or you don't and there is nothing that can influence you either way. It comes from within. |
You may be right but it doesn't answer my question. Why apply one principal of logic to religion and another to everything else? You are making a special case for religion. Why?
| Vintage Girl wrote: |
Your question is a bit like asking someone to prove that their depressed. You can't prove that they're not and they can't prove that they are. |
No, its not, that's a poor example, depression is a condition and it has clear medical symptoms, we say someone is depressed when someone exhibits those symptoms. Now I'm not doubting that people are religious, because when someone exhibits the symptoms of religious belief I can say they are religious.
This has nothing to do with the question of the existence of God.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 7:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
People experience faith as a sensation and set of emotions. People either have faith or they do not. To experience faith doesnt require any proof or explanation its a matter of fact. Person A has a faith, Person B does not, there is no meanigful evidence or arguments to explain why its just the case.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
redlunar
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 06 Nov 2006
Posts: 244
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 06, 2007 8:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I guess you could apply the same principal to evolution - it can't be varified. People are just guessing and looking for something to "rationally" explain things, when in fact they can't (although they seem to think so). It's the same with faith and God. You either know Him, or you don't.
An interesting verse to consider:
"None of the wicked shall understand; but the Wise shall understand" (Daniel 12:10)" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wakeyboy wrote: | | People experience faith as a sensation and set of emotions. People either have faith or they do not. To experience faith doesnt require any proof or explanation its a matter of fact. Person A has a faith, Person B does not, there is no meanigful evidence or arguments to explain why its just the case. |
So you know God exists because you experience faith... you have a feeling which tells you God exists... that's how you know he's there.... OK I think I'm getting the picture.
Did I ever tell you about the Invisible Pink Unicorn?
People experience the Invisible Pink Unicorn as a sensation and set of emotions. People either believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn or they do not. To experience the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesnt require any proof or explanation its a matter of fact. Person A believes in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, Person B does not, there is no meaningful evidence or arguments to explain why its just the case.
I accept you might have problems believing in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, can you maybe now see why I have problems believing in God?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
PS: Redlunar - Evolution as a Theory is being verified everyday. Every new fossilised discovery is consistent with the theory, so it is being verified. Of course one inconsistent result will mean we have to re-examine the theory, but we've had almost 200 years of testing Darwinism and its so far stood up to the test. This means our confidence in Evolutionary theory is growing with every new piece of the evolutionary jigsaw puzzle we find.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks.
Last edited by AngryLiberal on Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodbrit
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 859
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 12:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
yes, but wheres the proof that pink unicorns dont exist-ive never seen a giant squid, but i know they exist.
Ive never seen an alien,. but i believe they exist-ev en though i also believe in go (the bible says we were made in Gods image-it doesnt say other sentient species were not created by God somewhere else)
_________________
Manchester, when death isnt enougth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | | wakeyboy wrote: | | People experience faith as a sensation and set of emotions. People either have faith or they do not. To experience faith doesnt require any proof or explanation its a matter of fact. Person A has a faith, Person B does not, there is no meanigful evidence or arguments to explain why its just the case. |
So you know God exists because you experience faith... you have a feeling which tells you God exists... that's how you know he's there.... OK I think I'm getting the picture.
Did I ever tell you about the Invisible Pink Unicorn?
People experience the Invisible Pink Unicorn as a sensation and set of emotions. People either believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn or they do not. To experience the Invisible Pink Unicorn doesnt require any proof or explanation its a matter of fact. Person A believes in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, Person B does not, there is no meaningful evidence or arguments to explain why its just the case.
I accept you might have problems believing in the Invisible Pink Unicorn, can you maybe now see why I have problems believing in God?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - |
Who's to say there isn't an invisible pink unicorn?
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Goodbrit wrote: | | yes, but wheres the proof that pink unicorns dont exist |
There isn't any, this is why the burden of proof should always be on the advocate, not the sceptic. Otherwise its possible to claim virtually anything unseen & undetectable exists.
| Quote: | | -ive never seen a giant squid, but i know they exist. |
Yeah that's because they've been caught, photographed and even landed. 
| Quote: |
Ive never seen an alien,. but i believe they exist-ev en though i also believe in go (the bible says we were made in Gods image-it doesnt say other sentient species were not created by God somewhere else) |
Believing in Alien Life is a leap of faith I cannot take because there is no hard evidence of extraterrestrial life. However, I do believe that extraterrestrial life is likely, indeed probable, for reasons best left for another thread. However, I think we are more likely to find microscopic organisms than little Green Men.
But whilst I can make a rational and reasoned argument for the case that extraterrestrial life is likely to exist. This is very different from saying it does exist. And as far as God is concerned, when you reduce everything down, is much harder to make a reasoned argument to say God is likely to exist. Particularly the kind of God who answers prayers and is concerned for our mortal souls
PS: GoodBrit if you believe God created man in his own image, then God is a Monkey, we have already traced our evolutionary lineage back to apes. In fact unless you reject evolution then if God Created man in his own image then God is a single celled organism.
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AngryLiberal
A-cute schizophrenic
Joined: 04 Nov 2006
Posts: 1465
Location: Tenerife, Canary Islands
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| wakeyboy wrote: |
Who's to say there isn't an invisible pink unicorn? |
Like I just said to GoodBrit, no-one.
This is why the burden of proof should always be on the advocate, not the sceptic. Otherwise its possible to claim virtually anything unseen & undetectable exists.
Imagine if someone smashed into your car and blamed it on having to swerve to avoid an invisible pink unicorn which he "felt" run out in front of him. Could you really see this an acceptable defence for wreaking your motor?
_________________
David
This post is dedicated to those who lost their lives in the Star Wars films: Darth Vader, Darth Maul, Padme, Obi Wan, Yoda, Stormtrooper #5, Qui Gon, Dak, Biggs, Stormtrooper #22, Palpatine. Everyone on the Death Stars and sadly not Jar Jar Binks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Goodbrit
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 05 Nov 2006
Posts: 859
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 1:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AngryLiberal wrote: | | Goodbrit wrote: | | yes, but wheres the proof that pink unicorns dont exist |
There isn't any, this is why the burden of proof should always be on the advocate, not the sceptic. Otherwise its possible to claim virtually anything unseen & undetectable exists.
| Quote: | | -ive never seen a giant squid, but i know they exist. |
Yeah that's because they've been caught, photographed and even landed.
| Quote: |
Ive never seen an alien,. but i believe they exist-ev en though i also believe in go (the bible says we were made in Gods image-it doesnt say other sentient species were not created by God somewhere else) |
Believing in Alien Life is a leap of faith I cannot take because there is no hard evidence of extraterrestrial life. However, I do believe that extraterrestrial life is likely, indeed probable, for reasons best left for another thread. However, I think we are more likely to find microscopic organisms than little Green Men.
But whilst I can make a rational and reasoned argument for the case that extraterrestrial life is likely to exist. This is very different from saying it does exist. And as far as God is concerned, when you reduce everything down, is much harder to make a reasoned argument to say God is likely to exist. Particularly the kind of God who answers prayers and is concerned for our mortal souls
PS: GoodBrit if you believe God created man in his own image, then God is a Monkey, we have already traced our evolutionary lineage back to apes. In fact unless you reject evolution then if God Created man in his own image then God is a single celled organism. |
Thats the fundamental challenge for non believers-to accept the unknown as a small part of the greater entity that is their faith
_________________
Manchester, when death isnt enougth |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
wakeyboy
Inmate of the Asylum
Joined: 08 Jan 2007
Posts: 615
Location: West Yorkshire, UK
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 07, 2007 2:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
God didnt create the organism homosapien in his image, he created the human soul in his image.
_________________
http://www.realradioyorkshire.co.uk/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
