[kirklancaster]

I would genuinely welcome other FM’s thoughts and responses on this, but would make an appeal for those responses to be civil, rational, and relevant, so that this – potentially, fascinating and thought-provoking - thread is not prematurely ‘closed’ by the moderators because it has descended into the usual, abuse riddled, illogical melee, which all topics on religion seem to cause on here. So here goes:

On the 22nd of January 1992, Estate Agent Stephanie Slater was abducted by Michael Samms. During her captivity, she was raped, then blindfolded, had her feet and hands shackled, and forced into a laid down modified 'wheelie bin' which was far too small to accommodate her. She was suffering so much physical pain, in addition to her psychological and emotional trauma that she vainly tried to kill herself in that pitch-black prison by forcing her mouth and nose into a cloth and suffocating herself.

In the depths of her despair, and despite the blindfold and darkness, Stephanie 'saw' a bright light. In this light Jesus Christ appeared to her. After this ‘vision’, Stephanie said that she felt strangely 'at peace' and found the resolve to live through her ordeal.

Now, the strange thing is; that Stephanie was always an atheist prior to this, and cannot understand why it was Christ who appeared to her.

Incidentally, anyone who knows Stephanie Slater - or who has read her articles, or watched the various documentaries in which she features - knows that she is a thoroughly grounded, highly intelligent and rational woman not given to hysterics, hallucinations or delusions. She does however, now believe in God.

There are diverse logical reasons why so many people believe in God (whichever God that may be) but I just wonder why it wasn't Richard Dawkins who appeared to her.

[billy123]

You ask people to not let it descend into abuse and then call most atheists bigots in the same post good luck with that.
It seems like you are the one being intolerant of others views.

[arista]

I can take it any place



Jesus is a fable

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by bobnot

You ask people to not let it descend into abuse and then call most atheists bigots in the same post good luck with that.

I also qualified that by including in parentheses 'not all'. And it is my own personal opinion based on my own personal experiences, that of all the many conversations, discussions and debates which I have been involved in most atheists do ask, then refuse to listen to, or accept an answer, but merely keep repeating the same question.

This was not meant to offend or be inflammatory, but was stated because this is what my experience has been.

Perhaps (and hopefully) this thread will prove me wrong and I will then graciously apologise.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

:
There are diverse logical reasons why so many people believe in God (whichever God that may be) but most atheists (not all) question then refuse – usually through bigotry - to listen to the answers.

I'm sorry because I like you but I think this thread deserves to be closed from the off just because of this inflammatory remark designed to get people's backs up

Can you imagine if someone started a thread and called most Christians bigots? How long do we all think the thread would last?

This is exactly the same as when someone said they hate atheists and not a single person kicked off.

[LeatherTrumpet]

I think if I was going to believe in an almighty power that made the known universe I would want it to perhaps step in a bit before in this scenario, maybe before she was raped?

And i wonder if the 20,000 children that will die today from hunger and preventable disease will see an image of Jesus as they gasp for their last breath?

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by arista

I can take it any place

Jesus is a fable

'The God Delusion' by Richard Dawkins is essentially fiction, but also a very useful reference tool for looking up examples of 'Fallacies', 'Misrepresentation', 'Unsupported Presumption' 'Inappropriate Polemics', 'Deliberate Falsehoods', 'Argumentative Flaws', 'Strawman' Apologetics', and a whole host of other weird and wonderful things.

It is also a classic example of how to confuse 'God' with 'Religion' and how to deviously strengthen 'weak' argument by cloaking it with rhetoric.

As a biological evolutionist Dawkins is creditable, but as a serious 'Debunker' of 'God', if this book is anything to go by, Dawkins is right up there with Victor Lustig Scientit - the unscrupulous conman who 'sold' the Eiffel Tower, and it takes a greater 'leap of faith' to accept this book, than it does to accept the Judeo Christian bible - not only in my opinion Arista, but in the opinion of an ever-increasing number of scientists including secular ones.

[MTVN]

Mmm anecdotal evidence is just that though - anecdotal. Impossible to corroborate and for anyone else to relate to it, obviously she's not the first one to claim to have experienced something like this and she won't be the last but I never think that too much significance should be attached to these stories. There are better backdrops against which religion can be debated imo.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

I'm sorry because I like you but I think this thread deserves to be closed from the off just because of this inflammatory remark designed to get people's backs up

Can you imagine if someone started a thread and called most Christians bigots? How long do we all think the thread would last?

This is exactly the same as when someone said they hate atheists and not a single person kicked off.

I like and respect you too Kyle - genuinely, but I am only quoting my opinion based upon my experiences.

It wasn't meant to be inflammatory but in any event it pales into insignificance when compared to some of the abusive unwarranted statements made by atheists against people of faith - particularly Christians - on various threads on this very forum - let alone outside of it.

It is my birthday today, and I am a little hung-over through celebrating last night, so perhaps my mind is a little more fogged than usual, so I will edit my original post, remove the offending line, then perhaps we can have the discussion I originally sought.

[Kyle]

If it was genuinely your opinion based on your experiences Kirk you should have put 'in my opinion' in there somewhere instead of leaving it as a definitive statement mate.

I'm not offended by being labelled a potential bigot cos I don't give a sh*t, people have and will say worse, my concern was that perhaps that was designed to get atheists to react aggressively to your post, get it closed and therefore notch another win in your mind that us nasty atheists are 'bigots'.

[LeatherTrumpet]

And also as 99.9999 etc % of women who have been raped did not see a vision of Jesus perhaps its time to think about them?

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

And also as 99.9999 etc % of women who have been raped did not see a vision of Jesus perhaps its time to think about them?

Bit of a cop out for me that she sees Jesus and others don't. Now she has 'proof' she has no need to have faith.

I think it's only fair that Jesus shows up to as all now and make it fair.

Just seems to me like most things religion claims as proof tbh, 'he came to me, I can see it, there's proof, oh I'm sorry nobody can corroborate it because it was a vision.'

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

If it was genuinely your opinion based on your experiences Kirk you should have put 'in my opinion' in there somewhere instead of leaving it as a definitive statement mate.

I'm not offended by being labelled a potential bigot cos I don't give a sh*t, people have and will say worse, my concern was that perhaps that was designed to get atheists to react aggressively to your post, get it closed and therefore notch another win in your mind that us nasty atheists are 'bigots'.

Furthest thing from my mindset Kyle. I welcome a good discussion, an exchange of views, and from my experience mate, I certainly don't need to additionally 'bait' the atheist 'bulls' on here by waving any 'red flag' of controversy at the outset.

Having another thread closed is also something which I definitely do not desire - it's counter productive to the 'raison d'etre of a forum.

[LeatherTrumpet]

Originally Posted by Kyle

Bit of a cop out for me that she sees Jesus and others don't. Now she has 'proof' she has no need to have faith.

I think it's only fair that Jesus shows up to as all now and make it fair.

Just seems to me like most things religion claims as proof tbh, 'he came to me, I can see it, there's proof, oh I'm sorry nobody can corroborate it because it was a vision.'

I mean can she be sure it wasnt say Russel Brand?

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

Furthest thing from my mindset Kyle. I welcome a good discussion, an exchange of views, and from my experience mate, I certainly don't need to additionally 'bait' the atheist 'bulls' on here by waving any 'red flag' of controversy at the outset.

Having another thread closed is also something which I definitely do not desire - it's counter productive to the 'raison d'etre of a forum.

Out of all honesty I will mention I did something that I don't do, I reported your original post with basically what I said above. The mods should have seen it and deemed it ok by now, which is fine I defer to their judgement, so I genuinely hope you are seeking a good discussion and you get a good discussion. You might get 3 or 4 pages of it at least before it all kicks off

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

I think if I was going to believe in an almighty power that made the known universe I would want it to perhaps step in a bit before in this scenario, maybe before she was raped?

And i wonder if the 20,000 children that will die today from hunger and preventable disease will see an image of Jesus as they gasp for their last breath?

Yeah exactly.

My own opinion on it is that it was her minds way of coping and getting her through the awful situation she was in. The mind is a very powerful thing, she may not have had hallucinations before but she was probably never in such a traumatic situation before that either

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

Out of all honesty I will mention I did something that I don't do, I reported your original post with basically what I said above. The mods should have seen it and deemed it ok by now, which is fine I defer to their judgement, so I genuinely hope you are seeking a good discussion and you get a good discussion. You might get 3 or 4 pages of it at least before it all kicks off

I agree, but hopefully, we will attract quite a few other FM's - including those who normally are too timid to post their views, before it does 'kick off' (hopefully it won't).

There really is a very high level of intelligent, educated, and very knowledgeable people on this forum - really disproportionate given the fact that it is not an academics forum - and I am genuinely interested in their views, whether they disagree with mine or otherwise.

I realise that (given the results of a recent poll on here about religion) people of faith are in a minority but this should not stop them from posting on a religious subject, or invalidate that subject.

[Kyle]

I've known a few girls who have had themselves forced upon and although they live life again, laugh again and generally are just everyday people the scars are always there and it's a horrible thing to have to know that someone's whole view on life has been forever tainted because one despicable human being decided to put his filthy needs above the rights of another.

My view is like others on here, she conjured it up as a way to deal with the incident at hand and that's all there is to it.

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

I agree, but hopefully, we will attract quite a few other FM's - including those who normally are too timid to post their views, before it does 'kick off' (hopefully it won't).

There really is a very high level of intelligent, educated, and very knowledgeable people on this forum - really disproportionate given the fact that it is not an academics forum - and I am genuinely interested in their views, whether they disagree with mine or otherwise.

I realise that (given the results of a recent poll on here about religion) people of faith are in a minority but this should not stop them from posting on a religious subject, or invalidate that subject.

Fair play then mate, please accept my apologies for reporting your post.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

Yeah exactly.

My own opinion on it is that it was her minds way of coping and getting her through the awful situation she was in. The mind is a very powerful thing, she may not have had hallucinations before but she was probably never in such a traumatic situation before that either

A valid viewpoint Niamh, one which I have examined myself, but according to Stephanie herself, who is very grounded and rational, it was neither hallucination nor illusion. And why Christ? Given that she was Atheist? Why not Richard Dawkins, or Buddha, or Allah?

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

A valid viewpoint Niamh, one which I have examined myself, but according to Stephanie herself, who is very grounded and rational, it was neither hallucination nor illusion. And why Christ? Given that she was Atheist? Why not Richard Dawkins, or Buddha, or Allah?

Why would Richard Dawkins turn up in a vision? He's a person like you and me.

And I'm sure it would have been Buddha or Allah, if she lived in a different location in the world where those religions were prevalent.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

Fair play then mate, please accept my apologies for reporting your post.

No need Kyle. We'e mates, and if I really didn't have some kind of (inexplicable) 'bond' with you, I would definitely not have confided in you by pm as I did. Believe me on that Kyle.

You did what you thought was right mate - and for the right reason.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Kyle

Why would Richard Dawkins turn up in a vision? He's a person like you and me.

And I'm sure it would have been Buddha or Allah, if she lived in a different location in the world where those religions were prevalent.

She hails from Birmingham Kyle.

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

A valid viewpoint Niamh, one which I have examined myself, but according to Stephanie herself, who is very grounded and rational, it was neither hallucination nor illusion. And why Christ? Given that she was Atheist? Why not Richard Dawkins, or Buddha, or Allah?

How could Stephanie know for sure if it was a hallucination or not? Her being a very grounded person in normal circumstances is irrelevant, she was not in a "normal" situation. Richard Dawkins is still alive for a start lol and has never claimed to be a God who was going to save all our souls so why would, when her mind was looking for a saviour an "anti saviour of the world believer" appear to her?

As for why Christ and not Buddha or Allah? I would imagine it's probably a geographical thing(I'm guessing by her name that she wasn't from a country where Muslimism or Buddhism is the most common religion) and the "God" who would be most familiar to her Also, Buddha wasn't even a "God" as far as I know

[Kyle]

Originally Posted by kirklancaster

She hails from Birmingham Kyle.

Christian country.

And her name doesn't strike me as very Islamic. It's most likely she has a Christian background.

If this happened in Cairo or Istanbul would it have been Jesus? Doubt it very much.