Meaning of life

[Redway]

Been thinking about this kind of thing a lot lately, so what's your opinion on the significance of life... are we just here or is it a journey etc?

[Jack_]

There isn't one. Our lives are a miracle but there's no point to them, you just do what you want with it.

There's things people perhaps should do with their lives, but there's no inherent meaning.

[arista]

Been thinking about this kind of thing a lot lately, so what's your opinion on the significance of life... are we just here or is it a journey etc?



Yes we are on a Journey
Full Speed Ahead
then dead end
you Die


Life In The Fast Lane

[arista]

There isn't one. Our lives are a miracle but there's no point to them, you just do what you want with it.

There's things people perhaps should do with their lives, but there's no inherent meaning.


Depends what Level you are on.

[arista]

http://cdn.phys.org/newman/gfx/news/2014/fromlightint.jpg

[arista]

Look at Hitler
in Sept 1939
he had a meaning in life.

Invasion and Murder

[arista]

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/09/22/1411382413611_wps_2_Awkward_Family_Photos.jpg
Shotgun Wedding
they have a USA meaning of life

[arista]

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_5gW6OiFwD2U/TBI84Iei0pI/AAAAAAAAIeE/EYp3-HuJURE/s1600/curtis172746_1_f.jpg

[MTVN]

I agree with arista

[Marsh.]

To learn. It's all about learning IMO. :laugh:

But don't get me started on these deep subjects, I'm trying to dwell less. :laugh:

[arista]

I agree with arista


You Are Most Wise

[Niamh.]

I agree with MTVN

[MB.]

Look at Hitler
in Sept 1939
he had a meaning in life.

Invasion and Murder

You charmer you :hehe:

Yeah, life has no meaning, just try and enjoy it before you're in a pot on someone's mantelpiece

[Kyle]

Well as a secular humanist I would say that life has no particular meaning (other than the natural cycle of life which seems to be to replicate your genes and continue them on.)

However what's good for the goose is certainly not good for the gander when we compare ourselves to other sentient beings and I think we as a species are way past that now. The meaning of life is well and truly whatever you want it to be. Help others, shag as many people as you want, leave the world in a better place than when you came into it. It's your call.

Like the great talk talk song 'life is what you make it'

[waterhog]

i try to work out the meaning
and the quack sent me for screening.
i just could not see the tunnel
it was running round my head faster then sally gunnel.
until one day when i woke
and this verse nearly made me choke.
i decided to make everything rhyme
to show my bitterness is more sour then a lime.
then life really came not at all worth while
and everyone sore me as a odd ball that is vile.
so to the corner i went and i did brew
poetry is me did boil and stew.
it had to come out with all the baggage
and the out come smells just as nasty as cabbage.


in english - the meaning to my life is poetry. and if anyone knocks me you will feel the power of words lol

ps love a rhyme to knock me. it would make me smile.

[Marc]

I'd say the meaning of life was to make new life

[arista]

i try to work out the meaning
and the quack sent me for screening.
i just could not see the tunnel
it was running round my head faster then sally gunnel.
until one day when i woke
and this verse nearly made me choke.
i decided to make everything rhyme
to show my bitterness is more sour then a lime.
then life really came not at all worth while
and everyone sore me as a odd ball that is vile.
so to the corner i went and i did brew
poetry is me did boil and stew.
it had to come out with all the baggage
and the out come smells just as nasty as cabbage.


in english - the meaning to my life is poetry. and if anyone knocks me you will feel the power of words lol

ps love a rhyme to knock me. it would make me smile.



Yes Hog
and no link needed


Life In The City

[kirklancaster]

To learn. It's all about learning IMO. :laugh:

But don't get me started on these deep subjects, I'm trying to dwell less. :laugh:

You've given the best response so far in my opinion. I agree about the 'deep subject' and know just what you mean by 'trying to dwell less'. If I post, I'll probably get slagged off for my belief in God and all that comes with it. :wavey::thumbs:

[Marsh.]

You've given the best response so far in my opinion. I agree about the 'deep subject' and know just what you mean by 'trying to dwell less'. If I post, I'll probably get slagged off for my belief in God and all that comes with it. :wavey::thumbs:

:clap1:

[rubymoo]

There isn't one. Our lives are a miracle but there's no point to them, you just do what you want with it.

There's things people perhaps should do with their lives, but there's no inherent meaning.

Sorry Jack but this view makes me feel sad.

I believe in reincarnation and i believe we are here to learn and the meaning of life is love, there's nothing more powerful than love.:kiss:

[Marsh.]

Y8HOfcYWZoo

[rubymoo]

Y8HOfcYWZoo

:thumbs:

[waterhog]

where do you find this love ?

[arista]

154eCsuPvOk

[Crimson Dynamo]

Asking about meaning is the wrong question. One should understand how we are here.

Its like asking what is the meaning of the life of a daffodil or a sheep tic

[Crimson Dynamo]

Asking about meaning is the wrong question. One should understand how we are here.

Its like asking what is the meaning of the life of a daffodil or a sheep tic

[Kizzy]

Depends if you're a new soul or an old soul .... oooohhh deeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeep :laugh:

[JoshBB]

My personal goal is to just find peace, I guess. I don't think there is a reason or meaning to life though.

[King Gizzard]

there isn't one really

[Ammi]

..I agree with Arista..and MTVN and Niamh...I think the 'meaning' is what you make it mean and that will be different for everyone/everyone will find their own meaning, for as long as they have life...

[Kizzy]

And kyle... kyle said that too I think?
Shame some live their lives trying to live up to others ideals and not their own, I don't think you van ever be happy living like that.

[Marsh.]

And me! ME! I'm always right! :hmph:

[Kyle]

And kyle... kyle said that too I think?
Shame some live their lives trying to live up to others ideals and not their own, I don't think you van ever be happy living like that.

Why yes I did. :angel:

Marsh didn't though he can bog off :fist:

[Kizzy]

Now now boys, the meaning of life is 'be excellent to each other' it's the gospel accordint to St Bill and St Ted :laugh:

[Ammi]

..anyways, whoever said it..it's what I believe to be true and the 'meaning' will be different for everyone and I guess some people will find no meaning at all and just 'live' and be happy and some will 'make a difference' and perhaps make history etc....sadly some will have very short lives themselves but will touch the lives of others, no matter for how short a time....

[Kyle]

Now now boys, the meaning of life is 'be excellent to each other' it's the gospel accordint to St Bill and St Ted :laugh:

:laugh: just so long as I'm the Keanu Reeves one marsh can be the lame one.

[arista]

Now now boys, the meaning of life is 'be excellent to each other' it's the gospel accordint to St Bill and St Ted :laugh:



No


Hitler 1939
did not have your view.



Bush/Blair Iraq Invasion/Murder
did not have your view

[rubymoo]

where do you find this love ?

It's everywhere water hog, it's the flowers, the birds, the animals, the sunshine, the rain, too many things to list, this is going to sound weird but I see hearts everywhere, leaves, stones, clouds, even squashed chewing gum:laugh:, this is a reminder to me that love is everywhere and that's what its about:love:

[Ammi]

It's everywhere water hog, it's the flowers, the birds, the animals, the sunshine, the rain, too many things to list, this is going to sound weird but I see hearts everywhere, leaves, stones, clouds, even squashed chewing gum:laugh:, this is a reminder to me that love is everywhere and that's what its about:love:

..Ruby..:lovedup:...

[rubymoo]

..Ruby..:lovedup:...

:blush: just look around and you'll see the hearts:love:

[Nedusa]

This should be in the forum entitled .... Greatest. Unanswered questions..

Or is it 42 ?



.

[Redway]

No


Hitler 1939
did not have your view.



Bush/Blair Iraq Invasion/Murder
did not have your view

I think it's called a joke.

[arista]

I think it's called a joke.

Yes a Very Good One
from Kizzy


This thread should made a Sticky.

[Kizzy]

http://i.imgur.com/ElmyyKE.gif

[the truth]

To do good, to help others, to work for the greater good, to fulfill your talents, to give those you love the help they truly need when they truly need, not when it suits you just to make yourself feel better nor to simply to impress others....to be creative at all times, to build not to destroy, to be sincere, genuine, honest. to show patience and temperance, to live well, to protect the sick and the weak to fight the tyranny and evil which is so often camouflaged and disguised by false prophets. whether we live for an eternity or get reinvented, reborn as frogs or eagles, whether we go to heaven and hell, whether our spirits and souls are reincarnated indefinitely, whether we re-emerge, whether we simply fertilize the land which in itself is a type of regrowth.......all of that is in the lap of the Gods or the unknowns.....all we can do is do the best we can and let the river take you home

[Ninastar]

My personal belief is that the meaning of life is to learn, become a unique individual and work hard.

[Marsh.]

..anyways, whoever said it..it's what I believe to be true and the 'meaning' will be different for everyone and I guess some people will find no meaning at all and just 'live' and be happy and some will 'make a difference' and perhaps make history etc....sadly some will have very short lives themselves but will touch the lives of others, no matter for how short a time....

That sounds so lovely and yet depresses me at the same time. :sad:

My personal belief is that the meaning of life is to learn, become a unique individual and work hard.

:worship:

[Kizzy]

Some will never learn.... so they have to come back, as a dung beetle or something :laugh:

[Marsh.]

Some will never learn.... so they have to come back, as a dung beetle or something :laugh:

What heinous crime did you commit in a past life to come back as that? :idc:

[Kizzy]

What heinous crime did you commit in a past life to come back as that? :idc:

I don't know.... I've had to deal with a lot of **** I know that... but I can handle it :)

[Marsh.]

Ok, I'll take you back. You've twisted my arm. :smug:

[Marsh.]

Hold on, Kyle called me what? :fist: :suspect:

[Kizzy]

Ok, I'll take you back. You've twisted my arm. :smug:

I don't want you back, I've discovered the meaning of life is you're a doofi.

[Marsh.]

http://www.reactiongifs.us/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/raining_david_tennant_nosedrip.gif

[Kizzy]

Kyle taught me that... :idc:

[the truth]

other than human, so what animal would you like to come back as ?

[Kyle]

Sorry Marsh, guess my influence getting busy with the Kizzy has rubbed off on her.

But don't worry, that's what life is all about. You'll learn :hehe:

[lostalex]

there is no meaning. but you should spend a lot of time ****ing and loving and thinking. i think, and i ****, and i love.

that's the best I can figure out so far. sleeping and eating also seem important. moving, and trying new things.

surprise yourself, don't expect anything, especially from other people. RUN. sometimes in circles, sometimes away, but RUN. use your feet as much as possible, and go places.

Don't be scared. you are going to die, like everyone and everything else in the world. It's okay. Life doesn't last forever, but also, pain does'nt last forever, nothing lasts forever. Everything is nothing in the end.

Don't worry about being loved. if you have to try to be loved then they don't really love you, they just love your effort, and that's not actually love.

masturbate. no one can give you as much pleasure as you can give to yourself, and there is nothing wrong with that.

and most importantly....be gentle and kind to other human beings, because they are even more insecure, and more helpless than you. You can be a hero.

[GypsyGoth]

In the words of the great Ash Ketchum - Gotta Catch 'Em All.

That's the meaning of life, you gotta catch all them pokémon before your time runs out and you die.

[Kizzy]

other than human, so what animal would you like to come back as ?

An elephant I think, they're peaceful and strong.

[Kizzy]

Sorry Marsh, guess my influence getting busy with the Kizzy has rubbed off on her.

But don't worry, that's what life is all about. You'll learn :hehe:

One day all the muggles will learn hopefully :hehe:

[lostalex]

muggles? that's racist. :nono:

[Kizzy]

muggles? that's racist. :nono:

I can't help being a mugglist, I was brought up that way :hmph:

[rubymoo]

One day all the muggles will learn hopefully :hehe:

I'm still waiting for my Hogwarts letter:bawling:

[Kyle]

Ohhhhhhh, it's a Harry Potter reference. :umm2:

Is it too much to ask for some bloody Lord of the rings fans round here :fist:

[lostalex]

Ohhhhhhh, it's a Harry Potter reference. :umm2:

Is it too much to ask for some bloody Lord of the rings fans round here :fist:

sorry, but they all died of boredom watching the movies. it was like the exact opposite of what happened with all those people dying of seizures watching pokemon. LOTR is the most boring **** ever.

[Kyle]

sorry, but they all died of boredom watching the movies. it was like the exact opposite of what happened with all those people dying of seizures watching pokemon. LOTR is the most boring **** ever.

No need to apologise. Your opinion is noted and you are henceforth struck off my Christmas card list.

Good day sir. :hmph:

[thesheriff443]

if your not doing!
you are being done!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Lord of the ring?

is that John Barrowman?

[lostalex]

No need to apologise. Your opinion is noted and you are henceforth struck off my Christmas card list.

Good day sir. :hmph:

fine with me. i don't celebrate christmas anyway, i'm too cheap to buy presents.

[Marc]

In the words of the great Ash Ketchum - Gotta Catch 'Em All.

That's the meaning of life, you gotta catch all them pokémon before your time runs out and you die.

I think he was actually referring to STI's

[rubymoo]

Ohhhhhhh, it's a Harry Potter reference. :umm2:

Is it too much to ask for some bloody Lord of the rings fans round here :fist:

Ok my precious:hehe:

[Marsh.]

People died of seizures watching Pokemon? :umm2:

[Niamh.]

I think he was actually referring to STI's

:laugh2:

[Marc]

My meaning of life is to marry Niamh

[lostalex]

My meaning of life is to marry Niamh

"marry" :smug: you sly bastard.

[Niamh.]

My meaning of life is to marry Niamh

:love:

[Marsh.]

Not much life left then. :idc:

[Kyle]

Not much life left then. :idc:



:shocked:So long marsh, you were an interesting poster while you were here.

I'll light a candle for you

[Jules2]

It all depends on what we believe, is it true or do we deceive ourselves into thinking that yes it is ok to live for the day dont worry about tomorrow. Sadly tomorrow can bring a lot of unsuspected sorrow.

I see life as a schoolroom and each lesson has to be learnt so each classroom has to exist. I believe in reincarnation and karma. I do really believe though that this is not the true essence to the energy which surrounds us and which will take the "Whole" further when the time is right. In the meantime we have to fight to survive on this mortal coil before our minds begin to foil that which we know but do not show.

Death is just a change of circumstances, as we go down then we go up to prepare us for the day when we find our true way.

In other words this life is not the end there is so much more. This is why I liked Gary Busey whilst he may have come over as eccentric he really has a good grasp of all things.

He was asked "would man ever fly" his answer was, "man can fly now", in your mind. Sit relax and imagine, as you go into the feeling that feeling becomes real, you see we are not made up of one body we have others and to astral travel is one of the most exciting things, we can go anywhere in the world. Beautiful, sadly though our earthly bonds keep us rooted as we have our own trials and tribulations. The answer for me is, do not despair we are all in the process of learning something, we are all on a pathway.

[lostalex]

I agree with Jack, there is no meaning. once you're dead there is nothing, and 1 billion years from now humans will be completely erased from the history of the universe. in the end it all means absolutely nothing.

[Marc]

:hello: I can't wait

[Northern Monkey]

Nobody knows and likely never will before humanity is wiped out.The only 'meaning' we actually know is to reproduce and try to survive.Our planet is a living organism in which we are a small part.

[Cal.]

My RE teacher told us the meaning of life was to reproduce.

[Crimson Dynamo]

My RE teacher told us the meaning of life was to reproduce.

That is more the purpose

[Kazanne]

You've given the best response so far in my opinion. I agree about the 'deep subject' and know just what you mean by 'trying to dwell less'. If I post, I'll probably get slagged off for my belief in God and all that comes with it. :wavey::thumbs:

Post,I love reading your posts as for the meaning of life my opinion is probably the same as yours:wavey:

[arista]

My RE teacher told us the meaning of life was to reproduce.


Typical.



There is No God

[Kazanne]

I feel blessed to have been given life and for me it has a reason,it's cycle that continues,to pass on knowledge and be the best you can,imo death is not an end.I don't think I've explained that too well,but I think every life has a reason.

[Crimson Dynamo]

My RE teacher told us the meaning of life was to reproduce.

now he is doing a 10 stretch

:nono:

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

Typical.



There is No God

:joker:

[arista]

I feel blessed to have been given life and for me it has a reason,it's cycle that continues,to pass on knowledge and be the best you can,imo death is not an end.I don't think I've explained that too well,but I think every life has a reason.



Its is
I have seen people Die
its a solid block on everything.

No return
No come back later

Sad but its the Truth




Yes
Every life has a Reason
Hitler had a reason
to Murder Millions
and take over Europe

[Kazanne]

Its is
I have seen people Die
its a solid block on everything.

No return
No come back later

Sad but its the Truth




Yes
Every life has a Reason
Hitler had a reason
to Murder Millions
and take over Europe

Obviously the body is dead Arista,it gets old.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Obviously the body is dead Arista,it gets old.

There is nothing else unless you know better than the greatest scientific minds that have ever lived?

[arista]

Obviously the body is dead Arista,it gets old.


No not just Old
Young people Die
sadly.



Its a Solid Dead End
there are no secret doors


The Magic Age for music deaths
is 27

Jimi Hendrix - top of the list

Choked after taking his ladys head pain pills
He just wanted a rest.

[Kazanne]

There is nothing else unless you know better than the greatest scientific minds that have ever lived?

No one knows not even them:hehe:

[Kazanne]

No not just Old
Young people Die
sadly.



Its a Solid Dead End
there are no secret doors


The Magic Age for music deaths
is 27

Jimi Hendrix - top of the list

Choked after taking his ladys head pain pills
He just wanted a rest.

That's true,people 'die' sometimes when they shouldn't,usually by mans hand or disease.

[Kyle]

No one knows not even them:hehe:

Difference is science will always consider all possibilities in search of the truth whereas religion claims for a FACT that it has the answers to what happens after we die.

[Kyle]

But of course even they can't agree and what you believe happens when you die is wholly dependant on where you were born and thus what religion you follow.

[rubymoo]

Nobody knows what happens after death.

I'd like to believe that there's something, I felt my dead mum sit next to me, I wasn't thinking of her it just happened, but my heart told me it was her.

Sometimes there are no explanations, there has to be something or what is the point?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Nobody knows what happens after death.

I'd like to believe that there's something, I felt my dead mum sit next to me, I wasn't thinking of her it just happened, but my heart told me it was her.

Sometimes there are no explanations, there has to be something or what is the point?

Well they do know. We know how the body works, how the brain works and how we live, breath, see, think etc and we know when we die all that stops.

Its futile to spin this big " who knows myth"

You would be as well saying "well we dont know there could be massive invisible dinosaurs roaming around who we cant see or feel"

When you die the body stops and decays and "life" as we call it ends with the death of the brain.

One has to deal with the marvellous reality rather than create a very dull unreality.

[rubymoo]

Well they do know. We know how the body works, how the brain works and how we live, breath, see, think etc and we know when we die all that stops.

Its futile to spin this big " who knows myth"

You would be as well saying "well we dont know there could be massive invisible dinosaurs roaming around who we cant see or feel"

When you die the body stops and decays and "life" as we call it ends with the death of the brain.

One has to deal with the marvellous reality rather than create a very dull unreality.

Yet our hearts have an electrical system, this energy could be our souls and this energy could go into the universe, this energy could manifest as our being, again nobody knows.

Once upon a time humans thought the Earth was flat, and yet we learnt that indeed it wasn't.

I think we should all keep an open mind as no-one knows for sure, i've had my fair share of experiences and i'd like to believe they are true.

Morpheus: This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.


I like this quote, and i know it's from a movie but it indicates possibilities and potential.

No-one knows how deep the rabbit hole is and i believe science is in it's infancy, as humans we still have a lot to learn:angel:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yet our hearts have an electrical system, this energy could be our souls and this energy could go into the universe, this energy could manifest as our being, again nobody knows.

Once upon a time humans thought the Earth was flat, and yet we learnt that indeed it wasn't.

I think we should all keep an open mind as no-one knows for sure, i've had my fair share of experiences and i'd like to believe they are true.

Morpheus: This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.


I like this quote, and i know it's from a movie but it indicates possibilities and potential.

No-one knows how deep the rabbit hole is and i believe science is in it's infancy, as humans we still have a lot to learn:angel:

If you watch QI you learn that no one thought the earth was flat

Its a myth :idc:

TDXrpNk3fy4

[Jessica.]

The meaning of life if the same in all living things, make babies.

[rubymoo]

If you watch QI you learn that no one thought the earth was flat

Its a myth :idc:

TDXrpNk3fy4

But how do they know this?

Were they there?

Humans were around before the 13th Century.

[rubymoo]

The meaning of life if the same in all living things, make babies.

If this is the case then what's the point in working, education etc.

We may as well live like animals and just procreate.

We are far too intelligent for there to be nothing, deep in my soul it tells me that there's something.

[Crimson Dynamo]

But how do they know this?

Were they there?

Humans were around before the 13th Century.

:facepalm:

[rubymoo]

:facepalm:

Oh that's right QI have all the answers:grin2:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Oh that's right QI have all the answers:grin2:

They tend to delve a bit deeper than you seemingly have

:idc:

[rubymoo]

But how do they know this?

Were they there?

Humans were around before the 13th Century.

For how do they know this i meant to say, how do they know that people thought the Earth was flat/round, people in the very early years thought the Earth was flat, but as knowledge grew it was found that the Earth was round, for those that say it was a myth that people was believed to think the Earth was flat i ask, how do you know this, were you around to explore peoples beliefs at this time? No nobody was around, all we have to go on is what was written, and since there is very little to go on in the early years and i'm talking 3 BC, then we can't say that these people didn't believe the Earth was flat, just as we can't say what happens after death, because we just don't know.

[rubymoo]

They tend to delve a bit deeper than you seemingly have

:idc:

:joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

:joker:

:hug:

[rubymoo]

:hug:

:kiss:

[Kyle]

If this is the case then what's the point in working, education etc.

We may as well live like animals and just procreate.

We are far too intelligent for there to be nothing, deep in my soul it tells me that there's something.

So what were we when we were homo hablis then? Animals or more? Which stage of our eventual evolution from our primate ancestors did we gain this soul?

[rubymoo]

So what were we when we were homo hablis then? Animals or more? Which stage of our eventual evolution from our primate ancestors did we gain this soul?

I have my own theory, one that i'm comfortable with, but i don't wish to share it for fear of being ridiculed.

There are many things that can't be explained, and no-one has all the answers, but all i will say is that, once when i was incredibly sad, i was transported to the stars, i was in the universe and the love that i felt was unbelievable, i thought to myself, if this is what it feels like to die, then i'm not afraid anymore, and this is from a person who has had an issue with death from age 16.

I know what i felt and i know this is where i will go when my time is up, so for me i will go on, just like Celine Dion says "My heart will go on":smug:

[Braden]

The meaning of life is open to interpretation. Mine is to live it to the best of my ability because it's the only one I will get.

[rubymoo]

The meaning of life is open to interpretation. Mine is to live it to the best of my ability because it's the only one I will get.

The only one you'll know of:smug:

[kirklancaster]

For how do they know this i meant to say, how do they know that people thought the Earth was flat/round, people in the very early years thought the Earth was flat, but as knowledge grew it was found that the Earth was round, for those that say it was a myth that people was believed to think the Earth was flat i ask, how do you know this, were you around to explore peoples beliefs at this time? No nobody was around, all we have to go on is what was written, and since there is very little to go on in the early years and i'm talking 3 BC, then we can't say that these people didn't believe the Earth was flat, just as we can't say what happens after death, because we just don't know.

You are 1000% correct Ruby -

All civilisations which were the most enlightened for their time, believed that the Earth was flat at some point in their history, including the Iron and Bronze Age Near Eastern cultures (now the Middle East) until the Hellenistic period - 323 BC to 146 BC, India until c 100 BC, China until the 1600's and ancient Greece until 6 BC.

Even in the time of Columbus, it was only educated people who knew that the Earth was round a great majority in Europe still believed in a flat earth.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You are 1000% correct Ruby -

All civilisations which were the most enlightened for their time, believed that the Earth was flat at some point in their history, including the Iron and Bronze Age Near Eastern cultures (now the Middle East) until the Hellenistic period - 323 BC to 146 BC, India until c 100 BC, China until the 1600's and ancient Greece until 6 BC.

Even in the time of Columbus, it was only educated people who knew that the Earth was round a great majority in Europe still believed in a flat earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

:facepalm:

[rubymoo]

You are 1000% correct Ruby -

All civilisations which were the most enlightened for their time, believed that the Earth was flat at some point in their history, including the Iron and Bronze Age Near Eastern cultures (now the Middle East) until the Hellenistic period - 323 BC to 146 BC, India until c 100 BC, China until the 1600's and ancient Greece until 6 BC.

Even in the time of Columbus, it was only educated people who knew that the Earth was round a great majority in Europe still believed in a flat earth.

Thanks kirk:wavey:

You are a mine of information:laugh:and i love reading your posts.

[King Gizzard]

I reckon everyone should just chill out generally


And

http://i.imgur.com/M8HIToc.jpg

[rubymoo]

I reckon everyone should just chill out generally


And

http://i.imgur.com/M8HIToc.jpg

ok calm down:hehe:

[Crimson Dynamo]

next it will be well i went to a medium and there is no way she could have known what she said to me,,

i mean my dead grandad John died of a heart attack

it was too detailed to be coincidence....

[rubymoo]

next it will be well i went to a medium and there is no way she could have known what she said to me,,

i mean my dead grandad John died of a heart attack

it was too detailed to be coincidence....

I've been to lots of mediums and they always get it wrong.:laugh:

I must be very hard to read:shrug:

I did go to one and she said....."who's Robert?"

I said....."he's my dad in law"

She replied......"Lynne's not happy with him....who's Lynne?"

"My mum in law" i said.

"she's just passed over hasn't she" she said.

"yes" i replied

"she's not happy with Robert.....he's not looking after his family, he's selfish!"

How true she was!

[Crimson Dynamo]

I've been to lots of mediums and they always get it wrong.:laugh:

I must be very hard to read:shrug:

I did go to one and she said....."who's Robert?"

I said....."he's my dad in law"

She replied......"Lynne's not happy with him....who's Lynne?"

"My mum in law" i said.

"she's just passed over hasn't she" she said.

"yes" i replied

"she's not happy with Robert.....he's not looking after his family, he's selfish!"

How true she was!

no how selective your memory is

[Kazanne]

I have my own theory, one that i'm comfortable with, but i don't wish to share it for fear of being ridiculed.

There are many things that can't be explained, and no-one has all the answers, but all i will say is that, once when i was incredibly sad, i was transported to the stars, i was in the universe and the love that i felt was unbelievable, i thought to myself, if this is what it feels like to die, then i'm not afraid anymore, and this is from a person who has had an issue with death from age 16.

I know what i felt and i know this is where i will go when my time is up, so for me i will go on, just like Celine Dion says "My heart will go on":smug:

No ridicule from me Rubymoo,we all have our beliefs no one can say what is right or wrong,I'm with you on this.

[rubymoo]

no how selective your memory is

Have you been talking to my hubby:fist:

[rubymoo]

No ridicule from me Rubymoo,we all have our beliefs no one can say what is right or wrong,I'm with you on this.

Thanks Kaz:love:

[kirklancaster]

So what were we when we were homo hablis then? Animals or more? Which stage of our eventual evolution from our primate ancestors did we gain this soul?

Although Homo Habilis is generally accepted as a species in its own right, Leakey's proposal that it was a direct human ancestor, has still not been accepted by the archaeological establishment, who still regard Homo Erectus as our earliest ancestor, but I understand what you mean.

That said, how can anyone know whether mankind in his earliest form (whichever species that may be) had a soul or not? There is absolutely no way of knowing, just as there still is no way of knowing whether Homo Sapiens (modern man) has a soul or not - it is purely a matter of belief.

Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist, no more than those who believe in God (in any of his forms) can prove that he does. This too is purely a matter of belief.

This being the the irrefutable truth it is both arrogant and unfair for any atheist to ridicule any person of faith for his beliefs, when those beliefs are as valid as the atheists. Not that I'm accusing you of this.

[Redway]

Although Homo Habilis is generally accepted as a species in its own right, Leakey's proposal that it was a direct human ancestor, has still not been accepted by the archaeological establishment, who still regard Homo Erectus as our earliest ancestor, but I understand what you mean.

That said, how can anyone know whether mankind in his earliest form (whichever species that may be) had a soul or not? There is absolutely no way of knowing, just as there still is no way of knowing whether Homo Sapiens (modern man) has a soul or not - it is purely a matter of belief.

Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist, no more than those who believe in God (in any of his forms) can prove that he does. This too is purely a matter of belief.

This being the the irrefutable truth it is both arrogant and unfair for any atheist to ridicule any person of faith for his beliefs, when those beliefs are as valid as the atheists. Not that I'm accusing you of this.

Just like a lot of other things that people know aren't true can't be proven. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers but unlike faith there's actually solid evidence behind its theories.

[kirklancaster]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Myth_of_the_Flat_Earth

:facepalm:

Yes, but this article deals specifically with the 'Flat Earth Myth' which I am not denying. What I said - in endorsement of what Ruby had said, is that: "All civilisations which were the most enlightened for their time, believed that the Earth was flat at some point in their history, including the Iron and Bronze Age Near Eastern cultures (now the Middle East) until the Hellenistic period - 323 BC to 146 BC, India until c 100 BC, China until the 1600's and ancient Greece until 6 BC. I added that; Even in the time of Columbus, it was only educated people who knew that the Earth was round, a great majority in Europe (the uneducated masses) still believed in a flat earth.

This is true and there are many internet links which will confirm as much, in addition to notable books.

As I was referring to periods in history from 323 BC to 6 BC (save China who still believed in a Flat Earth in the 1600's) and as Ruby was referring to periods in history around 3 BC - which she referred to as; "the very early years" and "3 BC,", your link to The Flat Earth Myth" of the 14th Century, is just not relevant and wins you no argument.

[rubymoo]

Just like a lot of other things that people know aren't true can't be proven. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers but unlike faith there's actually solid evidence behind its theories.

Millions of people with religious beliefs can't be wrong......can they:shrug:

I hasten to add that i'm not religious, i don't go to church, but i do believe to believe in your own truths, for example one of my truths is that i experienced my dead mum sit beside me, i was wide awake doing my hair, i felt cold on the side she sat, but i also felt calm and had the knowledge that it was her and therefore i was not afraid, the bed went down (as if she had sat beside me) i felt comforted and said..."hi mum, i hope you're ok..." that was all i could think of to say:laugh: and then i felt her presence leave, this means to me that there is an after life, as i experienced it, therefore it is my truth.

[Redway]

Millions of people with religious beliefs can't be wrong......can they:shrug:

Yeah... they can.

[rubymoo]

Yeah... they can.

Sorry Redway i added as you posted:)

[Ammi]

..beliefs don't have to be proven though, that's why they're 'beliefs' and it doesn't matter what you believe in either..it could be anything...it's more the positives that those beliefs give to your life and whether they make you want to be a better person...if having a faith or religion does that for people..then it's a great thing to have/how could it not be...

[kirklancaster]

Just like a lot of other things that people know aren't true can't be proven. Science doesn't claim to have all the answers but unlike faith there's actually solid evidence behind its theories.

I'm intrigued. Please expound. Just what 'solid evidence' has 'science' in respect of their being no God? In respect of Man not possessing 'souls'? In respect of death being final? and in respect of there being no afterlife?

Science, simply has no evidence for the above, they have 'theories' or in other words; conjecture, hypothesis, speculation and propositions, with no proof.

Therefore, as I have stated, without proof, one is left merely to believe in scientific theories, just as one has to believe in God, a Soul, and an Afterlife.

One belief is no more correct or valid than the other. All that matters is that both sides respect the others right to believe.

[kirklancaster]

..beliefs don't have to be proven though, that's why they're 'beliefs' and it doesn't matter what you believe in either..it could be anything...it's more the positives that those beliefs give to your life and whether they make you want to be a better person...if having a faith or religion does that for people..then it's a great thing to have/how could it not be...

Good points Ammi.

[kirklancaster]

Yeah... they can.

And the proof for such a definite statement?

[Redway]

I'm intrigued. Please expound. Just what 'solid evidence' has 'science' in respect of their being no God? In respect of Man not possessing 'souls'? In respect of death being final? and in respect of there being no afterlife?

Science, simply has no evidence for the above, they have 'theories' or in other words; conjecture, hypothesis, speculation and propositions, with no proof.

Therefore, as I have stated, without proof, one is left merely to believe in scientific theories, just as one has to believe in God, a Soul, and an Afterlife.

One belief is no more correct or valid than the other. All that matters is that both sides respect the others right to believe.
Of course we only have theories at the minute but I'd rather take that than faith, which is believing without a shred of credible evidence. And feel free to disagree obviously but I don't see why people want there to be some deep magical explanation for our existence when *to me* science seems to have more proof.

And of course I respect everyone's right to believe whatever they want. I'm only expressing my opinion just as you are... the fact that mine's different doesn't mean I vehemently oppose anyone who believes in something deeper than the big bang theory. I'd only try to get you to view it in a different light not force you to believe something else.

[kirklancaster]

Millions of people with religious beliefs can't be wrong......can they:shrug:

I hasten to add that i'm not religious, i don't go to church, but i do believe to believe in your own truths, for example one of my truths is that i experienced my dead mum sit beside me, i was wide awake doing my hair, i felt cold on the side she sat, but i also felt calm and had the knowledge that it was her and therefore i was not afraid, the bed went down (as if she had sat beside me) i felt comforted and said..."hi mum, i hope you're ok..." that was all i could think of to say:laugh: and then i felt her presence leave, this means to me that there is an after life, as i experienced it, therefore it is my truth.

When my father died, it was sudden and totally unexpected and a policeman actually came to my house where I was asleep. My partner woke me and the very first thing I said, was "My dad's dead, isn't he?" This - like any claim I make - can be proved.

There are genuine mysteries in life Ruby, which that thing we call 'Science' just cannot answer. In the grand scheme of things, science is but a bunch of baboons poking a beehive with a stick. We do not understand what life is, know very little about the human brain - parts of which, the functions are unknown - and still have no idea how the universe came to be in existence.

You should never be intimidated by those who may try to ridicule you for your beliefs, because they do not possess a monopoly on the truth, and neither can they back up their reasons for mocking with any valid scientific proof. Such scientific proof does not exist. :wavey:

[Redway]

Millions of people with religious beliefs can't be wrong......can they:shrug:

I hasten to add that i'm not religious, i don't go to church, but i do believe to believe in your own truths, for example one of my truths is that i experienced my dead mum sit beside me, i was wide awake doing my hair, i felt cold on the side she sat, but i also felt calm and had the knowledge that it was her and therefore i was not afraid, the bed went down (as if she had sat beside me) i felt comforted and said..."hi mum, i hope you're ok..." that was all i could think of to say:laugh: and then i felt her presence leave, this means to me that there is an after life, as i experienced it, therefore it is my truth.

Which is all fine and yeah, of course faith is a personal thing. I don't believe in it myself (which is what I was trying to get across) but I'd never rubbish anyone else's opinions. Sorry to hear about your mum :hug:

[kirklancaster]

Of course we only have theories at the minute but I'd rather take that than faith, which is believing without a shred of credible evidence. And feel free to disagree obviously but I don't see why people want there to be some deep magical explanation for our existence when *to me* science seems to have more proof.

And of course I respect everyone's right to believe whatever they want. I'm only expressing my opinion just as you are... the fact that mine's different doesn't mean I vehemently oppose anyone who believes in something deeper than the big bang theory. I'd only try to get you to view it in a different light not force you to believe something else.

That's fair comment Redway, and I respect you for your civility. That's what these forums are really for - civilised debate by people with differing viewpoints. :thumbs:

[Redway]

Edit: never mind

[rubymoo]

Which is all fine and yeah, of course faith is a personal thing. I don't believe in it myself (which is what I was trying to get across) but I'd never rubbish anyone else's opinions. Sorry to hear about your mum :hug:

Thanks Red way, that's OK, it was a long time ago, I think that's why I questioned life and death from an early age as well as exploring the spiritual side of life:laugh:

[rubymoo]

When my father died, it was sudden and totally unexpected and a policeman actually came to my house where I was asleep. My partner woke me and the very first thing I said, was "My dad's dead, isn't he?" This - like any claim I make - can be proved.

There are genuine mysteries in life Ruby, which that thing we call 'Science' just cannot answer. In the grand scheme of things, science is but a bunch of baboons poking a beehive with a stick. We do not understand what life is, know very little about the human brain - parts of which, the functions are unknown - and still have no idea how the universe came to be in existence.

You should never be intimidated by those who may try to ridicule you for your beliefs, because they do not possess a monopoly on the truth, and neither can they back up their reasons for mocking with any valid scientific proof. Such scientific proof does not exist. :wavey:


Sorry about your dad kirk, I agree though sometimes you have a 6th sense and you just know, I believe science and medicine is all in it's infancy and as humans we have lots to learn, I'm comforted by my beliefs, and have had too many things happen for them to be just passed off as coincidence, I live my life in believing my truth, which is a Buddhist way of life.:wavey:

[kirklancaster]

This is a very complex subject - the debating of, which could fill thousands of volumes, not scratch the surface, and answer nothing.

There are hundreds of excellent 'pros and cons' articles on the internet, and thousands of books on this subject - all written by far more intelligent and knowledgeable people than me, but read as I may, I am still left with unanswered questions and my belief in God intact.

For what it's worth, I will post on this subject soon, but for now, will anyone care to answer these questions:

If life is 'accidental' - where did at all begin?
If there was nothing who introduced the something ?
If there was already something, who put the something there in the first place ?
If there is no meaning to life, and no after life, then we are no different to other animals.
If that is so, then where did our moral code come from?

[kirklancaster]

I reckon everyone should just chill out generally


And

http://i.imgur.com/M8HIToc.jpg

:joker::joker::joker:

[Northern Monkey]

I happen to believe in the theories that scientific research and archeology have to offer us as it is the most credible information we have to go on.I think religion began due to lack of understanding and continues to this day in part as a way to offer hope of death not being the end.I also think that we(myself included)fear the unknown and religion gives people a refuge from their fear of not understanding.I don't believe that organised religion has the answers,However i do find the stories extremely interesting as an insight into how people thought thousands of years in the past,I am especially interested in the ancient Egyptian belief systems.However,I am not totally closed minded as to things beyond what we as a species know,I feel i have no right to be since i myself and the human race actually know very little.The only conclusion that my mind can come to is......We just don't know.

[Ammi]

I happen to believe in the theories that scientific research and archeology have to offer us as it is the most credible information we have to go on.I think religion began due to lack of understanding and continues to this day in part as a way to offer hope of death not being the end.I also think that we(myself included)fear the unknown and religion gives people a refuge from their fear of not understanding.I don't believe that organised religion has the answers,However i do find the stories extremely interesting as an insight into how people thought thousands of years in the past,I am especially interested in the ancient Egyptian belief systems.However,I am not totally closed minded as to things beyond what we as a species know,I feel i have no right to be since i myself and the human race actually know very little.The only conclusion that my mind can come to is......We just don't know.

..I agree with you Paul..it would be the height of arrogance to assume that only the 'explained/proven' by humans was all that there was...but anyway, I don't follow a religious faith but I do have 'beliefs' ..not so much about what happens after death but more 'the meaning of life'...I think for everyone that meaning will be different and I think as someone said early in the thread..for some, their life meaning will be nothing but negative/'evil'..or maybe that's not their whole life meaning but the most predominant effect on others...but for me I think...we have life, we know we will have it for a limited time and then we will die, I don't think about what will happen then but I do believe that a 'dead body is just a carcass' ..it's not that person who lived, that person who laughed/cried/felt...so there is a 'missing element' and the 'energy' attached to that which is huge...but I think it's more for me, concentrating on the 'life' part ...for most of us, we go through life the best we can and it's good and bad and some fairly rubbish times etc...stuff will happen regardless of 'beliefs' or not..the rubbish stuff will happen anyway...so if a faith/belief helps you feel a bit more positive so that you don't lose sight of the good stuff then it's a good thing, whatever that belief is...I think it's also fine to not belief in anything other than 'what is proven/scientifically..'...but either way, why 'waste' life and use living years thinking about it too much...just live/just enjoy your own 'meaning' while it's there for you to enjoy...make it mean what you want it to mean, type thing and don't cross the bridge of 'death' because it will get here soon enough and that will be the time to cross it, like anything else we have to face in our lives...


..I know that often people say that religion is the 'root of all evil..'...well it isn't...it's people being evil and trying to use religion as a justification for their actions....



...:laugh:..meaning of life and religious threads..Redway..:fist:...

[Northern Monkey]

..I agree with you Paul..it would be the height of arrogance to assume that only the 'explained/proven' by humans was all that there was...but anyway, I don't follow a religious faith but I do have 'beliefs' ..not so much about what happens after death but more 'the meaning of life'...I think for everyone that meaning will be different and I think as someone said early in the thread..for some, their life meaning will be nothing but negative/'evil'..or maybe that's not their whole life meaning but the most predominant effect on others...but for me I think...we have life, we know we will have it for a limited time and then we will die, I don't think about what will happen then but I do believe that a 'dead body is just a carcass' ..it's not that person who lived, that person who laughed/cried/felt...so there is a 'missing element' and the 'energy' attached to that which is huge...but I think it's more for me, concentrating on the 'life' part ...for most of us, we go through life the best we can and it's good and bad and some fairly rubbish times etc...stuff will happen regardless of 'beliefs' or not..the rubbish stuff will happen anyway...so if a faith/belief helps you feel a bit more positive so that you don't lose sight of the good stuff then it's a good thing, whatever that belief is...I think it's also fine to not belief in anything other than 'what is proven/scientifically..'...but either way, why 'waste' life and use living years thinking about it too much...just live/just enjoy your own 'meaning' while it's there for you to enjoy...make it mean what you want it to mean, type thing and don't cross the bridge of 'death' because it will get here soon enough and that will be the time to cross it, like anything else we have to face in our lives...


..I know that often people say that religion is the 'root of all evil..'...well it isn't...it's people being evil and trying to use religion as a justification for their actions....



...:laugh:..meaning of life and religious threads..Redway..:fist:...
Very wise words:) Also we have to remember that religion can't be the root of all evil......It was created by people in the first place.So surely again,It's people who are the root of evil.

[Kyle]

..beliefs don't have to be proven though, that's why they're 'beliefs' and it doesn't matter what you believe in either..it could be anything...it's more the positives that those beliefs give to your life and whether they make you want to be a better person...if having a faith or religion does that for people..then it's a great thing to have/how could it not be...

Nobody is saying people don't have the right to their own personal faith, the problem is when they start indoctrinating other people in schools or at home that what they believe is FACT that we start to have problems.

[Kyle]

Although Homo Habilis is generally accepted as a species in its own right, Leakey's proposal that it was a direct human ancestor, has still not been accepted by the archaeological establishment, who still regard Homo Erectus as our earliest ancestor, but I understand what you mean.

That said, how can anyone know whether mankind in his earliest form (whichever species that may be) had a soul or not? There is absolutely no way of knowing, just as there still is no way of knowing whether Homo Sapiens (modern man) has a soul or not - it is purely a matter of belief.

Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist, no more than those who believe in God (in any of his forms) can prove that he does. This too is purely a matter of belief.

This being the the irrefutable truth it is both arrogant and unfair for any atheist to ridicule any person of faith for his beliefs, when those beliefs are as valid as the atheists. Not that I'm accusing you of this.

The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try.

Just because I decide to believe in the God of Anal sphincters and you can't damn well disprove his existence does not mean he does so.

[Ammi]

..again I think that the 'school' thing is a generalisation and a judgement...maybe some schools do 'indoctrinate', I don't know of any but that may be so...but no school that I know of does that at all...there may be 'bible stories' but it's more of a philosophy/'moral story' type thing which other 'non religious' stories are also used for...and teaching children to be kind to others/to think about their actions/learn empathy etc is a very good and valuable 'life lesson'....but if parents strongly object to any even slight reference to religion being used in any way, then there is always an 'opt out' available for their child ..it's not just one specific religion that's referred to anyway, many religions are used to explain different beliefs, which also teaches tolerance and understandings...

[Ammi]

...I don't think there is any 'burden of proof' to be explained with a faith by it's very definition, it is having faith...and nothing was ever 'proven' until science provided 'proof'...there are so many things that science has not got round to 'proving' yet and always will be...

[kirklancaster]

...I don't think there is any 'burden of proof' to be explained with a faith by it's very definition, it is having faith...and nothing was ever 'proven' until science provided 'proof'...there are so many things that science has not got round to 'proving' yet and always will be...:clap1:

[kirklancaster]

The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try.

Just because I decide to believe in the God of Anal sphincters and you can't damn well disprove his existence does not mean he does so.

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

Kyle, you have completely misread, or misunderstood what I posted - or both. I actually said that:

"Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist" -- not, as you misquote, that "the non religious" has to "prove God exists".

Further; your statement;

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

is totally misleading and simply not true, because, 'Burden of Proof' by definition:

'It is a fundamental principle of English law that a litigant bears the burden (or “onus”) of proof in respect of the propositions it asserts to prove its claim. The burden of proof does not lie with the person who denies the allegation'.

Therefore, 'Burden of Proof' actually falls squarely upon the shoulders of the claimant - whether he be a 'believer' claiming that God exists, or an Atheist claiming that God does not exist. :wavey:

[bots]

Superstition, faith, religion etc are all interlinked and all originate from events that the person is unable to explain. Historically, the majority of superstitions have been proven to be false as science advances, because people generally connect events together for their own benefit/advantage with little to back up their assertions. Like it or not, religion has, and continues to be used as a method of controlling the actions and behaviour of people to fit in with the agenda of those controlling. When spirituality is finally allowed to be divorced from religious agendas, then it may have some substance and depth, until then, its nothing more than mumbo jumbo.

[Northern Monkey]

..again I think that the 'school' thing is a generalisation and a judgement...maybe some schools do 'indoctrinate', I don't know of any but that may be so...but no school that I know of does that at all...there may be 'bible stories' but it's more of a philosophy/'moral story' type thing which other 'non religious' stories are also used for...and teaching children to be kind to others/to think about their actions/learn empathy etc is a very good and valuable 'life lesson'....but if parents strongly object to any even slight reference to religion being used in any way, then there is always an 'opt out' available for their child ..it's not just one specific religion that's referred to anyway, many religions are used to explain different beliefs, which also teaches tolerance and understandings...

I went to a Church of England primary school.Good school,Used to sing hymns every morning,Pray go to church for certain events.They never indoctrinated me because i never believed any of it at any point,Even as a 5 year old.Did'nt ever do me any harm at all.Nothing wrong with faith schools imo,Still have good memories of going there.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I went to a Church of England primary school.Good school,Used to sing hymns every morning,Pray go to church for certain events.They never indoctrinated me because i never believed any of it at any point,Even as a 5 year old.Did'nt ever do me any harm at all.Nothing wrong with faith schools imo,Still have good memories of going there.

And if there was no religion at the school you went to do you think that you would have turned out different. Lets say that all the time that you were singing, going to church and praying you instead were learning new things?

[Crimson Dynamo]

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

Kyle, you have completely misread, or misunderstood what I posted - or both. I actually said that:

"Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist" -- not, as you misquote, that "the non religious" has to "prove God exists".

Further; your statement;

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

is totally misleading and simply not true, because, 'Burden of Proof' by definition:

'It is a fundamental principle of English law that a litigant bears the burden (or “onus”) of proof in respect of the propositions it asserts to prove its claim. The burden of proof does not lie with the person who denies the allegation'.

Therefore, 'Burden of Proof' actually falls squarely upon the shoulders of the claimant - whether he be a 'believer' claiming that God exists, or an Atheist claiming that God does not exist. :wavey:


This is a very old argument and to save you and others time you are wrong. :spin:

But I wonder which god you are talking about. I presume that you yourself are a strict atheist for 99% of the hundreds of other gods but the one you claim to believe in?

[user104658]

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

Kyle, you have completely misread, or misunderstood what I posted - or both. I actually said that:

"Atheist's cannot prove that God does not exist" -- not, as you misquote, that "the non religious" has to "prove God exists".

Further; your statement;

"The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

is totally misleading and simply not true, because, 'Burden of Proof' by definition:

'It is a fundamental principle of English law that a litigant bears the burden (or “onus”) of proof in respect of the propositions it asserts to prove its claim. The burden of proof does not lie with the person who denies the allegation'.

Therefore, 'Burden of Proof' actually falls squarely upon the shoulders of the claimant - whether he be a 'believer' claiming that God exists, or an Atheist claiming that God does not exist. :wavey:
You're quoting a definition of legal proof not philosophical proof. You cannot set out to prove non-existence, it's logically impossible. The burden of proof lies on whoever seeks to claim existence.

[Kizzy]

..again I think that the 'school' thing is a generalisation and a judgement...maybe some schools do 'indoctrinate', I don't know of any but that may be so...but no school that I know of does that at all...there may be 'bible stories' but it's more of a philosophy/'moral story' type thing which other 'non religious' stories are also used for...and teaching children to be kind to others/to think about their actions/learn empathy etc is a very good and valuable 'life lesson'....but if parents strongly object to any even slight reference to religion being used in any way, then there is always an 'opt out' available for their child ..it's not just one specific religion that's referred to anyway, many religions are used to explain different beliefs, which also teaches tolerance and understandings...

The school thing is a fair and valid point, there are hundreds of faith schools up and down the country all touting their specific version of the 'truth' and 'bible stories' are a form of indoctrination there are 101 different ways you could instill moral reasoning into a child without the use of religion, Aesop managed it.
I wouldn't want my child to opted out of learning about values, tolerance and understanding ... so if I don't want the religious spin do they then have to miss out? that doesn't seem right or fair.

[Ammi]

..anyone parent who wants to opt their child out of any religion in schools is within their right to do so..if they then feel that in doing that, their child also loses out on other valuable ‘life lessons’ in terms of life philosophies, is just really maybe the assurance they may need to show that there is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools in the way it is taught at present ...because otherwise they would feel no ‘loss’...it’s not ‘indoctrination’ in any way whatsoever, there are many, many children’s books and stories that have a ‘moral’ value in them..those are the stories that are mostly read to children in school and the stories which are discussed with the children and part of their learning and 'growth'...just because a story has biblical names in and therefore may receive ‘judgement’ or doubt from some for that, doesn’t make the philosophy from that story any different to any other from any children’s book...


..from my own personal experience and that’s all I can comment on..?...with the very few parents I have ever met who have felt very strongly against their child having any religion in school because of their own personal views and have actually considered opting their child out...once they have actually attended those lessons and attended church assemblies and celebrations etc, they’ve then been totally in favour of their child taking part in those lessons and extremely encouraging for them to do so...

[kirklancaster]

..anyone parent who wants to opt their child out of any religion in schools is within their right to do so..if they then feel that in doing that, their child also loses out on other valuable ‘life lessons’ in terms of life philosophies, is just really maybe the assurance they may need to show that there is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools in the way it is taught at present ...because otherwise they would feel no ‘loss’...it’s not ‘indoctrination’ in any way whatsoever, there are many, many children’s books and stories that have a ‘moral’ value in them..those are the stories that are mostly read to children in school and the stories which are discussed with the children and part of their learning and 'growth'...just because a story has biblical names in and therefore may receive ‘judgement’ or doubt from some for that, doesn’t make the philosophy from that story any different to any other from any children’s book...


..from my own personal experience and that’s all I can comment on..?...with the very few parents I have ever met who have felt very strongly against their child having any religion in school because of their own personal views and have actually considered opting their child out...once they have actually attended those lessons and attended church assemblies and celebrations etc, they’ve then been totally in favour of their child taking part in those lessons and extremely encouraging for them to do so...

Another well written, logical,:thumbs: and fair post Ammi.

[kirklancaster]

You're quoting a definition of legal proof not philosophical proof. You cannot set out to prove non-existence, it's logically impossible. The burden of proof lies on whoever seeks to claim existence.

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????

"You're quoting a definition of legal proof not philosophical proof."

I am using the same legal parlance that Kyle used in my response to his post - which was a response to my earlier post. Kyle wrote: "The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

"You cannot set out to prove non-existence, it's logically impossible. The burden of proof lies on whoever seeks to claim existence."

I really don't understand why you have quoted me and posted TS - because you're merely agreeing with me.
:shrug::shrug::shrug::conf::conf::conf:

[user104658]

..anyone parent who wants to opt their child out of any religion in schools is within their right to do so..if they then feel that in doing that, their child also loses out on other valuable ‘life lessons’ in terms of life philosophies, is just really maybe the assurance they may need to show that there is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools in the way it is taught at present ...because otherwise they would feel no ‘loss’...it’s not ‘indoctrination’ in any way whatsoever, there are many, many children’s books and stories that have a ‘moral’ value in them..those are the stories that are mostly read to children in school and the stories which are discussed with the children and part of their learning and 'growth'...just because a story has biblical names in and therefore may receive ‘judgement’ or doubt from some for that, doesn’t make the philosophy from that story any different to any other from any children’s book...


..from my own personal experience and that’s all I can comment on..?...with the very few parents I have ever met who have felt very strongly against their child having any religion in school because of their own personal views and have actually considered opting their child out...once they have actually attended those lessons and attended church assemblies and celebrations etc, they’ve then been totally in favour of their child taking part in those lessons and extremely encouraging for them to do so...

I agree to an extent - I don't think school really ever manages to indoctrinate, parental influence is much stronger (i.e. a child from a religious household in a non-religious school will quite probably be religious themselves - and vice versa, a child from a non-religious household going to a religious school is likely to play along but ultimately reject religion as "truth"). We are an entirely non-religious household (my wife was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school and yet rejected it as truth very early on, as many do, confirming what I was saying) and yet this summer our 4 year old attended a "summer camp" at the local church hall run by a Christian group. She absolutely loved it and enjoyed the stories (or probably more that they were very enthusiastically acted out by the volunteers...) and she was full of questions when she came home. It opens up a plethora of learning opportunities. She decided for herself that they were obviously "just stories, like Frozen" which I'd be lying if I said I'm not glad about, but we're always careful not to lead her thought processes in either direction.

I can see where the alternative viewpoint is coming from though - and it doesn't necessarily mean that there "is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools" - rather than strong moral stories are important and that those might be overlooked when every story being taught is religious and taught as truth. Many religious stories have wonderful messages. Many in my opinion have truly abhorrent messages. But anyway - even if they are to be present, I disagree with it all being based around one doctrine, it should be a more well rounded moral / philosophical education. There are some wonderful stories in religions not traditionally taught in Western schools, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, and it would be very limiting to overlook these in favour of dogmatic Christianity / Catholicism / Islam, etc.

I personally enjoy a lot of religious tales as much as any other, from all religions, living and dead (ancient greek and pre-Christianity Roman Empire myths and legends from those dead polytheistic religions are fascinating)... but in a universe of endless possibility I find the thought of subscribing to one religion completely depressing.

"We can only perceive a fraction of the near infinite planes of existence and barely understand anything about those immediately neighbouring ours, let alone the ones we haven't even considered! Imagine what incomprehensible things might b..."

Religious person: "Yeah but the answer is this :)"

:( spoilers! Boring!

[kirklancaster]

This is a very old argument and to save you and others time you are wrong. :spin:

But I wonder which god you are talking about. I presume that you yourself are a strict atheist for 99% of the hundreds of other gods but the one you claim to believe in?

"This is a very old argument and to save you and others time you are wrong."

Can you please expound, because I am totally confused as to what you mean by "This is a very old argument" --- What is?

Further: "and to save you and others time you are wrong"

Wrong about what? Please expound.

And please also explain why anyone with a different viewpoint to yours is decreed by you to be "wrong"? On what authority do you make such absolutes? Are you secretly the all-knowing, omniprescent and infallible true God whom you take such delight in denying?

As for: "But I wonder which god you are talking about. I presume that you yourself are a strict atheist for 99% of the hundreds of other gods but the one you claim to believe in?" -- This is ludicrous. I believe in one God. I am a monotheist. This being so, how can I believe in anyone else's God? However - unlike your good self - just because I do not share someone else's beliefs, I still respect their right to believe, and do not attempt to pour scorn on those beliefs at every opportunity.

Unlike you, I also answer every response to my posts where such a response dictates an answer.

I am genuinely intrigued LeatherTrumpet.

[user104658]

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????

"You're quoting a definition of legal proof not philosophical proof."

I am using the same legal parlance that Kyle used in my response to his post - which was a response to my earlier post. Kyle wrote: "The burden of proof is not on the non religious to prove God exists but nice try."

"You cannot set out to prove non-existence, it's logically impossible. The burden of proof lies on whoever seeks to claim existence."

I really don't understand why you have quoted me and posted TS - because you're merely agreeing with me.
:shrug::shrug::shrug::conf::conf::conf:

No, you're saying that the burden of proof always lies with the person making an assertation; that for someone saying "god does not exist" the burden of proof is on them to prove that. Which in philosophical / logical terms, is incorrect. You can't disprove existence and therefore the burden lies on the person claiming existence, always. Non-existence does not require proof, as by definition, non-existence requires an absence of proof.

It's a pointless argument though that only really serves as a distraction, people should stick to "near absolute" terms rather than absolute, if they want to be completely accurate. For example, I would say that I personally don't believe in a christian God or the god / gods of any other organised religion. It seems very, very unlikely that with infinite possibility, one of those humanistic Gods exists. I'd be confident in saying that the possibility is maybe something like a trillionth of 1%, but infinite being infinite, anything is possible. But I'd require proof of existence to consider it in any way likely or even outside the realms of fantasy.

This is completely different to the burden of proof in the legal system, where one would be seeking to prove or disprove truths and either stance has the possibility of proof, e.g. alibi ("Bobby stole my car" / "No I didn't, couldn't have, because I was at Jimmy's house!")

[Kizzy]

..anyone parent who wants to opt their child out of any religion in schools is within their right to do so..if they then feel that in doing that, their child also loses out on other valuable ‘life lessons’ in terms of life philosophies, is just really maybe the assurance they may need to show that there is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools in the way it is taught at present ...because otherwise they would feel no ‘loss’...it’s not ‘indoctrination’ in any way whatsoever, there are many, many children’s books and stories that have a ‘moral’ value in them..those are the stories that are mostly read to children in school and the stories which are discussed with the children and part of their learning and 'growth'...just because a story has biblical names in and therefore may receive ‘judgement’ or doubt from some for that, doesn’t make the philosophy from that story any different to any other from any children’s book...




..from my own personal experience and that’s all I can comment on..?...with the very few parents I have ever met who have felt very strongly against their child having any religion in school because of their own personal views and have actually considered opting their child out...once they have actually attended those lessons and attended church assemblies and celebrations etc, they’ve then been totally in favour of their child taking part in those lessons and extremely encouraging for them to do so...

My point is there is not the need though, religion is manipulating, controlling and limiting... that's not the meaning of life for me.

And by sitting in on a religious assembly does not negate the fact it's used as a tool for social control more than a 'moral and ethical ideology, whether or not the one parent you asked had a epiphany.

[kirklancaster]

No, you're saying that the burden of proof always lies with the person making an assertation; that for someone saying "god does not exist" the burden of proof is on them to prove that. Which in philosophical / logical terms, is incorrect. You can't disprove existence and therefore the burden lies on the person claiming existence, always. Non-existence does not require proof, as by definition, non-existence requires an absence of proof.

It's a pointless argument though that only really serves as a distraction, people should stick to "near absolute" terms rather than absolute, if they want to be completely accurate. For example, I would say that I personally don't believe in a christian God or the god / gods of any other organised religion. It seems very, very unlikely that with infinite possibility, one of those humanistic Gods exists. I'd be confident in saying that the possibility is maybe something like a trillionth of 1%, but infinite being infinite, anything is possible. But I'd require proof of existence to consider it in any way likely or even outside the realms of fantasy.

This is completely different to the burden of proof in the legal system, where one would be seeking to prove or disprove truths and either stance has the possibility of proof, e.g. alibi ("Bobby stole my car" / "No I didn't, couldn't have, because I was at Jimmy's house!")

Great post TS but I think we are at 'cross purposes' on the 'Burden of Proof' point -- Kyle used the legal phrase and I continued with the phrase in a Legal Context; as if the debate was a court case. Thus my contention that "The Burden of Proof falls squarely on whoever is making the claim etc."

Anyway, I respect your viewpoint and the fact that you took the time to explain why you have that viewpoint, which is something I try to do.
I also like the fact that you admit that you are not dealing in 'absolutes' and therefore allow the possibility (no matter how infinitesimal) that you could be wrong.

[Crimson Dynamo]

"This is a very old argument and to save you and others time you are wrong."

Can you please expound, because I am totally confused as to what you mean by "This is a very old argument" --- What is?

Further: "and to save you and others time you are wrong"

Wrong about what? Please expound.

And please also explain why anyone with a different viewpoint to yours is decreed by you to be "wrong"? On what authority do you make such absolutes? Are you secretly the all-knowing, omniprescent and infallible true God whom you take such delight in denying?

As for: "But I wonder which god you are talking about. I presume that you yourself are a strict atheist for 99% of the hundreds of other gods but the one you claim to believe in?" -- This is ludicrous. I believe in one God. I am a monotheist. This being so, how can I believe in anyone else's God? However - unlike your good self - just because I do not share someone else's beliefs, I still respect their right to believe, and do not attempt to pour scorn on those beliefs at every opportunity.

Unlike you, I also answer every response to my posts where such a response dictates an answer.

I am genuinely intrigued LeatherTrumpet.

I know you believe in one god but you must have heard that there are a few around and so I would wager that you dont believe in them?

How do you feel about Sikhs and Muslims and what they believe in?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I agree to an extent - I don't think school really ever manages to indoctrinate, parental influence is much stronger (i.e. a child from a religious household in a non-religious school will quite probably be religious themselves - and vice versa, a child from a non-religious household going to a religious school is likely to play along but ultimately reject religion as "truth"). We are an entirely non-religious household (my wife was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school and yet rejected it as truth very early on, as many do, confirming what I was saying) and yet this summer our 4 year old attended a "summer camp" at the local church hall run by a Christian group. She absolutely loved it and enjoyed the stories (or probably more that they were very enthusiastically acted out by the volunteers...) and she was full of questions when she came home. It opens up a plethora of learning opportunities. She decided for herself that they were obviously "just stories, like Frozen" which I'd be lying if I said I'm not glad about, but we're always careful not to lead her thought processes in either direction.

I can see where the alternative viewpoint is coming from though - and it doesn't necessarily mean that there "is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools" - rather than strong moral stories are important and that those might be overlooked when every story being taught is religious and taught as truth. Many religious stories have wonderful messages. Many in my opinion have truly abhorrent messages. But anyway - even if they are to be present, I disagree with it all being based around one doctrine, it should be a more well rounded moral / philosophical education. There are some wonderful stories in religions not traditionally taught in Western schools, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, and it would be very limiting to overlook these in favour of dogmatic Christianity / Catholicism / Islam, etc.

I personally enjoy a lot of religious tales as much as any other, from all religions, living and dead (ancient greek and pre-Christianity Roman Empire myths and legends from those dead polytheistic religions are fascinating)... but in a universe of endless possibility I find the thought of subscribing to one religion completely depressing.

"We can only perceive a fraction of the near infinite planes of existence and barely understand anything about those immediately neighbouring ours, let alone the ones we haven't even considered! Imagine what incomprehensible things might b..."

Religious person: "Yeah but the answer is this :)"

:( spoilers! Boring!

Indeed

There is an interview in this weeks Radio Times by Prof Brian Cox is which he states: We are made of 3 sub-atomic particles. We are Up Quarks, Down Quarks and electrons, and thats it. Its all you need to make a human and all you need to make a rock. So its quite tremendous that they form planets, rocks and brains. He also states that in our galaxy alone (MW) there are 20 BILLION Earth like planets!

Now there is more to marvel and wonder at in one Radio Times article than in the whole of Genesis alone :shocked:

[Crimson Dynamo]

No ridicule from me Rubymoo,we all have our beliefs no one can say what is right or wrong,I'm with you on this.

I am going to make a stab in the dark and say that Scientology is wrong, how about them apples?


:hehe:

[rubymoo]

I am going to make a stab in the dark and say that Scientology is wrong, how about them apples?


:hehe:

Yeah i don't understand Scientology, but i do get along with Buddhism:pat:

Ooops looks like i spilt some tea:grin2:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I am also going to say that the beliefs of ISIL are wrong

more tea spillage

[rubymoo]

I am also going to say that the beliefs of ISIL are wrong

more tea spillage

Agree with you:thumbs:

[Ammi]

I agree to an extent - I don't think school really ever manages to indoctrinate, parental influence is much stronger (i.e. a child from a religious household in a non-religious school will quite probably be religious themselves - and vice versa, a child from a non-religious household going to a religious school is likely to play along but ultimately reject religion as "truth"). We are an entirely non-religious household (my wife was raised Catholic and went to Catholic school and yet rejected it as truth very early on, as many do, confirming what I was saying) and yet this summer our 4 year old attended a "summer camp" at the local church hall run by a Christian group. She absolutely loved it and enjoyed the stories (or probably more that they were very enthusiastically acted out by the volunteers...) and she was full of questions when she came home. It opens up a plethora of learning opportunities. She decided for herself that they were obviously "just stories, like Frozen" which I'd be lying if I said I'm not glad about, but we're always careful not to lead her thought processes in either direction.

I can see where the alternative viewpoint is coming from though - and it doesn't necessarily mean that there "is indeed a valuable and relevant place for some religion in schools" - rather than strong moral stories are important and that those might be overlooked when every story being taught is religious and taught as truth. Many religious stories have wonderful messages. Many in my opinion have truly abhorrent messages. But anyway - even if they are to be present, I disagree with it all being based around one doctrine, it should be a more well rounded moral / philosophical education. There are some wonderful stories in religions not traditionally taught in Western schools, such as Hinduism and Buddhism, and it would be very limiting to overlook these in favour of dogmatic Christianity / Catholicism / Islam, etc.I personally enjoy a lot of religious tales as much as any other, from all religions, living and dead (ancient greek and pre-Christianity Roman Empire myths and legends from those dead polytheistic religions are fascinating)... but in a universe of endless possibility I find the thought of subscribing to one religion completely depressing.

"We can only perceive a fraction of the near infinite planes of existence and barely understand anything about those immediately neighbouring ours, let alone the ones we haven't even considered! Imagine what incomprehensible things might b..."

Religious person: "Yeah but the answer is this :)"

:( spoilers! Boring!


..that's exactly it though, TS...a moral or philosophy story that has a good message for children has the same 'learning factor', whether it's based on a religion or not and it is also balanced with many religions, the ones you have mentioned in your post are some of them...because many religion based stories have great messages which are good for children and also easy for them to understand ... but there is obviously balance to it with many non religion sources as well, it's far from being an indoctrination or anything like that...and you're correct, what a child will take from it is also largely influenced and mainly influenced by other environmental factors, the family home being the main one obviously...but it would be blinkered to dismiss a great learning source just because there was an element of 'religion' to it...when there is actually something that all young people can learn from it about tolerance to others/empathy/kindness etc...

[kirklancaster]

I went to a Church of England primary school.Good school,Used to sing hymns every morning,Pray go to church for certain events.They never indoctrinated me because i never believed any of it at any point,Even as a 5 year old.Did'nt ever do me any harm at all.Nothing wrong with faith schools imo,Still have good memories of going there.

A good post. :wavey:

[user104658]

..that's exactly it though, TS...a moral or philosophy story that has a good message for children has the same 'learning factor', whether it's based on a religion or not and it is also balanced with many religions, the ones you have mentioned in your post are some of them...because many religion based stories have great messages which are good for children and also easy for them to understand ... but there is obviously balance to it with many non religion sources as well, it's far from being an indoctrination or anything like that...and you're correct, what a child will take from it is also largely influenced and mainly influenced by other environmental factors, the family home being the main one obviously...but it would be blinkered to dismiss a great learning source just because there was an element of 'religion' to it...when there is actually something that all young people can learn from it about tolerance to others/empathy/kindness etc...
Right but the problem arises when it's being taught as history / fact rather than as standalone stories, which does tend to happen in at least the more fundamental religious educations (Catholic, Muslim, etc.). When an adult and especially a teacher tells a child that something is true then they tend to believe it without question, if there is no alternate voice encouraging them to think critically. These beliefs then just become the truth of the world for some children and many find it hard to let go of that as they get older. I've seen people from religious backgrounds working themselves into a terrified state when they intellectually start to challenge what they've been taught but are battling against an ingrained message that they will be lost m doomed if they turn away from or question their deity. That, in my opinion, is something that can't be overlooked.

I think religion and religious stories should be taught, but only ever with the caveat of "some people believe..." "Christianity teaches that..." etc. Never as unquestioned truth?

[Marsh.]

A lot of it is entrenched in history though.

I went to a Catholic school and I think the misconception is that they drum "stories" into you and make you believe them. They don't.

They teach you about the history of religion, how and when each branch was created, the culture differences etc etc. It's not even just about Catholicism, they give you a broad religious and philosophical education. Which is a great thing.

[user104658]

A lot of it is entrenched in history though.

I went to a Catholic school and I think the misconception is that they drum "stories" into you and make you believe them. They don't.

They teach you about the history of religion, how and when each branch was created, the culture differences etc etc. It's not even just about Catholicism, they give you a broad religious and philosophical education. Which is a great thing.
Do they teach you that God might not be real? Do they teach you that Jesus may never have existed and if he did historically exist, he may not have been the son of God?

[Marsh.]

Do they teach you that God might not be real? Do they teach you that Jesus may never have existed and if he did historically exist, he may not have been the son of God?

No, but they didn't "teach" you that he did exist.

It was Christianity is this.... Buddhism is this.... Hinduism is this....

[Crimson Dynamo]

A lot of it is entrenched in history though.

I went to a Catholic school and I think the misconception is that they drum "stories" into you and make you believe them. They don't.

They teach you about the history of religion, how and when each branch was created, the culture differences etc etc. It's not even just about Catholicism, they give you a broad religious and philosophical education. Which is a great thing.

Like they teach in normal schools. So lets just do away with all religious schools and provide the best education for children in a BS free environment :spin:

[Marsh.]

Well my religious school was a brilliant education so I have no issue with them.

[Northern Monkey]

And if there was no religion at the school you went to do you think that you would have turned out different. Lets say that all the time that you were singing, going to church and praying you instead were learning new things?

Things like hymns and praying etc were during morning assembly which i believe most schools had,All my other non religious schools after had assemblies in the morning which were just as useless.The only thing that may have ate into lesson time would be the odd visit to church for harvest but that was like once a year.Tbh we'd never pay much attention to all the religious stuff,Just sit there or mess around.I don't think that stuff had any effect on me positive or negative,I only went there because it was the local primary school,It was just like any other school apart from what i mentioned.
Edit:Also there were kids there from other religions too,Sikhs,Muslims,Hindus etc.I even remember us celebrating Diwali one year in a play aswell as the Nativity.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well my religious school was a brilliant education so I have no issue with them.

no your school was, its got nowt to do with religion

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

my RE teacher had a beard

[user104658]

my RE teacher had a beard

Mine actually looked like Jesus, it was brilliant. Although I suspect he might have been a Buddhist. He wasn't allowed to say what his own personal beliefs were but he always sounded just that little bit more knowledgeable and enthusiastic about Buddhism.

[Crimson Dynamo]

my RE teacher had a beard

But was she any good?

[Marsh.]

no your school was, its got nowt to do with religion

You mentioned religious schools, mine was one so what's the difference?

People have a choice of schools to send their children so there is no problem.

[kirklancaster]

Like they teach in normal schools. So lets just do away with all religious schools and provide the best education for children in a BS free environment :spin::nono::nono::nono:

This is either a joke, or the slippery slope to Fascism - What do you propose next Leather T? How about a Ginger Hair Tax because you personally don't like Gingers? :joker::joker::joker:

[kirklancaster]

Things like hymns and praying etc were during morning assembly which i believe most schools had,All my other non religious schools after had assemblies in the morning which were just as useless.The only thing that may have ate into lesson time would be the odd visit to church for harvest but that was like once a year.Tbh we'd never pay much attention to all the religious stuff,Just sit there or mess around.I don't think that stuff had any effect on me positive or negative,I only went there because it was the local primary school,It was just like any other school apart from what i mentioned.
Edit:Also there were kids there from other religions too,Sikhs,Muslims,Hindus etc.I even remember us celebrating Diwali one year in a play aswell as the Nativity.

:thumbs: Another balanced post.

[kirklancaster]

A lot of it is entrenched in history though.

I went to a Catholic school and I think the misconception is that they drum "stories" into you and make you believe them. They don't.

They teach you about the history of religion, how and when each branch was created, the culture differences etc etc. It's not even just about Catholicism, they give you a broad religious and philosophical education. Which is a great thing.

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[Kyle]

:nono::nono::nono:

This is either a joke, or the slippery slope to Fascism - What do you propose next Leather T? How about a Ginger Hair Tax because you personally don't like Gingers? :joker::joker::joker:

Gingers clearly exist. They can't teach about gingers in school as long as they like :hehe:

[kirklancaster]

Gingers clearly exist. They can't teach about gingers in school as long as they like :hehe:

:joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

:nono::nono::nono:

This is either a joke, or the slippery slope to Fascism - What do you propose next Leather T? How about a Ginger Hair Tax because you personally don't like Gingers? :joker::joker::joker:

No i just proprose not lying to children

Or is that a problem for you?

[Marsh.]

No i just proprose not lying to children

Or is that a problem for you?

There is no lying.

[Jake.]

RE has always been preached as a belief (well it was at my school at least, and I've attended two catholic schools)

[Jake.]

Do they teach you that God might not be real? Do they teach you that Jesus may never have existed and if he did historically exist, he may not have been the son of God?

Well presumably Marsh was taught Science.. And for me it was more about Religions in historical aspects

[Crimson Dynamo]

There is no lying.

Oh for gods sake Morsh

[Marsh.]

Well presumably Marsh was taught Science.. And for me it was more about Religions in historical aspects

Exactly.

Have some of these people been to religious schools? Do you think it's praying and "God lives on a cloud" for 6 hours a day? :idc:

[Marsh.]

Oh for gods sake Morsh

No blaspheming please. :smug:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I give Morsh 10 years and he is atheist

[Marsh.]

:suspect: Eh?

[Crimson Dynamo]

Ok 9

[Marsh.]

Never. :hmph:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Never. :hmph:

I said that at you age

[Marsh.]

Don't be so insulting. :nono: I'm not Tom.

[Kizzy]

I give Morsh 10 years and he is atheist

Let's not get twisted here, I don't agree with religion... I never said I didn't agree with god.

All this 'life lessons' given with an unhealthy dose of fear and guilt in schools is counterproductive, and more than a little unnerving for me if I'm honest.

[kirklancaster]

Oh for gods sake Morsh

For who's sake?

Hope you've never said this to any children by way of appeal. You're appealing on behalf of a deity - which according to you - you know absolutely doesn't exist. Best not to deceive children like that. :hehe:

[Ammi]

..the Meaning of Life is Redway's threads..:laugh:..

[kirklancaster]

I know you believe in one god but you must have heard that there are a few around and so I would wager that you dont believe in them?

How do you feel about Sikhs and Muslims and what they believe in?

No I'm a monotheist.

“Remember, an easy question can have an easy answer. But a hard question must have a hard answer. And for the hardest questions of all, there may be no answer - except faith.”
― Charles Sheffield, Brother to Dragons

Some people on here assert that people of 'faith' believe without any shred of credible evidence, but that is simply not true - in my case at least. For example;

I believe in the Old Testament God - Yahweh, and if I was a Jew, I would be a 'Jew for Jesus' because I also firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. I believe that he lived, died on the cross and was resurrected.

I was not 'conditioned' into my beliefs by fanatically religious parents, nor by any absorption of religious doctrines at any of the schools I attended, and I was not exposed to any religious cult. Nor did I 'turn to God' in desperation as a result of some crisis in my life or nervous breakdown, as can happen with some people. I chose to believe.

From a young age, I was always curious about what life was all about, where did we come from, what the Cosmos really was, and a hundred other questions. As I got older, I literally, spent years seeking definitive answers to questions which I now know have no definitive answers. But, after delving (as deeply as I was intellectually able) into subjects as diverse as Agnosticism, through Christianity, Buddhism and Existentialism, to Deism, and even Ancient Astronaut theory, and after experimenting with mid-altering drugs like LSD, I 'gave up the ghost' and resorted to pure hedonism for a time.

Then, when I was in my late 20's, I witnessed something which was so unbelievable, so incredible, that I knew at that moment that there were some other laws at work in our universe besides the ones we have been taught to accept as 'natural'. I should add here, that 'no', I was not on drugs and hadn't touched LSD for years. Neither was I drunk or deluded, and also that this incident was witnessed by three other people - a young couple, who frankly 'were not the sharpest chisels in the box', knew what they'd witnessed, but seemed to merely accept it, metaphorically 'shrug' and subsequently seemed to give it no more thought. The third - a typical party loving, skirt chasing male - didn't change much publicly, but did become a regular church-goer - something I have never been drawn to because the 'Church' is man's creation and I don't believe in Man. Anyway, he spent a long time with me thereafter, privately analysing and discussing what we'd seen. Years have gone by, and he is still one of my close friends today.

At the time, I did not change much publicly either, but privately, I started to re-examine philosophy and religion.

I will state here that I do not believe without questioning. I do not question without seeking answers, and I do not blindly accept answers without further researching.

Anyway, I developed a belief in God. I haven't all the answers - if, indeed I have any - because I am mortal and ordinary, and not God, but my faith in God is built on both logic, and intuition. I cannot actually identify which God I believe in but I believe there is a God - some supernatural force, some entity - and I think of God as Yahweh, the Hebrew Old Testament God, largely because I firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Messiah.

My belief in Jesus as the Christ is not only based on logic and intuition, but also on an acceptance that the evidence needed to justify such a belief, is both, preponderant and wholly convincing. So can I start with a case for the historical Jesus?

Can there really be any dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived 2000 years ago? Because, in addition to all the overwhelming Biblical testimony, there is a wealth of extraneous secular evidence. There is neither space here nor need to list comprehensively, so briefly:

Flavius Josephus - a Ist Century Romano-Jewish historian widely considered to be one of the greatest and most credible historians of antiquity. Josephus did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God - and therefore denied Christianity, yet in his book 'The Antiquities of the Jews' he confirms that not only did Jesus Christ exist, but also corroborates the New Testament teachings about Christ, including the fact that Christ was Crucified on the cross under the orders of Pontius Pilate:

“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

And:

“But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.”

(It's very important here to bear in mind, that Josephus was not a Christian but an orthodox Jew, that his books were primarily written to recount the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience, and that Christ was mentioned only incidentally and briefly in small passages which formed a very minuscule part of a huge tome.)

Tacitus - a Roman Historian 55-120AD. who - in his book the Annals - when writing of the 6 day fire which all but destroyed Rome (Nero fiddling while Rome burned) , wrote:

" Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus (meaning 'Messiah') from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.”

(Tacitus detested Christians but none-the-less confirms here the existence of Jesus, and His crucifixion on the cross. Further he corroborates that Pontius Pilate was the procurator who oversaw the crucifixion of Christ.)

Pliny the Younger - 61 AD – ca. 112 AD : Ancient Roman Lawyer, Magistrate and Author who is famous for a huge collection of letters which are an invaluable historical source, Pliny - accepted as honest and moderate - was relentless in pursuing Christians and in correspondence with the emperor Trajan, he asks the Emperor for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced Christians to curse Christ under torture:

“They were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but ordinary and innocent food.”

Tallus -- 1st century non-Christian historian. (Quoted by Julius Africanus -- 160 – c.240) in his 'Chronicles' explains the reason for it being so dark during the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:

“An eclipse of the sun ’unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon) and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.....”

(As a derider of Christ, Tallus tried to come up with a 'scientific' reason for the sky inexplicably darkening at Christ's crucifixion. Of course his 'scientific' explanation is nonsense, but this not only corroborates that Christ lived and was crucified, it also corroborates the biblical claim of the sky blackening at the hour of Christ's 'death')

Lucian of Samosate -- 115 AD -- was a Greek satirist and travelling lecturer who mocked Christians in his writing, but provided evidence that Jesus really did exist in doing so
:
“He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world.”

Seutonius-- 69/75 -- a Roman historian and author:

"The emperor Claudius reigned 41 to 54 AD. Suetonius reports his dealings with the eastern Roman Empire, that is, with Greece and Macedonia, and with the Lycians, Rhodians, and Trojans. He then reports that the emperor expelled the Jews from Rome, since they “constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Christ”

I do not think that any rational man can dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived and died on the cross 2000 years ago. The evidence for this is simply overwhelming.

The evidence that Jesus was the Messiah is another post.

This is my opinion and I am not trying to indoctrinate or convert anyone else.

[Kyle]

What excuses do you have for Yahweh's disgusting genocidal behaviour that is rampant throughout the Old Testament kirk?

[Crimson Dynamo]

No I'm a monotheist.

“Remember, an easy question can have an easy answer. But a hard question must have a hard answer. And for the hardest questions of all, there may be no answer - except faith.”
― Charles Sheffield, Brother to Dragons

Some people on here assert that people of 'faith' believe without any shred of credible evidence, but that is simply not true - in my case at least. For example;

I believe in the Old Testament God - Yahweh, and if I was a Jew, I would be a 'Jew for Jesus' because I also firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. I believe that he lived, died on the cross and was resurrected.

I was not 'conditioned' into my beliefs by fanatically religious parents, nor by any absorption of religious doctrines at any of the schools I attended, and I was not exposed to any religious cult. Nor did I 'turn to God' in desperation as a result of some crisis in my life or nervous breakdown, as can happen with some people. I chose to believe.

From a young age, I was always curious about what life was all about, where did we come from, what the Cosmos really was, and a hundred other questions. As I got older, I literally, spent years seeking definitive answers to questions which I now know have no definitive answers. But, after delving (as deeply as I was intellectually able) into subjects as diverse as Agnosticism, through Christianity, Buddhism and Existentialism, to Deism, and even Ancient Astronaut theory, and after experimenting with mid-altering drugs like LSD, I 'gave up the ghost' and resorted to pure hedonism for a time.

Then, when I was in my late 20's, I witnessed something which was so unbelievable, so incredible, that I knew at that moment that there were some other laws at work in our universe besides the ones we have been taught to accept as 'natural'. I should add here, that 'no', I was not on drugs and hadn't touched LSD for years. Neither was I drunk or deluded, and also that this incident was witnessed by three other people - a young couple, who frankly 'were not the sharpest chisels in the box', knew what they'd witnessed, but seemed to merely accept it, metaphorically 'shrug' and subsequently seemed to give it no more thought. The third - a typical party loving, skirt chasing male - didn't change much publicly, but did become a regular church-goer - something I have never been drawn to because the 'Church' is man's creation and I don't believe in Man. Anyway, he spent a long time with me thereafter, privately analysing and discussing what we'd seen. Years have gone by, and he is still one of my close friends today.

At the time, I did not change much publicly either, but privately, I started to re-examine philosophy and religion.

I will state here that I do not believe without questioning. I do not question without seeking answers, and I do not blindly accept answers without further researching.

Anyway, I developed a belief in God. I haven't all the answers - if, indeed I have any - because I am mortal and ordinary, and not God, but my faith in God is built on both logic, and intuition. I cannot actually identify which God I believe in but I believe there is a God - some supernatural force, some entity - and I think of God as Yahweh, the Hebrew Old Testament God, largely because I firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Messiah.

My belief in Jesus as the Christ is not only based on logic and intuition, but also on an acceptance that the evidence needed to justify such a belief, is both, preponderant and wholly convincing. So can I start with a case for the historical Jesus?

Can there really be any dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived 2000 years ago? Because, in addition to all the overwhelming Biblical testimony, there is a wealth of extraneous secular evidence. There is neither space here nor need to list comprehensively, so briefly:

Flavius Josephus - a Ist Century Romano-Jewish historian widely considered to be one of the greatest and most credible historians of antiquity. Josephus did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God - and therefore denied Christianity, yet in his book 'The Antiquities of the Jews' he confirms that not only did Jesus Christ exist, but also corroborates the New Testament teachings about Christ, including the fact that Christ was Crucified on the cross under the orders of Pontius Pilate:

“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

And:

“But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.”

(It's very important here to bear in mind, that Josephus was not a Christian but an orthodox Jew, that his books were primarily written to recount the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience, and that Christ was mentioned only incidentally and briefly in small passages which formed a very minuscule part of a huge tome.)

Tacitus - a Roman Historian 55-120AD. who - in his book the Annals - when writing of the 6 day fire which all but destroyed Rome (Nero fiddling while Rome burned) , wrote:

" Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus (meaning 'Messiah') from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.”

(Tacitus detested Christians but none-the-less confirms here the existence of Jesus, and His crucifixion on the cross. Further he corroborates that Pontius Pilate was the procurator who oversaw the crucifixion of Christ.)

Pliny the Younger - 61 AD – ca. 112 AD : Ancient Roman Lawyer, Magistrate and Author who is famous for a huge collection of letters which are an invaluable historical source, Pliny - accepted as honest and moderate - was relentless in pursuing Christians and in correspondence with the emperor Trajan, he asks the Emperor for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced Christians to curse Christ under torture:

“They were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but ordinary and innocent food.”

Tallus -- 1st century non-Christian historian. (Quoted by Julius Africanus -- 160 – c.240) in his 'Chronicles' explains the reason for it being so dark during the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:

“An eclipse of the sun ’unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon) and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.....”

(As a derider of Christ, Tallus tried to come up with a 'scientific' reason for the sky inexplicably darkening at Christ's crucifixion. Of course his 'scientific' explanation is nonsense, but this not only corroborates that Christ lived and was crucified, it also corroborates the biblical claim of the sky blackening at the hour of Christ's 'death')

Lucian of Samosate -- 115 AD -- was a Greek satirist and travelling lecturer who mocked Christians in his writing, but provided evidence that Jesus really did exist in doing so
:
“He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world.”

Seutonius-- 69/75 -- a Roman historian and author:

"The emperor Claudius reigned 41 to 54 AD. Suetonius reports his dealings with the eastern Roman Empire, that is, with Greece and Macedonia, and with the Lycians, Rhodians, and Trojans. He then reports that the emperor expelled the Jews from Rome, since they “constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Christ”

I do not think that any rational man can dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived and died on the cross 2000 years ago. The evidence for this is simply overwhelming.

The evidence that Jesus was the Messiah is another post.

This is my opinion and I am not trying to indoctrinate or convert anyone else.

Love the quote from Charles Sheffield - President of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sheffield

:joker:

[Crimson Dynamo]

No I'm a monotheist.

“Remember, an easy question can have an easy answer. But a hard question must have a hard answer. And for the hardest questions of all, there may be no answer - except faith.”
― Charles Sheffield, Brother to Dragons

Some people on here assert that people of 'faith' believe without any shred of credible evidence, but that is simply not true - in my case at least. For example;

I believe in the Old Testament God - Yahweh, and if I was a Jew, I would be a 'Jew for Jesus' because I also firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. I believe that he lived, died on the cross and was resurrected.

I was not 'conditioned' into my beliefs by fanatically religious parents, nor by any absorption of religious doctrines at any of the schools I attended, and I was not exposed to any religious cult. Nor did I 'turn to God' in desperation as a result of some crisis in my life or nervous breakdown, as can happen with some people. I chose to believe.

From a young age, I was always curious about what life was all about, where did we come from, what the Cosmos really was, and a hundred other questions. As I got older, I literally, spent years seeking definitive answers to questions which I now know have no definitive answers. But, after delving (as deeply as I was intellectually able) into subjects as diverse as Agnosticism, through Christianity, Buddhism and Existentialism, to Deism, and even Ancient Astronaut theory, and after experimenting with mid-altering drugs like LSD, I 'gave up the ghost' and resorted to pure hedonism for a time.

Then, when I was in my late 20's, I witnessed something which was so unbelievable, so incredible, that I knew at that moment that there were some other laws at work in our universe besides the ones we have been taught to accept as 'natural'. I should add here, that 'no', I was not on drugs and hadn't touched LSD for years. Neither was I drunk or deluded, and also that this incident was witnessed by three other people - a young couple, who frankly 'were not the sharpest chisels in the box', knew what they'd witnessed, but seemed to merely accept it, metaphorically 'shrug' and subsequently seemed to give it no more thought. The third - a typical party loving, skirt chasing male - didn't change much publicly, but did become a regular church-goer - something I have never been drawn to because the 'Church' is man's creation and I don't believe in Man. Anyway, he spent a long time with me thereafter, privately analysing and discussing what we'd seen. Years have gone by, and he is still one of my close friends today.

At the time, I did not change much publicly either, but privately, I started to re-examine philosophy and religion.

I will state here that I do not believe without questioning. I do not question without seeking answers, and I do not blindly accept answers without further researching.

Anyway, I developed a belief in God. I haven't all the answers - if, indeed I have any - because I am mortal and ordinary, and not God, but my faith in God is built on both logic, and intuition. I cannot actually identify which God I believe in but I believe there is a God - some supernatural force, some entity - and I think of God as Yahweh, the Hebrew Old Testament God, largely because I firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Messiah.

My belief in Jesus as the Christ is not only based on logic and intuition, but also on an acceptance that the evidence needed to justify such a belief, is both, preponderant and wholly convincing. So can I start with a case for the historical Jesus?

Can there really be any dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived 2000 years ago? Because, in addition to all the overwhelming Biblical testimony, there is a wealth of extraneous secular evidence. There is neither space here nor need to list comprehensively, so briefly:

Flavius Josephus - a Ist Century Romano-Jewish historian widely considered to be one of the greatest and most credible historians of antiquity. Josephus did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God - and therefore denied Christianity, yet in his book 'The Antiquities of the Jews' he confirms that not only did Jesus Christ exist, but also corroborates the New Testament teachings about Christ, including the fact that Christ was Crucified on the cross under the orders of Pontius Pilate:

“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

And:

“But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.”

(It's very important here to bear in mind, that Josephus was not a Christian but an orthodox Jew, that his books were primarily written to recount the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience, and that Christ was mentioned only incidentally and briefly in small passages which formed a very minuscule part of a huge tome.)

Tacitus - a Roman Historian 55-120AD. who - in his book the Annals - when writing of the 6 day fire which all but destroyed Rome (Nero fiddling while Rome burned) , wrote:

" Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus (meaning 'Messiah') from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.”

(Tacitus detested Christians but none-the-less confirms here the existence of Jesus, and His crucifixion on the cross. Further he corroborates that Pontius Pilate was the procurator who oversaw the crucifixion of Christ.)

Pliny the Younger - 61 AD – ca. 112 AD : Ancient Roman Lawyer, Magistrate and Author who is famous for a huge collection of letters which are an invaluable historical source, Pliny - accepted as honest and moderate - was relentless in pursuing Christians and in correspondence with the emperor Trajan, he asks the Emperor for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced Christians to curse Christ under torture:

“They were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but ordinary and innocent food.”

Tallus -- 1st century non-Christian historian. (Quoted by Julius Africanus -- 160 – c.240) in his 'Chronicles' explains the reason for it being so dark during the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:

“An eclipse of the sun ’unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon) and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.....”

(As a derider of Christ, Tallus tried to come up with a 'scientific' reason for the sky inexplicably darkening at Christ's crucifixion. Of course his 'scientific' explanation is nonsense, but this not only corroborates that Christ lived and was crucified, it also corroborates the biblical claim of the sky blackening at the hour of Christ's 'death')

Lucian of Samosate -- 115 AD -- was a Greek satirist and travelling lecturer who mocked Christians in his writing, but provided evidence that Jesus really did exist in doing so
:
“He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world.”

Seutonius-- 69/75 -- a Roman historian and author:

"The emperor Claudius reigned 41 to 54 AD. Suetonius reports his dealings with the eastern Roman Empire, that is, with Greece and Macedonia, and with the Lycians, Rhodians, and Trojans. He then reports that the emperor expelled the Jews from Rome, since they “constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Christ”

I do not think that any rational man can dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived and died on the cross 2000 years ago. The evidence for this is simply overwhelming.

The evidence that Jesus was the Messiah is another post.

This is my opinion and I am not trying to indoctrinate or convert anyone else.

"I cannot actually identify which God I believe in "

"No I'm a monotheist. "

Monotheist: The doctrine or belief that there is only one God.

:facepalm:

[kirklancaster]

What excuses do you have for Yahweh's disgusting genocidal behaviour that is rampant throughout the Old Testament kirk?

I haven't any Kyle. You raise a very valid and complex issue. I'm not even certain that I do believe in Yahweh. I only know that I believe in Christ for reasons which I will post later, and by the fact that Christ is called The Son of God and the Biblical God being Yahweh, I submit to the link, if you like.

I'm not even sure, to be honest, that the Old and New Testaments even allude to the same God, because - as you have astutely suggested - Yahweh seems to have transformed himself from a blood thirsty egocentric deity who only cares that his people worship him in the Old Testament, into the all loving, all forgiving, humanitarian God of the New Testament.

If you refer to my post, I actually admitted this much:

"I cannot actually identify which God I believe in but I believe there is a God - some supernatural force, some entity - and I think of God as Yahweh, the Hebrew Old Testament God, largely because I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Messiah."

Too many people seem to think that if you believe in God then you cannot believe in science and vice versa, but this is totally wrong. Some of the most eminent scientists who ever lived also believed in God. The list is considerable, but include:

Copernicus, Kepler, Bacon, Galileo, Descartes and Faraday, Kelvin, Planck, Mendel, Boyle - and none more eminent than these two:

Isaac Newton -- 1642-1727 --

This genius was devoutly religious. He proposed numbers as involved in understanding God's plan for history, did a considerable work on biblical numerology, and thought that theology was very important. In his system of physics, Newton said that God was essential to the nature and absoluteness of space. In Principia, he stated, "The most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being."

Albert Einstein -- 1879-1955 --

Einstein stated the: "impossibility of a non-created universe." and firmly denied atheism. He not only stated his belief in "Spinoza's God who reveals himself in the harmony of what exists." but also; ""I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

His very famous epithet on the "uncertainty principle" was that; "God does not play dice" This was a real statement about a God in whom he believed. Another famous saying of Einstein's was that; "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind."

Not bad evidence for God coming from the most revered genius and scientist of the Modern Era.

I believe in God, but that does not mean I am a some kind of science 'Luddite' because I'm not, I have always been hugely interested in all branches of science, from Astronomy to Zoology through Physics and Chemistry.

I believe in certain principles of Evolution but not all of it because scientific advances and ever increasing new discoveries in the fossil records by archaeologists, are proving flaws in Darwin's Theories. In my opinion there is no conflict between science and Theism only that which some biased parties wish to create by misinformation and exaggeration for their own benefit.

[kirklancaster]

Love the quote from Charles Sheffield - President of the Science Fiction and Fantasy Writers of America

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Sheffield

:joker:

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????

:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:: shrug:

What relevance has that? It is a quote which is superbly apt for the subject matter.

[Crimson Dynamo]

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????

:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:: shrug:

What relevance has that? It is a quote which is superbly apt for the subject matter.

Its just some blokes opinion and does not actually make sense unless he qualifies what he means by "hard"

[kirklancaster]

"I cannot actually identify which God I believe in "

"No I'm a monotheist. "

Monotheist: The doctrine or belief that there is only one God.

:facepalm:

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shru g::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

Do you actually read any of these posts from honest and sincere forum members? Or are you so bigoted and bored that you snipe for no other reason than that you can?

I really wouldn't mind but your tiny little peashooter keeps missing the target - as when you posted a link to me which referred specifically to a 14th century 'Flat Earth Myth' when I was writing about a period between 323 BC to 146 BC to 6 BC!!!!:shrug:

Like when you posted what you regard as an 'absolute' in response to Kaz:

"There is nothing else unless you know better than the greatest scientific minds that have ever lived?" :shrug:--

-- Yet, quite clearly, if you refer to my post to Kyle, you will see that you're talking crap, because "some of the greatest minds which ever lived" also believed in God and an afterlife - including; Copernicus, Kepler, Bacon, Galileo, Descartes and Faraday, Kelvin, Planck, Mendel, Boyle , and Issac Newton and Albert Einstein - among others.

My posts are lucid - unlike yours - but if you have trouble understanding what I write, then I will try again:

I believe in one God - and that God being whoever is the father of Jesus Christ. I cannot identify him because, although the Old Testament and New Testament have been combined to form the Christian Bible, I have reservations about the link.

However, because Christ is the fountain-head of Christianity and because I believe in Christ as the Son of God, then it follows that I believe in a CHRISTIAN God whatever his real name may be.

It therefore follows that because I believe in a Christian God, and because I am a monotheist, then I cannot believe in Allah, Breged, Biame, The Rainbow Serpent, Brahma, Rama, Krishna, nor Shiva, Ahura Mazda, Queztalcoatl, or Zeus.

All cleared up now? Good. :shrug::shrug::shrug:

[kirklancaster]

Its just some blokes opinion and does not actually make sense unless he qualifies what he means by "hard"

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ??????????????????
:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:: shrug::shrug::shrug:

[Kizzy]

What excuses do you have for Yahweh's disgusting genocidal behaviour that is rampant throughout the Old Testament kirk?

Now one of those stories would sure as hell :hehe: spice up assembly :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????????????????:shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shru g::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug::shrug:

Do you actually read any of these posts from honest and sincere forum members? Or are you so bigoted and bored that you snipe for no other reason than that you can?

I really wouldn't mind but your tiny little peashooter keeps missing the target - as when you posted a link to me which referred specifically to a 14th century 'Flat Earth Myth' when I was writing about a period between 323 BC to 146 BC to 6 BC!!!!:shrug:

Like when you posted what you regard as an 'absolute' in response to Kaz:

"There is nothing else unless you know better than the greatest scientific minds that have ever lived?" :shrug:--

-- Yet, quite clearly, if you refer to my post to Kyle, you will see that you're talking crap, because "some of the greatest minds which ever lived" also believed in God and an afterlife - including; Copernicus, Kepler, Bacon, Galileo, Descartes and Faraday, Kelvin, Planck, Mendel, Boyle , and Issac Newton and Albert Einstein - among others.

My posts are lucid - unlike yours - but if you have trouble understanding what I write, then I will try again:

I believe in one God - and that God being whoever is the father of Jesus Christ. I cannot identify him because, although the Old Testament and New Testament have been combined to form the Christian Bible, I have reservations about the link.

However, because Christ is the fountain-head of Christianity and because I believe in Christ as the Son of God, then it follows that I believe in a CHRISTIAN God whatever his real name may be.

It therefore follows that because I believe in a Christian God, and because I am a monotheist, then I cannot believe in Allah, Breged, Biame, The Rainbow Serpent, Brahma, Rama, Krishna, nor Shiva, Ahura Mazda, Queztalcoatl, or Zeus.

All cleared up now? Good. :shrug::shrug::shrug:

Yes, you are essentially a 99% atheist for all the hundreds of other gods that are around and that you dont read what you type as you are munching on your copypasta

keep typing however as your petard is almost complete

:idc:

[kirklancaster]

Yes, you are essentially a 99% atheist for all the hundreds of other gods that are around and that you dont read what you type as you are munching on your copypasta

keep typing however as your petard is almost complete

:idc:

Thank you LT I will. By the way, I have never tried copy pasta - is it like cannelloni or more like Fusilli bucati? No on second thoughts, I think I will have a boiled egg - No, on third thoughts I won't because I wouldn't know whether to break the small end or the big end. Perhaps I'll read Gulliver's Travels again instead. :sleep::sleep::sleep:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Thank you LT I will. By the way, I have never tried copy pasta - is it like cannelloni or more like Fusilli bucati? No on second thoughts, I think I will have a boiled egg - No, on third thoughts I won't because I wouldn't know whether to break the small end or the big end. Perhaps I'll read Gulliver's Travels again instead. :sleep::sleep::sleep:

I would've thought you would be having roast lamb of god for lunch on a toasted communion wafer and washed down with some tasty blood of christ

then some hypocrisy and custard for puds?

[kirklancaster]

I would've thought you would be having roast lamb of god for lunch on a toasted communion wafer and washed down with some tasty blood of christ

then some hypocrisy and custard for puds?

:sleep::sleep::sleep: Bye.

[Jules2]

The body dies we can all agree with that but the true essence of "us" goes on to other experiences. Karma and rebirth were taken out of the bible by those who thought they knew better. Domination was there aim, thus man hasnt always been taught these things in the Western world. If we think of it though, why should some suffer and others do not, why do the young die young? There has to be a reason.

For many, experiences of unknown quantity and orignation can confirm that yes a part of us is separate from the mortal body. Spiritual life is continuous but the body is left behind. Scientists have now opened their minds to far greater things.

We have our own truths deep inside but our trials and tribulations do make us hide. Fear often stops an unhappy wanderer, is it or isnt it, is it true nah better to stay and feel so blue.

Just have faith in yourself for within we have an enormous amount of wealth.

[Kizzy]

That's real nice jules :hug:

[Marsh.]

The body dies we can all agree with that but the true essence of "us" goes on to other experiences. Karma and rebirth were taken out of the bible by those who thought they knew better. Domination was there aim, thus man hasnt always been taught these things in the Western world. If we think of it though, why should some suffer and others do not, why do the young die young? There has to be a reason.

For many, experiences of unknown quantity and orignation can confirm that yes a part of us is separate from the mortal body. Spiritual life is continuous but the body is left behind. Scientists have now opened their minds to far greater things.

We have our own truths deep inside but our trials and tribulations do make us hide. Fear often stops an unhappy wanderer, is it or isnt it, is it true nah better to stay and feel so blue.

Just have faith in yourself for within we have an enormous amount of wealth.

:flutter:

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

reincarnation sounds so much better than the heaven/hell idea like as if you would be left to suffer for all of eternity for 70 years or w/e being a ****

[Fetch The Bolt Cutters]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Summerland#Wicca >>>

[Kyle]

Kirk,

While as this thread shows we have a difference of opinion on certain philosophical aspects of our existence, I fully appreciate the time you have taken to lay out your beliefs to us all.

My last post might have looked like an attack and that is not my intention. I respect your belief and I thank you for sharing it to a group of strangers.

[kirklancaster]

Kirk,

While as this thread shows we have a difference of opinion on certain philosophical aspects of our existence, I fully appreciate the time you have taken to lay out your beliefs to us all.

My last post might have looked like an attack and that is not my intention. I respect your belief and I thank you for sharing it to a group of strangers.

Thanks Kyle.

[Ammi]

The body dies we can all agree with that but the true essence of "us" goes on to other experiences. Karma and rebirth were taken out of the bible by those who thought they knew better. Domination was there aim, thus man hasnt always been taught these things in the Western world. If we think of it though, why should some suffer and others do not, why do the young die young? There has to be a reason.

For many, experiences of unknown quantity and orignation can confirm that yes a part of us is separate from the mortal body. Spiritual life is continuous but the body is left behind. Scientists have now opened their minds to far greater things.

We have our own truths deep inside but our trials and tribulations do make us hide. Fear often stops an unhappy wanderer, is it or isnt it, is it true nah better to stay and feel so blue.

Just have faith in yourself for within we have an enormous amount of wealth.

..great post Jules...I don't know that I believe everything there but I do believe that it's only a body which dies and it's not a body that has made that person who they are in life...that 'spirit' or essence, or whatever it is has to be somewhere, it's too powerful not to be...and that essence is what made that person everything they were in life...

[kirklancaster]

The body dies we can all agree with that but the true essence of "us" goes on to other experiences. Karma and rebirth were taken out of the bible by those who thought they knew better. Domination was there aim, thus man hasnt always been taught these things in the Western world. If we think of it though, why should some suffer and others do not, why do the young die young? There has to be a reason.

For many, experiences of unknown quantity and orignation can confirm that yes a part of us is separate from the mortal body. Spiritual life is continuous but the body is left behind. Scientists have now opened their minds to far greater things.

We have our own truths deep inside but our trials and tribulations do make us hide. Fear often stops an unhappy wanderer, is it or isnt it, is it true nah better to stay and feel so blue.

Just have faith in yourself for within we have an enormous amount of wealth.:clap1::clap1::clap1:

You are absolutely right Jules on a lot of these points - especially about the Bible being 'selectively edited' over the years.

[Jules2]

If we could only take our minds back to the very beginning when there wasnt any headings at all. We were possibly all of one mind believing in an energy which surrounded the universe. Then along comes so and so wanting to lead, thinking that he/she knew better, lets go this way. So we have a split, then along comes someone else taking away the togetherness of the beginning of the soul plus the division from the "whole".

The energy is forgotten as it is split into different personalities, each one claiming a part as their "God". What if man's god is an alien?

The universe is vast and tbh I cannot disagree totally with Zecharia Sitchin's theories, to me it gives rise to the acceptance of both evolution and creation. Very interesting.

On another note the works of Max Freedom Long explains the travels of the Huna tribes people who worked with the energies of the earth long before the arrival of the Nazarene, they were working miracles and could not understand why Jesus was so valued.

Jose Silva was a great life teacher, he taught that we do not use the full potential of our brain. I sat in two of his seminars and was greatly impressed with the meditation arts in fulfilling the effect. Now it is through meditation that we can reach and undestand a lot of things which we are querying, we can experience, we can find out our inner feelings and self. We can find our faith and know that there is a light at the end of the tunnel. For me it isnt religion as I do believe in that original energy, it is just life and discovering how to obtain the satisfaction of knowing.....

[Jules2]

Yet our hearts have an electrical system, this energy could be our souls and this energy could go into the universe, this energy could manifest as our being, again nobody knows.

Once upon a time humans thought the Earth was flat, and yet we learnt that indeed it wasn't.

I think we should all keep an open mind as no-one knows for sure, i've had my fair share of experiences and i'd like to believe they are true.

Morpheus: This is your last chance. After this, there is no turning back. You take the blue pill - the story ends, you wake up in your bed and believe whatever you want to believe. You take the red pill - you stay in Wonderland and I show you how deep the rabbit-hole goes.


I like this quote, and i know it's from a movie but it indicates possibilities and potential.

No-one knows how deep the rabbit hole is and i believe science is in it's infancy, as humans we still have a lot to learn:angel:

Hi there, I believe that once we have experienced we cannot and should not deny them. Once we acknowledge we can go further if not we just put blinkers up and the experience comes to a halt. Many experience without realising especially in the dream state when we astral travel a lot. x

[Jules2]

I have my own theory, one that i'm comfortable with, but i don't wish to share it for fear of being ridiculed.

There are many things that can't be explained, and no-one has all the answers, but all i will say is that, once when i was incredibly sad, i was transported to the stars, i was in the universe and the love that i felt was unbelievable, i thought to myself, if this is what it feels like to die, then i'm not afraid anymore, and this is from a person who has had an issue with death from age 16.

I know what i felt and i know this is where i will go when my time is up, so for me i will go on, just like Celine Dion says "My heart will go on":smug:

I am with you Ruby, there is so much more, for me I would like to think that our purpose is to have a foot in each world, existing on the mortal plane but learning from the spiritual plane. In doing so we, with the help of like minds, could bring back peace and tranquility. It is going to take years for this to happen unless there is a sudden surge in energy which leads us all on another pathway as a "whole". Death is only a change in circumstance.

Each person has the right to their own beliefs and thoughts as we are all travelling together but on different pathways. If we believe in reincarnation then we are each within our own boundaries, noone is greater or lesser, just learning.

We have to enjoy our experiences if they are genuine but we have to be careful not to lead ourselves astray for the rewards are great and to sit amongst the stars is perfection in itself and the love is overwhelming. You must have really enjoyed that. It just goes to show that help is here when we need it and when we have the faith to realise that it can help xx

[InOne]

Not read a good old God debate on here in a while LOL. I live my life under the assumption there is no God and that works for me.

I don't think about the meaning of life to much. Might as well just get on with it.

[arista]

Not read a good old God debate on here in a while LOL. I live my life under the assumption there is no God and that works for me.

I don't think about the meaning of life to much. Might as well just get on with it.


Bang On Right

[Crimson Dynamo]

20 000 children died today from disease and hunger


I wonder what was the meaning of their lives

Or indeed the 20 000 who will die tomorrow?

Maybe they needed more faith.....?

[Marsh.]

20 000 children died today from disease and hunger


I wonder what was the meaning of their lives

Or indeed the 20 000 who will die tomorrow?

Maybe they needed more faith.....?

I sense you're trying to make a point here but have struggled to do so.

Would you like to try again..... ?

[Jules2]

No I'm a monotheist.

“Remember, an easy question can have an easy answer. But a hard question must have a hard answer. And for the hardest questions of all, there may be no answer - except faith.”
― Charles Sheffield, Brother to Dragons

Some people on here assert that people of 'faith' believe without any shred of credible evidence, but that is simply not true - in my case at least. For example;

I believe in the Old Testament God - Yahweh, and if I was a Jew, I would be a 'Jew for Jesus' because I also firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. I believe that he lived, died on the cross and was resurrected.

I was not 'conditioned' into my beliefs by fanatically religious parents, nor by any absorption of religious doctrines at any of the schools I attended, and I was not exposed to any religious cult. Nor did I 'turn to God' in desperation as a result of some crisis in my life or nervous breakdown, as can happen with some people. I chose to believe.

From a young age, I was always curious about what life was all about, where did we come from, what the Cosmos really was, and a hundred other questions. As I got older, I literally, spent years seeking definitive answers to questions which I now know have no definitive answers. But, after delving (as deeply as I was intellectually able) into subjects as diverse as Agnosticism, through Christianity, Buddhism and Existentialism, to Deism, and even Ancient Astronaut theory, and after experimenting with mid-altering drugs like LSD, I 'gave up the ghost' and resorted to pure hedonism for a time.

Then, when I was in my late 20's, I witnessed something which was so unbelievable, so incredible, that I knew at that moment that there were some other laws at work in our universe besides the ones we have been taught to accept as 'natural'. I should add here, that 'no', I was not on drugs and hadn't touched LSD for years. Neither was I drunk or deluded, and also that this incident was witnessed by three other people - a young couple, who frankly 'were not the sharpest chisels in the box', knew what they'd witnessed, but seemed to merely accept it, metaphorically 'shrug' and subsequently seemed to give it no more thought. The third - a typical party loving, skirt chasing male - didn't change much publicly, but did become a regular church-goer - something I have never been drawn to because the 'Church' is man's creation and I don't believe in Man. Anyway, he spent a long time with me thereafter, privately analysing and discussing what we'd seen. Years have gone by, and he is still one of my close friends today.

At the time, I did not change much publicly either, but privately, I started to re-examine philosophy and religion.

I will state here that I do not believe without questioning. I do not question without seeking answers, and I do not blindly accept answers without further researching.

Anyway, I developed a belief in God. I haven't all the answers - if, indeed I have any - because I am mortal and ordinary, and not God, but my faith in God is built on both logic, and intuition. I cannot actually identify which God I believe in but I believe there is a God - some supernatural force, some entity - and I think of God as Yahweh, the Hebrew Old Testament God, largely because I firmly believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Messiah.

My belief in Jesus as the Christ is not only based on logic and intuition, but also on an acceptance that the evidence needed to justify such a belief, is both, preponderant and wholly convincing. So can I start with a case for the historical Jesus?

Can there really be any dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived 2000 years ago? Because, in addition to all the overwhelming Biblical testimony, there is a wealth of extraneous secular evidence. There is neither space here nor need to list comprehensively, so briefly:

Flavius Josephus - a Ist Century Romano-Jewish historian widely considered to be one of the greatest and most credible historians of antiquity. Josephus did not believe that Jesus Christ was the Son of God - and therefore denied Christianity, yet in his book 'The Antiquities of the Jews' he confirms that not only did Jesus Christ exist, but also corroborates the New Testament teachings about Christ, including the fact that Christ was Crucified on the cross under the orders of Pontius Pilate:

“Now, there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man, for he was a doer of wonderful works—a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him both many of the Jews, and many of the Gentiles. He was [the] Christ; and when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men amongst us, had condemned him to the cross, those that loved him at the first did not forsake him, for he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him; and the tribe of Christians, so named from him, are not extinct at this day.”

And:

“But the younger Ananus who, as we said, received the high priesthood, was of a bold disposition and exceptionally daring; he followed the party of the Sadducees, who are severe in judgment above all the Jews, as we have already shown. As therefore Ananus was of such a disposition, he thought he had now a good opportunity, as Festus was now dead, and Albinus was still on the road; so he assembled a council of judges, and brought before it the brother of Jesus the so-called Christ, whose name was James, together with some others, and having accused them as law-breakers, he delivered them over to be stoned.”

(It's very important here to bear in mind, that Josephus was not a Christian but an orthodox Jew, that his books were primarily written to recount the history of the world from a Jewish perspective for an ostensibly Roman audience, and that Christ was mentioned only incidentally and briefly in small passages which formed a very minuscule part of a huge tome.)

Tacitus - a Roman Historian 55-120AD. who - in his book the Annals - when writing of the 6 day fire which all but destroyed Rome (Nero fiddling while Rome burned) , wrote:

" Consequently, to get rid of the report, Nero fastened the guilt and inflicted the most exquisite tortures on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus (meaning 'Messiah') from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one of our procurators, Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome, where all things hideous and shameful from every part of the world find their centre and become popular. Accordingly, an arrest was first made of all who pleaded guilty; then, upon their information, an immense multitude was convicted, not so much of the crime of firing the city, as of hatred against mankind. Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt, to serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired.”

(Tacitus detested Christians but none-the-less confirms here the existence of Jesus, and His crucifixion on the cross. Further he corroborates that Pontius Pilate was the procurator who oversaw the crucifixion of Christ.)

Pliny the Younger - 61 AD – ca. 112 AD : Ancient Roman Lawyer, Magistrate and Author who is famous for a huge collection of letters which are an invaluable historical source, Pliny - accepted as honest and moderate - was relentless in pursuing Christians and in correspondence with the emperor Trajan, he asks the Emperor for instructions dealing with Christians and explained that he forced Christians to curse Christ under torture:

“They were accustomed to meet on a fixed day before dawn and sing responsively a hymn to Christ as to a god, and bound themselves to a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft, adultery, never to falsify their word, not to deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up. When this was over, it was their custom to depart and to assemble again to partake of a meal–but ordinary and innocent food.”

Tallus -- 1st century non-Christian historian. (Quoted by Julius Africanus -- 160 – c.240) in his 'Chronicles' explains the reason for it being so dark during the day time on the day of crucifixion of Jesus Christ:

“An eclipse of the sun ’unreasonably, as it seems to me (unreasonably of course, because a solar eclipse could not take place at the time of the full moon) and it was at the season of the Paschal full moon that Christ died.....”

(As a derider of Christ, Tallus tried to come up with a 'scientific' reason for the sky inexplicably darkening at Christ's crucifixion. Of course his 'scientific' explanation is nonsense, but this not only corroborates that Christ lived and was crucified, it also corroborates the biblical claim of the sky blackening at the hour of Christ's 'death')

Lucian of Samosate -- 115 AD -- was a Greek satirist and travelling lecturer who mocked Christians in his writing, but provided evidence that Jesus really did exist in doing so
:
“He was second only to that one whom they still worship today, the man in Palestine who was crucified because he brought this new form of initiation into the world.”

Seutonius-- 69/75 -- a Roman historian and author:

"The emperor Claudius reigned 41 to 54 AD. Suetonius reports his dealings with the eastern Roman Empire, that is, with Greece and Macedonia, and with the Lycians, Rhodians, and Trojans. He then reports that the emperor expelled the Jews from Rome, since they “constantly made disturbances at the instigation of Christ”

I do not think that any rational man can dispute that a man called Jesus Christ lived and died on the cross 2000 years ago. The evidence for this is simply overwhelming.

The evidence that Jesus was the Messiah is another post.

This is my opinion and I am not trying to indoctrinate or convert anyone else.


Hi ya Kirk, it is lovely to look at different things, I fully appreciate yours. I believed totally in Jesus as a child but my views have altered as to his position in the scheme of things.

It is said that Jesus and his mother Mary attended different schools of learning, the ones which taught the mind to tune into the energies around us. For this reason and because I cannot totally accept a "God" but accept a total energy which has been fractioned by the will of man, I do not feel that the Nazerene was the only son of god. For me he was a great teacher and man could have and should have learnt by his teachings. There are many which are naturally known and which we should listen to for our own sakes for if we touch a hot surface does it not burn?

I feel for one person to supposedly take on the sins of the world is rather a selfish attitude and it lets man off to a certain extent, we should each be responsible for our own so called misdemeanours. I also find it hard that man can only get to "God" through Jesus.

There is such a lot to question in my eyes but my mind is ever open, I never ever close any doors. The fact that we can discuss and learn from each other is a fantastic way forward.

Possibly at the end of day we will find that we are all talking about the same thing but expressing it in a different way:wavey:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I sense you're trying to make a point here but have struggled to do so.

Would you like to try again..... ?

I have every faith in your ability to dicipher my meaning brother Morsh

[Marsh.]

I have every faith in your ability to dicipher my meaning brother Morsh

20,000 children dying is evidence that there is no such thing as a God?

Ok, whatever you say. :spin:

[Jules2]

20 000 children died today from disease and hunger


I wonder what was the meaning of their lives

Or indeed the 20 000 who will die tomorrow?

Maybe they needed more faith.....?

No LT this is where the theory of karma and reincarnation comes into play, if it is the spirit we are trying to build upon, then it may have been their choice to be in such a position. It is a hard thing to accept as it brings into play the old saying of "I am alright Jack". Mind you having said that I guess that many of us have had their trials and tribulations, it is just having the faith to know that we will come out of it one way or another. The acceptance of eternal spiritual life is the ultimate reward.

[Crimson Dynamo]

No LT this is where the theory of karma and reincarnation comes into play, if it is the spirit we are trying to build upon, then it may have been their choice to be in such a position. It is a hard thing to accept as it brings into play the old saying of "I am alright Jack". Mind you having said that I guess that many of us have had their trials and tribulations, it is just having the faith to know that we will come out of it one way or another. The acceptance of eternal spiritual life is the ultimate reward.

I have no idea what you are going on about

[Kyle]

No LT this is where the theory of karma and reincarnation comes into play, if it is the spirit we are trying to build upon, then it may have been their choice to be in such a position. It is a hard thing to accept as it brings into play the old saying of "I am alright Jack". Mind you having said that I guess that many of us have had their trials and tribulations, it is just having the faith to know that we will come out of it one way or another. The acceptance of eternal spiritual life is the ultimate reward.

Did you just claim that the people who die of disease and starvation chose to put themselves in that position in a past life?

This is where belief becomes a bit dangerous in my eyes, when we start writing off atrocities as 'meant to be'.

[kirklancaster]

20,000 children dying is evidence that there is no such thing as a God?

Ok, whatever you say. :spin:

:thumbs:

What baffles me is; that whenever there's a tragedy in life, some people seize upon it to either blame God, or to proffer it as evidence that there is no God.

They're not really knocking men of faith by doing so, although that's the intention. because anyone who believes in a God also accepts there's a Devil (for want of a better word). All I say is why blame God? Why not blame the Devil.

In fact, as these 'men of science' only believe in the Laws of Nature, why aren't they all cursing and shaking fists at Mother Nature? :wavey:

[Kyle]

:thumbs:

What baffles me is; that whenever there's a tragedy in life, some people seize upon it to either blame God, or to proffer it as evidence that there is no God.

They're not really knocking men of faith by doing so, although that's the intention. because anyone who believes in a God also accepts there's a Devil (for want of a better word). All I say is why blame God? Why not blame the Devil.

In fact, as these 'men of science' only believe in the Laws of Nature, why aren't they all cursing and shaking fists at Mother Nature? :wavey:

Because nobody is claiming that nature is omnipotent, omnibenevolant and omniscient.

Blaming the devil for pestilence and disease is pretty hilarious tbh. Blaming a woman for listening to a talking snake for all mankind's woe's today is like something out of a fantasy book.

[Crimson Dynamo]

:thumbs:

What baffles me is; that whenever there's a tragedy in life, some people seize upon it to either blame God, or to proffer it as evidence that there is no God.

They're not really knocking men of faith by doing so, although that's the intention. because anyone who believes in a God also accepts there's a Devil (for want of a better word). All I say is why blame God? Why not blame the Devil.

In fact, as these 'men of science' only believe in the Laws of Nature, why aren't they all cursing and shaking fists at Mother Nature? :wavey:

"that whenever there's a tragedy in life"

20, 000 die every day 365 days of the year


Jesus Christ on a Bike.


oh and mother nature also does not exist

:facepalm:

[Ammi]

Not read a good old God debate on here in a while LOL. I live my life under the assumption there is no God and that works for me.

I don't think about the meaning of life to much. Might as well just get on with it.

..:laugh:..good times eh, Joe...