A Vision of Jesus

[kirklancaster]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[billy123]

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

[arista]

http://afreuda.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/small-dawkins_the-god-delusion.jpg

I can take it any place



Jesus is a fable

[kirklancaster]

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

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

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

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

[Kyle]

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



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

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

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

[Crimson Dynamo]

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

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

[kirklancaster]

http://afreuda.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/small-dawkins_the-god-delusion.jpg

I can take it any place

Jesus is a fable

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

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

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

[MTVN]

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

[kirklancaster]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Kyle]

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

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

[Crimson Dynamo]

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

[Kyle]

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

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

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

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

[kirklancaster]

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

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

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

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

[Crimson Dynamo]

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

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

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


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

[Kyle]

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

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

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

[Niamh.]

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

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

Yeah exactly.

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

[kirklancaster]

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

:hehe:

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

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

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

[Kyle]

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

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

[Kyle]

:hehe:

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

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

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

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

[kirklancaster]

Yeah exactly.

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

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

[Kyle]

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

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

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

[kirklancaster]

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

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

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

[kirklancaster]

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

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

She hails from Birmingham Kyle. :joker:

[Niamh.]

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

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

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

[Kyle]

She hails from Birmingham Kyle. :joker:

Christian country.

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

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

[Niamh.]

Christian country.

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

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

Eeeeeeeexactly

[Crimson Dynamo]

I would imagine she had many tales told to her as a child about Jesus and how he was good and saves people etc and she, when under extreme conditions, reached for anything.

And how does the op know she is grounded and rational - it sounds like she is not rational at all based on the op's evidence?

[Niamh.]

lol Imagine Richard Dawkins appearing to her, "sorry love just here to confirm that there is no God"

[Kyle]

lol Imagine Richard Dawkins appearing to her, "sorry love just here to confirm that there is no God"

"Buy my book, you heathen. Sincerely Arista....uh I mean Richard"

[kirklancaster]

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

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

Yes, but I'm referring to her 'vision' as inspirational rather than God due to the fact that she was atheist. Surely, it's highly improbable that an atheist would 'conjure' up Jesus to bring her comfort and strengthen her resolve, when she has never believed in him. She had 'accepted' that she was going to be murdered, and being an atheist, I would think that in her very dire circumstances, she would find solace in an atheist figurehead like Dawkins who represented what she believed in, and certainly not Jesus.

Stephanie hailed from Birmingham which probably has as many Mosques as anywhere else in the country, so being atheist, she was probably just as exposed to the Islamic religion, people, and 'trappings', as Christianity, or any other religion - none of which she believed in.

[Niamh.]

Yes, but I'm referring to her 'vision' as inspirational rather than God due to the fact that she was atheist. Surely, it's highly improbable that an atheist would 'conjure' up Jesus to bring her comfort and strengthen her resolve, when she has never believed in him. She had 'accepted' that she was going to be murdered, and being an atheist, I would think that in her very dire circumstances, she would find solace in an atheist figurehead like Dawkins who represented what she believed in, and certainly not Jesus.

Stephanie hailed from Birmingham which probably has as many Mosques as anywhere else in the country, so being atheist, she was probably just as exposed to the Islamic religion, people, and 'trappings', as Christianity, or any other religion - none of which she believed in.

Why on Earth would anyone, athiest or not find some sort of comfort from conjuring up Richard Dawkins? Besides the fact that he's still alive, he's not someone who your mind would think of to draw any sort of comfort from? My last post was a joke but it does apply here, What would he appear to tell her? "Congratulations Stephanie you were right, there is no God, If there was why would he let this horrible thing happen to you? Well, I'm off to rub salt in some Christian kidnappees wounds now, see ya later!"

"Stephanie" doesn't sound like a very Muslim name, England is a Christian country :shrug: If she had seen "Allah" would you be sitting here saying why not Jesus, it must be true?

[Kyle]

Yes, but I'm referring to her 'vision' as inspirational rather than God due to the fact that she was atheist. Surely, it's highly improbable that an atheist would 'conjure' up Jesus to bring her comfort and strengthen her resolve, when she has never believed in him. She had 'accepted' that she was going to be murdered, and being an atheist, I would think that in her very dire circumstances, she would find solace in an atheist figurehead like Dawkins who represented what she believed in, and certainly not Jesus.

Stephanie hailed from Birmingham which probably has as many Mosques as anywhere else in the country, so being atheist, she was probably just as exposed to the Islamic religion, people, and 'trappings', as Christianity, or any other religion - none of which she believed in.

It is improbable. I don't see other masses of rape victims turning to Jesus. What we have here is a single testimony of a lady under extreme duress may I add as she was kept for many days against her own volition.

Let's not forget 'visions' are not and never will be 'proof' because they are personal and cannot be corroborated. Do you believe Joseph C Smith was visited by Jesus and directed to form the church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints?

[kirklancaster]

lol Imagine Richard Dawkins appearing to her, "sorry love just here to confirm that there is no God"

So as a logical extension then Niamh - can we expect all Atheists at the hour of their death to suddenly start frantically believing? Why would an Atheist suddenly need confirmation that there is no God?

And I cannot accept that the sub-conscious mind of an Atheist would project a vision of Christ no matter how dire the circumstances she was in.

Unless - deep down inside her conscious - she was never really Atheist at all.

[kirklancaster]

It is improbable. I don't see other masses of rape victims turning to Jesus. What we have here is a single testimony of a lady under extreme duress may I add as she was kept for many days against her own volition.

Let's not forget 'visions' are not and never will be 'proof' because they are personal and cannot be corroborated. Do you believe Joseph C Smith was visited by Jesus and directed to form the church of Jesus Christ and Latter Day Saints?

No Kyle, I do not believe that Joseph Smith was visited by an angel called Moroni, because - unlike Christ - there is no corroboration for his claim, as with the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.

But in any event I do not offer Stephanie's experience as any kind of 'proof' - a 'vision' can never be - what I'm asking, is given that she was an Atheist, why was her vision of Christ?

[Niamh.]

So as a logical extension then Niamh - can we expect all Atheists at the hour of their death to suddenly start frantically believing? Why would an Atheist suddenly need confirmation that there is no God?

You're the one asking why she didn't see Richard Dawkins not me:laugh: and no I don't believe you can come to that "logical conclusion" because of one case you heard about :shrug: There are also people who lose their faith in God when bad things happen to them, it works both ways :shrug:



And I cannot accept that the sub-conscious mind of an Atheist would project a vision of Christ no matter how dire the circumstances she was in.

Unless - deep down inside her conscious - she was never really Atheist at all.


Why not? imo this woman sounds like she had some sort of mental breakdown (understandably so) and as a coping mechanism her mind drew on a "saviour" for her. How could anyone possibly speculate on how an atheist or anyone else would react when in such a horrible situation?

[Kyle]

No Kyle, I do not believe that Joseph Smith was visited by an angel called Moroni, because - unlike Christ - there is no corroboration for his claim, as with the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.

But in any event I do not offer Stephanie's experience as any kind of 'proof' - a 'vision' can never be - what I'm asking, is given that she was an Atheist, why was her vision of Christ?

He also claimed to see two personages which are assumed to be Jesus Christ and God the father.

[Crimson Dynamo]

"It was an image from the handkerchief of St Veronica that I had seen many years ago as a child, in Godshill church in the Isle of Wight, when we were on holiday. I'm not a religious person"

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/welcome-to-her-nightmare-1571909.html

She does not say she is an atheist and she conjured up an image from her mind she saw as a child

:facepalm:

[kirklancaster]

He also claimed to see two personages which are assumed to be Jesus Christ and God the father.

Yes you're right Kyle, I wasn't meaning to 'dilute' your statement's validity, I used his vision of 'Moroni' because I think it's such a contrived B.S. name and it for me underlines why I don't accept his 'visions'. (maybe I shouldn't have got so pissed last night).

[kirklancaster]

"It was an image from the handkerchief of St Veronica that I had seen many years ago as a child, in Godshill church in the Isle of Wight, when we were on holiday. I'm not a religious person"

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/welcome-to-her-nightmare-1571909.html

She does not say she is an atheist and she conjured up an image from her mind she saw as a child

:facepalm:

In other articles she does say she was an atheist and it still does not answer my original question LT - why Jesus?.

[Niamh.]

In other articles she does say she was an atheist and it still does not answer my original question LT - why Jesus?.

:umm2:

It was an image from the handkerchief of St Veronica that I hadseen many years ago as a child, in Godshill church in the Isle of Wight, when we were on holiday.

[Crimson Dynamo]

In other articles she does say she was an atheist and it still does not answer my original question LT - why Jesus?.



the hanky....


:hehe:


http://hoocher.com/El_Greco/Saint_Veronica_Holding_the_Veil_ca_1580_Spain.jpg

[kirklancaster]

You're the one asking why she didn't see Richard Dawkins not me:laugh: and no I don't believe you can come to that "logical conclusion" because of one case you heard about :shrug: There are also people who lose their faith in God when bad things happen to them, it works both ways :shrug:

I agree, but to be fair, I'm not concerned here with them, I was specifically asking in this case why Jesus?


Why not? imo this woman sounds like she had some sort of mental breakdown (understandably so) and as a coping mechanism her mind drew on a "saviour" for her. How could anyone possibly speculate on how an atheist or anyone else would react when in such a horrible situation?

Yes, your view is plausible, but if Stephanie Slater herself is adamant that she was not having a mental breakdown, then why should I reach for other explanations? And why Christ as a 'coping mechanism'?

As to speculation Niamh, that's 'the nature of the beast' here, because on a host of subjects - not just religious ones - we cannot know but can only air speculative opinion. So my speculative opinion is no less valid than yours.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Yes, your view is plausible, but if Stephanie Slater herself is adamant that she was not having a mental breakdown, then why should I reach for other explanations? And why Christ as a 'coping mechanism'?

As to speculation Niamh, that's 'the nature of the beast' here, because on a host of subjects - not just religious ones - we cannot know but can only air speculative opinion. So my speculative opinion is no less valid than yours.

My speculative opinion is that I dont think many people will be supporting her viewpoint...

[kirklancaster]

the hanky....


:hehe:


http://hoocher.com/El_Greco/Saint_Veronica_Holding_the_Veil_ca_1580_Spain.jpg

I know what the Veronica Cloth is LT, and the Mandylion, and the Shroud of Turin, and the Sudarium of Oviedo - without having to google them.

What in don't know is; why the 'eheh'?

[Niamh.]

Yes, your view is plausible, but if Stephanie Slater herself is adamant that she was not having a mental breakdown, then why should I reach for other explanations? And why Christ as a 'coping mechanism'?

As to speculation Niamh, that's 'the nature of the beast' here, because on a host of subjects - not just religious ones - we cannot know but can only air speculative opinion. So my speculative opinion is no less valid than yours.

Why not Christ? "He's" a well known saviour type figure(who she'd obviously had some sort of experience with before as the vision was a memory of some handkerchief she saw as a kid), no matter who she envisioned you could say "why him/her?" If you're in a situation where you think you're going to die and you're scared about that then logically speaking a deity of some sort would be the ideal comfort to reach for, don't you think?

I never said your speculation was less valid than mine, I'm simply pointing out that everyones mind is different, everyones way of coping with situations is different :shrug:

[Niamh.]

Deleted some posts. Can people stay ontopic please

[Livia]

Who is ripping the piss out of her Livia? The discussion is about whether or not this proves there is a God.....that's what everyone in here was doing

lol Imagine Richard Dawkins appearing to her, "sorry love just here to confirm that there is no God"

the hanky....


:hehe:

with image...


No, his message was that religion (the jewish religion specifically) was wrong, but his message that religion was wrong was totally lost on the IDIOTS in this world, instead they just made him INTO a religion.

Stupid people will always find a way to be more stupid.


It's the same as any thread about religion. The sniggering and the lols that insinuate people who don't believe in God are somehow superior because people who DO believe are obviously gullible and not quite so intelligent. There's Alex calling people stupid and "idiots"... honestly, it wears me out.

I don't care whether you believe in God or not, or whether Trumpet or anyone else doesn't believe but I feel people who do believe have to constantly defend themselves from the ridicule.

The truth is, I have as much evidence that God exists as anyone on here has of him not existing - ie: none.

[billy123]

Deleted some posts. Can people stay ontopic pleaseAmen to that.

http://funny-pictures-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/god_funny.jpg

[Livia]

Amen to that. :hehe:

http://funny-pictures-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/god_funny.jpg

As if to illustrate my point.

[Niamh.]

I did not intend this to be a discussion of whether this proves there is a God Niamh - I posed the question why would an atheist see a vision of Jesus as opposed to other deities or even inspirational figures from her life.

Up to now, though you have certainly not agreed with me, you've given your view that it is a 'coping mechanism' which helped her in her lowest hour, which I do not agree with, but is a very valid view, and the type of response I was looking forward to.

I did not intend this to be about God, and didn't invite illogical rants or piss taking - neither of which I'm accusing you of, but which have appeared just the same.

Well, I took your question to imply that if a rational, grounded athiest was shown a vision of Jesus, does this prove that there is a God but whatever I think my posts applied to the topic anyway :laugh:

[Niamh.]

It's the same as any thread about religion. The sniggering and the lols that insinuate people who don't believe in God are somehow superior because people who DO believe are obviously gullible and not quite so intelligent. There's Alex calling people stupid and "idiots"... honestly, it wears me out.

I don't care whether you believe in God or not, or whether Trumpet or anyone else doesn't believe but I feel people who do believe have to constantly defend themselves from the ridicule.

The truth is, I have as much evidence that God exists as anyone on here has of him not existing - ie: none.

My post that you've quoted wasn't "ripping the piss" out of that girl at all and I find it extremely insulting that you would accuse me of "ripping the piss" out of a woman who suffered such a horrible crime. If anything I was making a joke of the suggestion by Kirk (sorry kirk, it was lighthearted) that anyone would see a vision of Richard Dawkins in a situation like that

[billy123]

As if to illustrate my point.What do you expect in reply to your condescending post Livia.

[Livia]

My post that you've quoted wasn't "ripping the piss" out of that girl at all and I find it extremely insulting that you would accuse me of "ripping the piss" out of a woman who suffered such a horrible crime. If anything I was making a joke of the suggestion by Kirk (sorry kirk, it was lighthearted) that anyone would see a vision of Richard Dawkins in a situation like that

Well, I'm sorry you're insulted, Niamh, but I did find your post to be ridiculing the woman in that situation, regardless of how it was meant.

What do you expect in reply to your condescending post Livia.

Bob, every thread that has anything to do with God and religion ends the same way. Please don't try to pretend your post was a reaction to what I said. You probably would have posted it anyway despite the fact this is supposed to be 'serious debates'. People who believe in God are always ridiculed on here, but any time someone bites back, it's condescending.

I have yet to see a serious religious person on this forum ridicule and try to belittle atheists. It's just a shame that doesn't work in reverse.

[kirklancaster]

I dont think anyone is ripping the piss, the comments are rather normal and logical

What she said was she saw an image from something she saw as a child and KL is somehow trying to make it all supernatural

with very little success

If you say that her vision was psychologically induced in a time of great stress, and was based on something she saw in childhood which was buried deep in her subconscious - as opposed to her Atheist conscious - then that is a perfectly feasible and valid viewpoint. But you have not the right to presume that I am "somehow trying to make it all supernatural" , because that was not in my original premise.

I merely posed the question,of why did an atheist see a vision of Jesus, as opposed to other deities or even inspirational figures from her own life.

[Nedusa]

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

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

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

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

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

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

The Brain does indeed play some strange tricks on people when they are under conditions of extreme stress or hunger or dehydration (or a combination of all 3).

I suggest that the brain increased the amount of endorphines/adrenaline and/or endogenous Dimethyltryptamine which is found in very small quantities in the pineal gland.

These chemicals , scientists say are responsible in part for the wild dream state and other out of body states in which hallucinations are experienced.

Maybe in this womans extremely disturbed state she had these visions. And as she survived her ordeal part of her may have attributed the vision as being a sign from a Deity.

This vision could have been the sign that a confirmed atheist would need in order to start believing.

On the other hand, it may actually have been a vision from Christ....




.

[Crimson Dynamo]

If you say that her vision was psychologically induced in a time of great stress, and was based on something she saw in childhood which was buried deep in her subconscious - as opposed to her Atheist conscious - then that is a perfectly feasible and valid viewpoint. But you have not the right to presume that I am "somehow trying to make it all supernatural" , because that was not in my original premise.

I merely posed the question,of why did an atheist see a vision of Jesus, as opposed to other deities or even inspirational figures from her own life.

and you have had your answer from many diff posters

its hardly rocket science

[Niamh.]

Well, I'm sorry you're insulted, Niamh, but I did find your post to be ridiculing the woman in that situation, regardless of how it was meant.



Bob, every thread that has anything to do with God and religion ends the same way. Please don't try to pretend your post was a reaction to what I said. You probably would have posted it anyway despite the fact this is supposed to be 'serious debates'. People who believe in God are always ridiculed on here, but any time someone bites back, it's condescending.

I have yet to see a serious religious person on this forum ridicule and try to belittle atheists. It's just a shame that doesn't work in reverse.

How was I ridiculing the woman? It was Kirk that suggested someone seeing Richard Dawkins, that idea to me is really funny, why would anyone see a vision of Richard Dawkins, he's not exactly a comforting figure. Glad to know you think that lowly of me though that I'd mock a woman who was kidnapped and raped, cheers for that.

[billy123]

Bob, every thread that has anything to do with God and religion ends the same way. Please don't try to pretend your post was a reaction to what I said. You probably would have posted it anyway despite the fact this is supposed to be 'serious debates'. People who believe in God are always ridiculed on here, but any time someone bites back, it's condescending.

I have yet to see a serious religious person on this forum ridicule and try to belittle atheists. It's just a shame that doesn't work in reverse.
You entered the thread with the default standpoint of your point of view being superior to anybody else's that has shown the audacity to not be religious and that to not be religious is somehow offensive and inferior. I have never passed judgement on anybodys religion nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs but it pisses me off when anybody of any religion jumps on the superiority train or even (as the opening post in this thread suggested before it was edited) trys to suggest their standpoint is in any way better than anybody elses.
The victim standpoint is just low if you are going to jump on the this is always the way they react train then expect to get picked up on it.


edit: Damn this is a crap post but yes Livia you annoyed me :flowers:

[kirklancaster]

You entered the thread with the default standpoint of your point of view being superior to anybody else's that has shown the audacity to not be religious and that to not be religious is somehow offensive and inferior. I have never passed judgement on anybodys religion nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs but it pisses me off when anybody of any religion jumps on the superiority train or even (as the opening post in this thread suggested before it was edited) trys to suggest their standpoint is in any way better than anybody elses.
The victim standpoint is just low if you are going to jump on the this is always the way they react train then expect to get picked up on it.

edit: Damn this is a crap post but yes Livia you annoyed me :flowers:

????????????????????????? And how did you deduce that from me stating that in my opinion most atheists ask a question of people of faith, then refuse to listen to, or accept the answer, usually through bigotry. No I did not specifically use the words; "In my opinion" but I expected that this much would be clear based on the fact it is me posting.

I edited that line out purely because I am a reasonable person, didn't realise that it could be misconstrued, and did not mean to cause unnecessary offence which was not my intention.

I don't know you or how many posts on these various 'religious' threads you have actually read, but you are way off the mark if you really think it is 'anybody of religion' who 'jumps on the superiority train' because - in my opinion - the polar opposite is true, and as Livia so rightly points out, it is people of faith who dare to post who are immediately berated, made to appear like 'nutters', and put on the defensive.

[kirklancaster]

And let us not forget how the thread started



" Originally Posted by kirklancaster "

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


Kirk later omitted this when it was pointed out by Kyle

So what's you point. Read my response to other posts of a similar ilk to save me duplicating.

[kirklancaster]

and you have had your answer from many diff posters

its hardly rocket science

It's not science at all - and neither are your responses which you seem to pass off as irrefutable truths.

[lostalex]

the truths, jesus never claimed to be god. it was his acolytes that used his name to gain power.

Jesus never claimed to be the son of God, he said that we are ALL children of God.

[kirklancaster]

The Brain does indeed play some strange tricks on people when they are under conditions of extreme stress or hunger or dehydration (or a combination of all 3).

I suggest that the brain increased the amount of endorphines/adrenaline and/or endogenous Dimethyltryptamine which is found in very small quantities in the pineal gland.

These chemicals , scientists say are responsible in part for the wild dream state and other out of body states in which hallucinations are experienced.

Maybe in this womans extremely disturbed state she had these visions. And as she survived her ordeal part of her may have attributed the vision as being a sign from a Deity.

This vision could have been the sign that a confirmed atheist would need in order to start believing.

On the other hand, it may actually have been a vision from Christ....

.

Excellent Nedusa.

[billy123]

????????????????????????? And how did you deduce that from me stating that in my opinion most atheists ask a question of people of faith, then refuse to listen to, or accept the answer, usually through bigotry. No I did not specifically use the words; "In my opinion" but I expected that this much would be clear based on the fact it is me posting.

I edited that line out purely because I am a reasonable person, didn't realise that it could be misconstrued, and did not mean to cause unnecessary offence which was not my intention.

I don't know you or how many posts on these various 'religious' threads you have actually read, but you are way off the mark if you really think it is 'anybody of religion' who 'jumps on the superiority train' because - in my opinion - the polar opposite is true, and as Livia so rightly points out, it is people of faith who dare to post who are immediately berated, made to appear like 'nutters', and put on the defensive.Thats a lot of question marks.
Can you point me to the post where someone called you a nutter please because i dont see it i think you might have confused people who dont hold the same viewpoint as you thinking people are calling you a nutter. :shrug:

You need to calm down a bit and then you might stand a chance of not offending people before you have even finished making your point and pretending someone made you look like a nutter when they didnt just comes across as a bit strange.
All the best to you though and have a great day.

[kirklancaster]

It's the same as any thread about religion. The sniggering and the lols that insinuate people who don't believe in God are somehow superior because people who DO believe are obviously gullible and not quite so intelligent. There's Alex calling people stupid and "idiots"... honestly, it wears me out.

I don't care whether you believe in God or not, or whether Trumpet or anyone else doesn't believe but I feel people who do believe have to constantly defend themselves from the ridicule.

The truth is, I have as much evidence that God exists as anyone on here has of him not existing - ie: none.

First Livia, I am sorry that your post has brought you so much flak. Secondly, I endorse everything you have to say. It is B.S. to say; "nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs ..." as BobNot does, then go on to post the 'flag' and comment "Amen to that". Just as its B.S. for LT to needlessly post an image of the Veronica Cloth, call it "an hankie", then add a "TeeHee" emoticon, if he isn't taking the piss and ridiculing.

Don't get me wrong, I couldn't give a flying monkeys, because - as I said earlier, I am 1000% rock solid in my beliefs, very comfortable in my own skin, and know what I know.

[billy123]

First Livia, I am sorry that your post has brought you so much flak. Secondly, I endorse everything you have to say. It is B.S. to say; "nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs ..." as BobNot does, then go on to post the 'flag' and comment "Amen to that". Just as its B.S. for LT to needlessly post an image of the Veronica Cloth, call it "an hankie", then add a "TeeHee" emoticon, if he isn't taking the piss and ridiculing.

Don't get me wrong, I couldn't give a flying monkeys, because - as I said earlier, I am 1000% rock solid in my beliefs, very comfortable in my own skin, and know what I know.
what flag did i post.
Can you tell me please why you are so offended and put out by the fact i dont subscribe to your brand of religion.

[Crimson Dynamo]

It's not science at all - and neither are your responses which you seem to pass off as irrefutable truths.

it is science, it is a story about the brain and human stress

[kirklancaster]

Thats a lot of question marks.
Can you point me to the post where someone called you a nutter please because i dont see it i think you might have confused people who dont hold the same viewpoint as you thinking people are calling you a nutter. :shrug:

You need to calm down a bit and then you might stand a chance of not offending people before you have even finished making your point and pretending someone made you look like a nutter when they didnt just comes across as a bit strange.
All the best to you though and have a great day.

Thank you Bobnot, and you have a good day too.

I didn't actually say that anyone had called me a 'nutter', I said 'made to appear like 'nutters'.

[Niamh.]

First Livia, I am sorry that your post has brought you so much flak. Secondly, I endorse everything you have to say. It is B.S. to say; "nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs ..." as BobNot does, then go on to post the 'flag' and comment "Amen to that". Just as its B.S. for LT to needlessly post an image of the Veronica Cloth, call it "an hankie", then add a "TeeHee" emoticon, if he isn't taking the piss and ridiculing.

Don't get me wrong, I couldn't give a flying monkeys, because - as I said earlier, I am 1000% rock solid in my beliefs, very comfortable in my own skin, and know what I know.

Can I remind you Kirk that you were the one who started this thread and invited the discussion, you posted this story without a link so LT found a link to the story himself and got more information on it then you gave. The Veronica Cloth was referred to as a Handkerchief by the lady herself and imo was a major piece of this story that was omitted, as it shows that Stephanie was in fact recalling a memory. When you were asking Why Jesus and not anyone else, this kind of gives that answer or atleast a possible answer

[Crimson Dynamo]

Can I remind you Kirk that you were the one who started this thread and invited the discussion, you posted this story without a link so LT found a link to the story himself and got more information on it then you gave. The Veronica Cloth was referred to as a Handkerchief by the lady herself and imo was a major piece of this story that was omitted as it shows that Stephanie was in fact recalling a memory when you were asking Why Jesus and not anyone else, this kind of gives that answer or atleast a possible answer

Bang on right neem

:thumbs:

The fact she recalled a picture of jesus from an image that had an effect on her as a child is of course key but isnt that supernatural

I get the feeling its this lady's way of dealing with her own situation and I think we should leave it at that

[billy123]

Thank you Bobnot, and you have a good day too.

I didn't actually say that anyone had called me a 'nutter', I said 'made to appear like 'nutters'.Look im not a religious person nor do i judge anyone that is religious infact i don't judge anybody based on belief,sexuality,colour of skin or anything other than how they behave as a person i treat them based on how they treat me and that's it everyone is equal and i wish everyone thought the same.

[Niamh.]

Bang on right neem

:thumbs:

The fact she recalled a picture of jesus from an image that had an effect on her as a child is of course key but isnt that supernatural

I get the feeling its this lady's way of dealing with her own situation and I think we should leave it at that

Yeah, I'm done now tbh, I thought we were having a pretty civilised discussion about it but clearly I was mistaken

[kirklancaster]

it is science, it is a story about the brain and human stress

You are presuming and passing off your presumption as fact. A psychological reason for her 'vision' is just one of the potential reasons, and is - like any others - hypothesis, not irrefutable fact. So while exploring that reason in this context is perfectly valid and fulfills the brief, it is ludicrous to proffer an hypothesis as fact.

[kirklancaster]

Yeah, I'm done now tbh, I thought we were having a pretty civilised discussion about it but clearly I was mistaken

I'm sorry to hear this Niamh, because genuinely, I felt your posts fulfilled the brief, and for myself I did not take any umbrage at anything you said. I posted what I did to secure intelligent viewpoints and though yours were counter to my beliefs, that is exactly what I got from you.

I even understood your little 'rise' about Dawkins because -to be honest - I did put his name in there through a sense of mischief. :hehe:

Anyway, thanks for the brief exchange.

[Niamh.]

I'm sorry to hear this Niamh, because genuinely, I felt your posts fulfilled the brief, and for myself I did not take any umbrage at anything you said. I posted what I did to secure intelligent viewpoints and though yours were counter to my beliefs, that is exactly what I got from you.

I even understood your little 'rise' about Dawkins because -to be honest - I did put his name in there through a sense of mischief. :hehe:

Anyway, thanks for the brief exchange.

No worries :love:

[kirklancaster]

Look im not a religious person nor do i judge anyone that is religious infact i don't judge anybody based on belief,sexuality,colour of skin or anything other than how they behave as a person i treat them based on how they treat me and that's it everyone is equal and i wish everyone thought the same.

Ok mate - I accept what you're saying and actually agree with you. I wish everyone was the same.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I am perched for the Turin Shroud thread tomorrow...

[kirklancaster]

I am perched for the Turin Shroud thread tomorrow...

You are a very, very funny and witty person LT, but you have just proved the old adage; 'Many a true word spoken in jest', and I am seriously thinking of starting a thread on just that topic ------ Or maybe not. :joker:

[Northern Monkey]

Yeah exactly.

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

This is what i was going to say(type) too.This imo is a far more likely scenario than Jesus showing up AFTER she was raped to tell her everything's ok.

[Northern Monkey]

You are a very, very funny and witty person LT, but you have just proved the old adage; 'Many a true word spoken in jest', and I am seriously thinking of starting a thread on just that topic ------ Or maybe not. :joker:

This is weird.As i read this post Terry Wogan just said on telly "many a true word spoken in jest",For real.

[Crimson Dynamo]

This is weird.As i read this post Terry Wogan just said on telly "many a true word spoken in jest",For real.

dont get him on about synchronisity

:nono:

[Livia]

How was I ridiculing the woman? It was Kirk that suggested someone seeing Richard Dawkins, that idea to me is really funny, why would anyone see a vision of Richard Dawkins, he's not exactly a comforting figure. Glad to know you think that lowly of me though that I'd mock a woman who was kidnapped and raped, cheers for that.

I don't think lowly of you. Neither did I say you were mocking the woman per se, but mocking the situation. I consider you my friend, but we're allowed to disagree.

[Livia]

You entered the thread with the default standpoint of your point of view being superior to anybody else's that has shown the audacity to not be religious and that to not be religious is somehow offensive and inferior. I have never passed judgement on anybodys religion nor have i ever ridiculed anybody for their beliefs but it pisses me off when anybody of any religion jumps on the superiority train or even (as the opening post in this thread suggested before it was edited) trys to suggest their standpoint is in any way better than anybody elses.
The victim standpoint is just low if you are going to jump on the this is always the way they react train then expect to get picked up on it.


edit: Damn this is a crap post but yes Livia you annoyed me :flowers:


Bob, I have never viewed my standpoint on religion as being superior to anyone. I don't expect people to accept my religion and I would never say it was right and others' beliefs were wrong, nor would I encourage anyone to think anything but what they want to think. If people don't believe, that's up to them and I totally respect their right to believe in anything they like, or not to believe in anything. It just saddens me that whenever there's a discussion about religion people who don't believe give the impression that people who do believe are stupid. I don't even think people realise they're doing it! On the "what religion are you" thread, Niamh (I love you Niamh, but you did say this...) said "I was a Catholic until I was old enough to think for myself", suggesting that people who are religious can't think for themselves.

I would just like people to cut others some slack when it comes to religion. Disagree with it, argue against it, but you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than I have that he does.

Sorry I annoyed you Bob, but your pic annoyed me too x

[Niamh.]

I don't think lowly of you. Neither did I say you were mocking the woman per se, but mocking the situation. I consider you my friend, but we're allowed to disagree.

Everything I said when I was talking about actual events surrounding that woman were respectful, I have nothing but sympathy for her. What I said about Richard Dawkins appearing in a vision was directed at Kirks rather absurd (and he admitted himself, he said it for a bit of mischief) suggestion that an atheist should be more likely to have a vision of Richard Dawkins. Yes of course we can disagree on a topic Livia, I have no issue with that but being told that my comments were ridiculling a woman who's been kidnapped and raped, I just find insulting.

[Livia]

Everything I said when I was talking about actual events surrounding that woman were respectful, I have nothing but sympathy for her. What I said about Richard Dawkins appearing in a vision was directed at Kirks rather absurd (and he admitted himself, he said it for a bit of mischief) suggestion that an atheist should be more likely to have a vision of Richard Dawkins. Yes of course we can disagree on a topic Livia, I have no issue with that but being told that my comments were ridiculling a woman who's been kidnapped and raped, I just find insulting.

I didn't mean it like that Niamh, and I apologise unreservedly if I have offended you x

[Niamh.]

I didn't mean it like that Niamh, and I apologise unreservedly if I have offended you x

OK :love:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Jesus would be proud of you both

[Livia]

Jesus would be proud of you both

Who?

[Niamh.]

:hehe:

[Dollface]

I agree with pretty much everything Livia said (especially the "you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than i have that he does) so true.

I watched the documentary about Stephanie Slater, really horrible what she went through.
My uncle (who sadly is now an angel) was an Atheist, but he saw God whilst he was in hospital with a serious illness. I know peoples minds can play tricks on them when they're in a state of shock or whatever but my uncle really believed he saw God (even though he'd been an Atheist his whole life) and i believe he did too.

[kirklancaster]

This is what i was going to say(type) too.This imo is a far more likely scenario than Jesus showing up AFTER she was raped to tell her everything's ok.

It didn't happen quite like that Eyeball, Jesus never said anything. It was just a 'vision' of him she saw.

[kirklancaster]

This is weird.As i read this post Terry Wogan just said on telly "many a true word spoken in jest",For real.

Synchronicity - another thing LT won't accept even if faced by 10,000 cases of hard evidence from people on here or anywhere for that matter.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I agree with pretty much everything Livia said (especially the "you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than i have that he does) so true.

I watched the documentary about Stephanie Slater, really horrible what she went through.
My uncle (who sadly is now an angel) was an Atheist, but he saw God whilst he was in hospital with a serious illness. I know peoples minds can play tricks on them when they're in a state of shock or whatever but my uncle really believed he saw God (even though he'd been an Atheist his whole life) and i believe he did too.

My mum thought she had a mouse in her shed for a week once and would not go into it - when i got there it turned out to be an old banana. She was truly convinced it was a mouse.

I believe she thought she did too.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Synchronicity - another thing LT won't accept even if faced by 10,000 cases of hard evidence from people on here or anywhere for that matter.

10,000 cases?

2 people on Tibb have had a coincidence in about a month

:joker:

[Livia]

I agree with pretty much everything Livia said (especially the "you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than i have that he does) so true.

I watched the documentary about Stephanie Slater, really horrible what she went through.
My uncle (who sadly is now an angel) was an Atheist, but he saw God whilst he was in hospital with a serious illness. I know peoples minds can play tricks on them when they're in a state of shock or whatever but my uncle really believed he saw God (even though he'd been an Atheist his whole life) and i believe he did too.

I remember reading an account of when Apple's Steve Jobs died. As he was dying he is reported to have looked past his family and his last words were, "Oh wow, oh wow, oh wow..." Who knows what he saw? Who knows whether it was real, or whether it was a misfiring synapse somewhere in his hippocampus throwing up an old memory? No one knows and no one will know until their time is up. Until then, this event obviously gave comfort to his family and to others with terminal illness, and I can't see that as a bad thing.

[Livia]

My mum thought she had a mouse in her shed for a week once and would not go into it - when i got there it turned out to be an old banana. She was truly convinced it was a mouse.

I believe she thought she did too.

That's a lovely story, Trumpet.

[Niamh.]

I remember reading an account of when Apple's Steve Jobs died. As he was dying he is reported to have looked past his family and his law words were, "Oh wow, oh wow, oh wow..." Who knows what he saw? Who knows whether it was real, or whether it was a misfiring synapse somewhere in his hippocampus throwing up an old memory? No one knows and no one will know until their time is up. Until then, this event obviously gave comfort to his family and to others with terminal illness, and I can't see that as a bad thing.

This I agree with :love:

[Livia]

This I agree with :love:

Dream team back on track x

[Dollface]

I remember reading an account of when Apple's Steve Jobs died. As he was dying he is reported to have looked past his family and his last words were, "Oh wow, oh wow, oh wow..." Who knows what he saw? Who knows whether it was real, or whether it was a misfiring synapse somewhere in his hippocampus throwing up an old memory? No one knows and no one will know until their time is up. Until then, this event obviously gave comfort to his family and to others with terminal illness, and I can't see that as a bad thing.

Exactly! :)

[Niamh.]

Dream team back on track x

:laugh: Indeed

[kirklancaster]

I agree with pretty much everything Livia said (especially the "you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than i have that he does) so true.

I watched the documentary about Stephanie Slater, really horrible what she went through.
My uncle (who sadly is now an angel) was an Atheist, but he saw God whilst he was in hospital with a serious illness. I know peoples minds can play tricks on them when they're in a state of shock or whatever but my uncle really believed he saw God (even though he'd been an Atheist his whole life) and i believe he did too.

There are 1000's of well documented examples of this including 100's of cases of those surviving 'Near Death' experiences. I'm not trying to convert anybody but all this from people who have no reason to lie (and who swear they were not deluded or having hallucinations) I take to bolster my own faith. If others want to perceive some psychological tricks that the brain plays at such times then that's fine.

I would turn the atheist's favourite question around on them though, and ask, why then doesn't the brain play the same psychological tricks on everyone who is dying or who has 'Near Death' experiences?

Additionally, why do so many rational people - even lifelong atheists - who have these 'visions' insist on what they have seen and maintain that it was God or Jesus?

[AnnieK]

Due to personal circumstances at the moment, this is something I have been talking a lot about and whether when you die that's it but the simple fact is no-one is ever going to know....simple. Whatever your personal beliefs if something helps you as your near the end of your life then that can only be a good thing.....

[Crimson Dynamo]

That's a lovely story, Trumpet.

Its a true one, when i picked up the banana she nearly had a fit and ran into the house

naturally i ran after here making squeaking noises

[Livia]

Its a true one, when i picked up the banana she nearly had a fit and ran into the house

naturally i ran after here making squeaking noises

I believe you. In fact, I'd have been a little disappointed if you hadn't...

[JoshBB]

If said religious experience did exist, why does Jesus/God choose not to show himself to everyone to prove his existence? It seems illogical.

[kirklancaster]

:laugh: Indeed

Good - I am pleased.

[Livia]

If said religious experience did exist, why does Jesus/God choose not to show himself to everyone to prove his existence? It seems illogical.

Because you have to have faith. I have faith... I can't explain what it is to you, and if you don't have it you wouldn't understand it if I could explain.

[InOne]

Can't do anything with personal experience because that's what it is - personal.

[Ninastar]

I remember reading an account of when Apple's Steve Jobs died. As he was dying he is reported to have looked past his family and his last words were, "Oh wow, oh wow, oh wow..." Who knows what he saw? Who knows whether it was real, or whether it was a misfiring synapse somewhere in his hippocampus throwing up an old memory? No one knows and no one will know until their time is up. Until then, this event obviously gave comfort to his family and to others with terminal illness, and I can't see that as a bad thing.

My sisters psychologist said that he's met many people who have 'died' and come back. He says he's met people who died and came back, who were in accidents, and he says he met those who took their own lives were brought back... But what he told me about each is something that will stay with me forever.

He said that the people who took their own lives, saw nothing but darkness and fear when they were dying. The people who were dying because of an accident, saw nothing but white and felt 'very happy'...

Now I'm not religious, but this is really something that made me think.

It does make me wonder what goes on after life...

[Crimson Dynamo]

My sisters psychologist said that he's met many people who have 'died' and come back. He says he's met people who died and came back, who were in accidents, and he says he met those who took their own lives were brought back... But what he told me about each is something that will stay with me forever.

He said that the people who took their own lives, saw nothing but darkness and fear when they were dying. The people who were dying because of an accident, saw nothing but white and felt 'very happy'...

Now I'm not religious, but this is really something that made me think.

It does make me wonder what goes on after life...

That sounds like a crock to me, with respect.

Anecdotal at best

[kirklancaster]

My sisters psychologist said that he's met many people who have 'died' and come back. He says he's met people who died and came back, who were in accidents, and he says he met those who took their own lives were brought back... But what he told me about each is something that will stay with me forever.

He said that the people who took their own lives, saw nothing but darkness and fear when they were dying. The people who were dying because of an accident, saw nothing but white and felt 'very happy'...

Now I'm not religious, but this is really something that made me think.

It does make me wonder what goes on after life...

A good post.

[kirklancaster]

That sounds like a crock to me, with respect.

Anecdotal at best

Why is it that anybody who posts anything which doesn't fit in with your view of things is talking a 'crock'?:nono::nono::nono:

[arista]

This Comet we have contact with
is Proof there is No God , No bible etc

[Crimson Dynamo]

Why is it that anybody who posts anything which doesn't fit in with your view of things is talking a 'crock'?:nono::nono::nono:

Its just anecdotal stuff

I know I guy i met in a pub who saw a ghost, yada yada

As arista says

What man achieved today is real, amazing and worth believing in

Its another great win for science over superstition

[Kazanne]

Its just anecdotal stuff

I know I guy i met in a pub who saw a ghost, yada yada

As arista says

What man achieved today is real, amazing and worth believing in

Its another great win for science over superstition

And LT,just WHO or WHERE did man get the tools of knowledge to do all these things,and remember 'amazing'man has also totally effed the planet up by his arrogant superiority.

[Crimson Dynamo]

And LT,just WHO or WHERE did man get the tools of knowledge to do all these things,and remember 'amazing'man has also totally effed the planet up by his arrogant superiority.


I am sorry but I dont follow your line of thought?

[kirklancaster]

Its just anecdotal stuff

I know I guy i met in a pub who saw a ghost, yada yada

As arista says

What man achieved today is real, amazing and worth believing in

Its another great win for science over superstition

:joker::joker::joker:LOL - It's nothing of the kind. It's a great achievement by Man but does nothing to prove or disprove the existence of a God.

Really, you need to analyse your thoughts LT before committing them to paper- It's like you having a child and when that child grows up he becomes a scientist and discovers a new rocket propulsion system. How does that disprove your existence?:facepalm:

[Crimson Dynamo]

:joker::joker::joker:LOL - It's nothing of the kind. It's a great achievement by Man but does nothing to prove or disprove the existence of a God.

Really, you need to analyse your thoughts LT before committing them to paper- It's like you having a child and when that child grows up he becomes a scientist and discovers a new rocket propulsion system. How does that disprove your existence?:facepalm:

I am sorry but I dont follow your line of thought?

[kirklancaster]

And LT,just WHO or WHERE did man get the tools of knowledge to do all these things,and remember 'amazing'man has also totally effed the planet up by his arrogant superiority.


:clap1::clap1::clap1:

Go Kaz - hope you get more sensible, more relevant answers from him than I have.

[kirklancaster]

I am sorry but I dont follow your line of thought?

For those who believe in God our Father - how does the technological advances made by Man (His children) and their achievements as a result of those advances, disprove God (The Father)?

You give your son his genes, what he achieves as he grows is independent of you but because of you, and it does not disprove your existence.

[Crimson Dynamo]

For those who believe in God our Father - how does the technological advances made by Man (His children) and their achievements as a result of those advances, disprove God (The Father)?

You give your son his genes, what he achieves as he grows is independent of you but because of you, and it does not disprove your existence.

Arista said it disproved your god, not I

[kirklancaster]

Arista said it disproved your god, not I

OK - I love your new avatar.

[arista]

Landing on the Comet today
is Great and it Proves
there is No God.

[AnnieK]

Landing on the Comet today
is Great and it Proves
there is No God.

How does it prove it arista?

[Marsh.]

Landing on the Comet today
is Great and it Proves
there is No God.

If that's your definition of "proof" then you have no right to criticise any religion. :joker:

[arista]

How does it prove it arista?


Before Man was on Our Earth
The Comets smashed into Earth
letting the seed of Life Start.



No Bible , No God

Truth

[Liam-]

Landing on the Comet today
is Great and it Proves
there is No God.

Yes because a big space rock is the long awaited proof that the highly debated existence of a superior being is false.

Are there space rocks out there that disprove unicorns and pixies too do you think? :think:

[arista]

If that's your definition of "proof" then you have no right to criticise any religion. :joker:


You know there is No God
it can not ever be proved
its fake.

The Bible was created to control people

Now Our Churches
should be made into Discos

[arista]

Yes because a big space rock is the long awaited proof that the highly debated existence of a superior being is false.

Are there space rocks out there that disprove unicorns and pixies too do you think? :think:

pixies are for kids books

[Crimson Dynamo]

You know there is No God
it can not ever be proved
its fake.

The Bible was created to control people

Now Our Churches
should be made into Discos

Arista is most wise


get these empty gothic mausoleums banging to the sound of drum n bass and sack the vicars and make them dig roads on min wage

[Marsh.]

You know there is No God
it can not ever be proved
its fake.

The Bible was created to control people

Now Our Churches
should be made into Discos

And this comet is proof of this how exactly?

Don't go on a tangential rant this time, stick to the question.

[Liam-]

pixies are for kids books

And The Hulk is for comic books, what's your point?

[arista]

And The Hulk is for comic books, what's your point?



The Hulk is For Movies

[Liam-]

The Hulk is For Movies

The Hulk started off as a comic book character.. then went onto movies.

Jesus started off as a being written about in the bible.. then went on to have movies made about him, yet you obviously like The Hulk, but belittle people for believing in God or Jesus, because it's just 'made up in a book'? What's so different about those two scenarios?

[arista]

And this comet is proof of this how exactly?

Don't go on a tangential rant this time, stick to the question.


The Data comes tomorrow.

Many Of Us know about whats on Comets
and the data is due tomorrow.


Why is it Not in the Bible You Trust?

[Kazanne]

Before Man was on Our Earth
The Comets smashed into Earth
letting the seed of Life Start.



No Bible , No God

Truth

And NO proof Arista,so if the comets did this by smashing into earth,surely other planets would be equally inhabited by us humans?

[arista]

The Hulk started off as a comic book character.. then went onto movies.

Jesus started off as a being written about in the bible.. then went on to have movies made about him, yet you obviously like The Hulk, but belittle people for believing in God or Jesus, because it's just 'made up in a book'? What's so different about those two scenarios?


Yes a Book of Fables
used to Control People

Now not so much


Utter Fecking Bliss

[Kazanne]

I am sorry but I dont follow your line of thought?

Well science didn't help you much with your line of thought LT:hehe:

[Kazanne]

:clap1::clap1::clap1:

Go Kaz - hope you get more sensible, more relevant answers from him than I have.

:wavey:Hello Kirklancaster

[arista]

And NO proof Arista,so if the comets did this by smashing into earth,surely other planets would be equally inhabited by us humans?


yes there is a 2nd Earth
but it takes us 30 to 50 years to get to it.


I have a solution for that
send a 7 year old Boy
with a Learning computer
and when he arrives to meet the Humans
on the 2nd Earth
he can let them know about us.

Life In The Fast Lane

[Liam-]

Yes a Book of Fables
used to Control People

Now not so much


Utter Fecking Bliss

If it's used to control people, it's not doing a very good job is it Arista? Come on now, play nice.

[arista]

If it's used to control people, it's not doing a very good job is it Arista? Come on now, play nice.


Thats due to the Leaders.


Get Rid of the Bible
is the Best Solution

[Liam-]

Thats due to the Leaders.


Get Rid of the Bible
is the Best Solution

Getting rid of the bible won't do anything, there would still be religion, there would still be faith.. people believe in more than paper and ink.

[arista]

Getting rid of the bible won't do anything, there would still be religion, there would still be faith.. people believe in more than paper and ink.


Yes they Used to
its now less and less.


Feel The Force

[kirklancaster]

Yes because a big space rock is the long awaited proof that the highly debated existence of a superior being is false.

Are there space rocks out there that disprove unicorns and pixies too do you think? :think:

:joker:

[kirklancaster]

:wavey:Hello Kirklancaster

Hiya Kaz - fancy meeting a Christian like you on this thread :hehe::wavey:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well science didn't help you much with your line of thought LT:hehe:

Your logic is not something that our current science has yet been able to solve


:hehe:

[Marsh.]

The Data comes tomorrow.

Many Of Us know about whats on Comets
and the data is due tomorrow.


Why is it Not in the Bible You Trust?

What data comes tomorrow?

"No God found on comet"? :joker:

[kirklancaster]

yes there is a 2nd Earth
but it takes us 30 to 50 years to get to it.


I have a solution for that
send a 7 year old Boy
with a Learning computer
and when he arrives to meet the Humans
on the 2nd Earth
he can let them know about us.

Life In The Fast Lane

If the humans on this second Earth are in advance of us, what makes you think that they don't already know about us, have been observing us. And if they have, then what makes you think they'd want to know us? We can't even get on with each other on this planet.

[Northern Monkey]

I believe that a comet/s could have brought some materials and/or created the huge amounts of energy to create a precursor for the building blocks of life on our planet.However this in itself does'nt disprove the existence of some kind of higher power imo.Not that i believe in a god but the comet won't disprove the existence of one.

[kirklancaster]

Your logic is not something that our current science has yet been able to solve

:hehe:

Kaz has a hell of a lot more logic than you LT - IMHO.

[arista]

If the humans on this second Earth are in advance of us, what makes you think that they don't already know about us, have been observing us. And if they have, then what makes you think they'd want to know us? We can't even get on with each other on this planet.


Its Not just me
we have a Agency
in USA and UK
and they would pick up the signal
if any are looking in on us.


It may be in advance or a bit behind us
we will find out.

[Marsh.]

They would pick up a signal? :joker:

[joeysteele]

And NO proof Arista,so if the comets did this by smashing into earth,surely other planets would be equally inhabited by us humans?

Therein lies another queston Kazanne, science can have its own interpetration of what happened which really is still not proven just as creationists can argue there is more to life than just an accident.

Even evolutionists who go on and on about how we and other life evolved,well, fine, however for something to evolve it must first exist.
How did that come about too. The big bang, what is the big bang, what made the big bang happen and why has it not again if it happened by accident.

Again questions get thrown up, it is a fascinating topic and when approached by open minds as to what may have happened as to life being created.
Many other doors then are opened and the fact is no one really knows and certainly not scientists, who regularly dispute what other scientists say anyway a lot of the time.

Back to the lady in the op, I have always said, I keep an open mind on these issues from things I have heard from others and also some things I have come across that just cannot be explained away.
This lady, must have known she would face ridicule for what she was saying but never-the-less said it.

I couldn't say she was making it up or confused for sure,just as I couldn't say she was right in what she was saying either.
However what I will add is that she was in danger and scared for her life it appears, in times like that, the human survival instinct takes over and we generally make the best and stronger decisions to survive.
We are far more alert,so imagination is not necessarily a factor probably either.

The instant thing is to dismiss people who say things like this as cranks or out of their minds,I am not so sure and as I say I keep an open mind on such things.
The simple fact is possibly we as humans really don't know very much at all and are 'maybe' scared a bit too to seek to learn too much on such matters.
Fascinating topic this is however.

[Northern Monkey]

Therein lies another queston Kazanne, science can have its own interpetration of what happened which really is still not proven just as creationists can argue there is more to life than just an accident.

Even evolutionists who go on and on about how we and other life evolved,well, fine, however for something to evolve it must first exist.
How did that come about too. The big bang, what is the big bang, what made the big bang ahppen and why has it not again if it happened by accident.

Again questions get thrown up, it is a fascinating topic and when approached by open minds as to what may have happened as to life being created.
Many other doors then are opened and the fact is no one really knows and certainly not scientists, who regularly dispute what other scientists say anyway a lot of the time.

Back to the lady in the op, I have always said, I keep an open mind on these issues from things I have heard from others and also some things I have come across that just cannot be explained away.
This lady, must have known she would face ridicule for what she was saying but never-the-less said it.

I couldn't say she was making it up or confused for sure,just as I couldn't say she was right in what she was saying either.
However what I will add is that she was in danger and scared for her life it appears, in times like that, the human survival instinct takes over and we generally make the best and stronger decisions to survive.
We are far more alert,so imagination is not necessarily a factor probably either.

The instant thing is to dismiss people who say things like this as cranks or out of their minds,I am not so sure and as I say I keep an open mind on such things.
The simple fact is possibly we as humans really don't know very much at all and are 'maybe' scared a bit too to seek to learn too much on such matters.
Fascinating topic this is however.

Exactly,Good post.I am more a believer in what science can try to find out and teach us.However science so far can only tell us very little.I don't believe any of the supernatural side or the 'miracles' of the religious texts.Many religions like those of the Ancient Egyptians
,Greeks and Romans that came long before Judaism,Christianity or Islam have now died out long ago and i
believe these modern religions are facing the same decline now.So when religion is gone,What are we left with?Just the ongoing pursuit of understanding the origins of the universe using what little facts we can gather.
When faced with questions about what caused the big bang and what was there before,Then i can only agree with your post and say 'I don't know'.It is the only truly honest answer that anyone on this planet can give.I have an open mind though and am always willing to learn and consider all options.

[Northern Monkey]

And NO proof Arista,so if the comets did this by smashing into earth,surely other planets would be equally inhabited by us humans?

Not necessarily humans but possibly life.It is imo more probable that there is life on other planets than not due to the unthinkable amount of stars in the universe,We cannot even explore our next nearest star,Nevermind get anywhere near the edge of our galaxy,Let alone get to another galaxy.Depending on location to there nearest star and conditions and if a comet/s did have an impact on the beginning of life on Earth,Even just due to the energy created,Then,Who's to say that it has'nt happened billions of times over around the universe?

[Kazanne]

Yes they Used to
its now less and less.


Feel The Force

Yes Arista and just look at the state of the world now.

[Kizzy]

It's a shame the human race can't have faith in each other isn't it?

'And crawling on the planets face
Some insects called the human race
Lost in time
And lost in space
And meaning.'

[kirklancaster]

Therein lies another queston Kazanne, science can have its own interpetration of what happened which really is still not proven just as creationists can argue there is more to life than just an accident.

Even evolutionists who go on and on about how we and other life evolved,well, fine, however for something to evolve it must first exist.
How did that come about too. The big bang, what is the big bang, what made the big bang happen and why has it not again if it happened by accident.

Again questions get thrown up, it is a fascinating topic and when approached by open minds as to what may have happened as to life being created.
Many other doors then are opened and the fact is no one really knows and certainly not scientists, who regularly dispute what other scientists say anyway a lot of the time.

Back to the lady in the op, I have always said, I keep an open mind on these issues from things I have heard from others and also some things I have come across that just cannot be explained away.
This lady, must have known she would face ridicule for what she was saying but never-the-less said it.

I couldn't say she was making it up or confused for sure,just as I couldn't say she was right in what she was saying either.
However what I will add is that she was in danger and scared for her life it appears, in times like that, the human survival instinct takes over and we generally make the best and stronger decisions to survive.
We are far more alert,so imagination is not necessarily a factor probably either.

The instant thing is to dismiss people who say things like this as cranks or out of their minds,I am not so sure and as I say I keep an open mind on such things.
The simple fact is possibly we as humans really don't know very much at all and are 'maybe' scared a bit too to seek to learn too much on such matters.
Fascinating topic this is however.

Another cracking, balanced post Joey.:clap1::clap1::clap1:

[GypsyGoth]

I just read the first post as I don't have time to go through the thread, anyway the whole jesus thing is a load of mumbo jumbo. Harrowing though her story is, seeing his face is nonsense, she didn't see him, only an image someone created to represent him. So she actual saw a drawing of jesus.

If you already believe in jesus before reading the story, then fine, it reinforces your beliefs. But if you look at the story just as it it, without religious tinted glasses, it's proof of nothing. She is the one who found the inner strength to continue. I believe in such desperate times, people will cling to anything rather than accept how truly random and lawless this world is, that's what frightens people into religion.

Where were the visions of jesus for all of the others who have survived abductions?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I just read the first post as I don't have time to go through the thread, anyway the whole jesus thing is a load of mumbo jumbo. Harrowing though her story is, seeing his face is nonsense, she didn't see him, only an image someone created to represent him. So she actual saw a drawing of jesus.

If you already believe in jesus before reading the story, then fine, it reinforces your beliefs. But if you look at the story just as it it, without religious tinted glasses, it's proof of nothing. She is the one who found the inner strength to continue. I believe in such desperate times, people will cling to anything rather than accept how truly random and lawless this world is, that's what frightens people into religion.

Where were the visions of jesus for all of the others who have survived abductions?

Its what 99% of posters have said and there is little more to be added

:thumbs:

[arista]

Well said LT & GG

[Nedusa]

Actually there is more evidence of extra terrestrial life than there is of God, although to be honest any form of alien life could be perceived as a God.

If you do a bit of research you will find hundreds of thousands of cases of reported sightings of unidentified craft, taken together with credible witness reports from Military personnel and as a large proportion of these sightings are captured on photographs, film and video together with radar sightings and anomalous physical data, this constitutes way more evidence than simply

I believe therefore it's real...????

Maybe we were actually created by an advanced Alien life form millions of years ago.

Simple fact is we haven't got a bloody clue who we are or where we came from and what our purpose is.....




.

[Niamh.]

Actually there is more evidence of extra terrestrial life than there is of God, although to be honest any form of alien life could be perceived as a God.

If you do a bit of research you will find hundreds of thousands of cases of reported sightings of unidentified craft, taken together with credible witness reports from Military personnel and as a large proportion of these sightings are captured on photographs, film and video together with radar sightings and anomalous physical data, this constitutes way more evidence than simply

I believe therefore it's real...????

Maybe we were actually created by an advanced Alien life form millions of years ago.

Simple fact is we haven't got a bloody clue who we are or where we came from and what our purpose is.....




.

Yep, that's exactly it. Maybe there is a "God" who created us? Or Gods ie Aliens, no one knows, no one will ever know imo I certainly don't put my belief in some book written such a longtime ago by people..other human beings just like me and you, not a hope in hell (pardon the pun)

[Crimson Dynamo]

Actually there is more evidence of extra terrestrial life than there is of God, although to be honest any form of alien life could be perceived as a God.

If you do a bit of research you will find hundreds of thousands of cases of reported sightings of unidentified craft, taken together with credible witness reports from Military personnel and as a large proportion of these sightings are captured on photographs, film and video together with radar sightings and anomalous physical data, this constitutes way more evidence than simply

I believe therefore it's real...????

Maybe we were actually created by an advanced Alien life form millions of years ago.

Simple fact is we haven't got a bloody clue who we are or where we came from and what our purpose is.....




.

That is not true

we have a very good idea how the universe was created and how with time, gravity and chemistry suns and planets are formed and cool and die and are reformed. This comet may explain why we have water on earth and that would be a huge breakthrough

we know how life started and evolved on earth

but to look for purpose is just leading down a blind alleyway we are the result of time and chance

[Niamh.]

That is not true

we have a very good idea how the universe was created and how with time, gravity and chemistry suns and planets are formed and cool and die and are reformed. This comet may explain why we have water on earth and that would be a huge breakthrough

we know how

but to look for purpose is just leading down a blind alleyway we are the result of time and chance

Well it is really, we might know how life started and evolved on earth but where did the stuff that made that possible come from etc etc etc you could go back and back and back and probably never get to the end

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well it is really, we might know how life started and evolved on earth but where did the stuff that made that possible come from etc etc etc you could go back and back and back and probably never get to the end

Well we have gotten 13 billion years back now to the big bang when all the elements for life and the known universe was created.

and if you want to know how you can get a universe from nothing then i recommend this amazing book by Lawrence M. Krauss

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Nothing-Lawrence-M-Krauss/dp/1471112683

This book explains why not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing. !

[Niamh.]

Well we have gotten 13 billion years back now to the big bang when all the elements for life and the known universe was created.

and if you want to know how you can get a universe from nothing then i recommend this amazing book by Lawrence M. Krauss

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Nothing-Lawrence-M-Krauss/dp/1471112683

This book explains why not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing. !

I think my brain might explode if I tried reading that LT :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think my brain might explode if I tried reading that LT :laugh:

Its a tough read as I recall but a rewarding one - you can see Krauss on youtube, he does great lectures

[Crimson Dynamo]

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=krauss+lawrence

[Niamh.]

Its a tough read as I recall but a rewarding one - you can see Krauss on youtube, he does great lectures

I went to see Interstellar last night and I couldn't even follow that lol 5th dimensions and black holes arrghh

http://i.imgur.com/ljO0kmh.gif

[Kazanne]

Well we have gotten 13 billion years back now to the big bang when all the elements for life and the known universe was created.

and if you want to know how you can get a universe from nothing then i recommend this amazing book by Lawrence M. Krauss

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Nothing-Lawrence-M-Krauss/dp/1471112683

This book explains why not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing. !

It's just a book though,as is The Bible,I suppose it depends on which one we read and believe.That something can arise from nothing seems as airy fairy as you say The Bible is.

[Crimson Dynamo]

It's just a book though,as is The Bible,I suppose it depends on which one we read and believe.That something can arise from nothing seems as airy fairy as you say The Bible is.

One is a book that has current peer reviewed cutting edge scientific theory and knowledge and one is a collection of myth, poetry and tales from 2000 years ago


I am going to say they are not comparable:joker:

Its like saying the earth is the same as the sun as both are round

[Livia]

One is a book that has current peer reviewed cutting edge scientific theory and knowledge and one is a collection of myth, poetry and tales from 2000 years ago


I am going to say they are not comparable:joker:

Its like saying the earth is the same as the sun as both are round

I don't know anyone who is religious who spends more time talking about and thinking about God than you do. You're obsessed. If I found myself spending as much time trying to rubbish your theories as you spend trying to rubbish religion, I would take some time off and get some talking therapy.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I don't know anyone who is religious who spends more time talking about and thinking about God than you do. You're obsessed. If I found myself spending as much time trying to rubbish your theories as you spend trying to rubbish religion, I would take some time off and get some talking therapy.

Not my thread and I am talking about science, Kaz is talking about old religious books

:hmph:

[Livia]

Not my thread and I am talking about science, Kaz is talking about old religious books

:hmph:

The two aren't exclusive of each other. I have a physicist cousin who is devout... and I'm guessing he knows more about science and more about the bible than you and I combined.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The two aren't exclusive of each other. I have a physicist cousin who is devout... and I'm guessing he knows more about science and more about the bible than you and I combined.

maybe he does maybe he does not and maybe he is not that devout


whatever devout means:spin:

[Livia]

maybe he does maybe he does not and maybe he is not that devout


whatever devout means:spin:

You know what devout means. And yes, he's completely devout. Of course you would question that because it doesn't fit in with your particular view. But it's possible to be both religious AND intelligent.

[Crimson Dynamo]

You know what devout means. And yes, he's completely devout. Of course you would question that because it doesn't fit in with your particular view. But it's possible to be both religious AND intelligent.

I tend to find that the intelligent ones just hide it better

[Livia]

I tend to find that the intelligent ones just hide it better

I consider myself one of the intelligent ones and I don't feel the need to hide anything.

Like I've said lots of times before, I have no problem with your beliefs. I don't consider you stupid or less intelligent because you believe something different from me. So please, don't try to intimate that I'm less intelligent because I believe something different from you. Because it is simply not true.

[Crimson Dynamo]

I consider myself one of the intelligent ones and I don't feel the need to hide anything.

Like I've said lots of times before, I have no problem with your beliefs. I don't consider you stupid or less intelligent because you believe something different from me. So please, don't try to intimate that I'm less intelligent because I believe something different from you. Because it is simply not true.

I dont think I ever do but this thread is based on an anecdotal and fairly preposterous notion and as such it tends to lead itsself into the realms of hilarity. No one in all the pages has really came to any conclusion other than what GG said earlier.

You are being overly defensive where you dont need to be

[Nedusa]

Well we have gotten 13 billion years back now to the big bang when all the elements for life and the known universe was created.

and if you want to know how you can get a universe from nothing then i recommend this amazing book by Lawrence M. Krauss

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Universe-Nothing-Lawrence-M-Krauss/dp/1471112683

This book explains why not only can something arise from nothing, but something will always arise from nothing. !

With respect though that is only a book written by a man using his knowledge of science and a rather large dollop of imagination, it is just his little theory.

Not proof of anything.

Until mankind can explore the Cosmos and has developed far stronger theories of the universe, only then will we really be able to start really piecing the jigsaw together.

And I suspect that may be in more than a few centuries time.



.

[Crimson Dynamo]

With respect though that is only a book written by a man using his knowledge of science and a rather large dollop of imagination, it is just his little theory.

Not proof of anything.

Until mankind can explore the Cosmos and has developed far stronger theories of the universe, only then will we really be able to start really piecing the jigsaw together.

And I suspect that may be in more than a few centuries time.



.

No one said it was proof, but its out there to be dissected, tested and built upon or torn down

and so we learn and move forward. Like with the comet today.

[Livia]

I dont think I ever do but this thread is based on an anecdotal and fairly preposterous notion and as such it tends to lead itsself into the realms of hilarity. No one in all the pages has really came to any conclusion other than what GG said earlier.

You are being overly defensive where you dont need to be

Defensive? I don't feel I'm being defensive. I don't feel like I have to defend myself.

As for the thread of the thread (if you get what I mean...) some people will believe one thing, some people will believe another. If someone's been through some kind of trauma or loss, they may well have a very different perspective from those who haven't ever been through trauma or loss and they will never see each other's perspective. If this woman thinks she saw Jesus, who am I to tell her she didn't?

[Northern Monkey]

Devout religious physicists or biologists perplex me slightly.It makes me wonder.They can be writing a paper on the origins of the universe and the big bang theory and the origins of life,But secretly not believe a word of what they're writing and think the Earth is only 6000 years old and we came from Adam and Eve.It's as if they believe that their lifes work is a lie.

[Kizzy]

I'm saying nowt.... :laugh:

I'm of the feeling that there has been a visitation, and that it was that that was recorded at the time and we have in a chinese whispers way totally misinterpreted what was written, and worse manipulated it for money, power and control of the masses.

[Livia]

Devout religious physicists or biologists perplex me slightly.It makes me wonder.They can be writing a paper on the origins of the universe and the big bang theory and the origins of life,But secretly not believe a word of what they're writing and think the Earth is only 6000 years old and we came from Adam and Eve.It's as if they believe that their lifes work is a lie.

Many modern Rabbis don't uphold the contention that the world is 6000 years old, and personally I think you'd have to be blinkered at best to believe that in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And I'm sure religious physicists wouldn't uphold that suggestion either. Who's to say that if the world was created by the Big Bang that it wasn't caused by God? Aren't they looking for the "God Particle" at Cern? Although obviously I'm not suggesting that the discovery of that [Higgs boson] particle is evidence that God exists.

[Northern Monkey]

Many modern Rabbis don't uphold the contention that the world is 6000 years old, and personally I think you'd have to be blinkered at best to believe that in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. And I'm sure religious physicists wouldn't uphold that suggestion either. Who's to say that if the world was created by the Big Bang that it wasn't caused by God? Aren't they looking for the "God Particle" at Cern? Although obviously I'm not suggesting that the discovery of that [Higgs boson] particle is evidence that God exists.
Yeah,The 6000 year old Earth theory is extreme and i doubt many if any scientists believe it.But,Many Christians for example believe in Adam and Eve and the world and life being created in seven days amongst many other things that gradually get disproven.I'm not saying categorically that a God did'nt create whatever caused the big bang,because,obviously,I don't know.I'm not a believer in the religious texts(although i find them fascinating) because i find that people tend to pick and choose which parts to believe and which parts to use as moral code and which parts to ignore.As more is discovered in science,More of these texts are cast aside as being false due to lack of understanding at the time the texts were written.It seems to me that religion and science are struggling more and more to work hand in hand the more that is disproven.I think eventually so much of the Torah,Bible and Quran will be at odds with science that it would be impossible to truly be devout to a religion and also work in the scientific fields.

[kirklancaster]

10,000 cases?

2 people on Tibb have had a coincidence in about a month

:joker:

You really should abandon your polemics and actually read the posts which you keep criticising. I never said that there has been 10,000 cases on TIBB - I actually said:

"Synchronicity - another thing LT won't accept even if faced by 10,000 cases of hard evidence from people on here or anywhere for that matter"


"Even if" -- not "When he has been".

If you're going to criticise at least have the good grace to read the subject matter.

[kirklancaster]

Originally Posted by Livia:

"You know what devout means. And yes, he's completely devout. Of course you would question that because it doesn't fit in with your particular view. But it's possible to be both religious AND intelligent."

LT's response:

"I tend to find that the intelligent ones just hide it better"


:joker::joker::joker::joker::joker::joker::joker:: joker::joker::joker::joker::joker:

This coming from someone who pulls out Krauss's 'A Universe Out Of Nothing' (more from me later on this crap) and waves it in triumph as if it once and forever destroys all theism.

Once again LT you contradict yourself, because, on the one hand you decry Livia's quite rational statement, that; "it's possible to be both religious AND intelligent." and on the other you espouse Krauss's B.S. book, yet -- Krauss's totally illogical, scientifically impossible proposition is solely based on the 'Big Bang theory' (Yes - that's 'Theory' LT because that's all it is) and the said 'theory' was proposed by none other than Monseigneur Georges Lemaitre - a Belgian Catholic priest. :joker::joker::joker:

Lemaitre was not only a priest, he was an astronomer and professor of physics, and in addition to being the first to propose 'the Big Bang Theory', he was also the first to propose the theory of 'an expanding universe' - which he published two years before Hubble, although Hubble was accredited (probably because he was not a priest).

Lemaire also proposed what we now all call 'Hubble's law' and the 'Hubble Constant', which he published in 1927, two years before Hubble.

So much for your contention.:joker::joker::joker:

[kirklancaster]

Leather Trumpet's Post:

"That is not true....

we have a very good idea how the universe was created and how with time, gravity and chemistry suns and planets are formed and cool and die and are reformed. This comet may explain why we have water on earth and that would be a huge breakthrough

we know how life started and evolved on earth

but to look for purpose is just leading down a blind alleyway we are the result of time and chance"

We know how life started and evolved on earth"?:joker::joker::joker::joker::joker:

Who knows? Please substantiate such a ludicrous statement. Once again, you are passing off theory as fact.

"Well it is really, we might know how life started and evolved on earth but where did the stuff that made that possible come from etc etc etc you could go back and back and back and probably never get to the end"

This response, is actually brilliant. It is the 64,000 dollar question avoided by all physicists who propose or follow the 'Big Bang Theory'. Krauss himself goes to great pains not to address this in his B.S. book, and when he is finally (in the last 20 odd pages) forced to address it, he takes tortuous, illogical, convoluted paths, to not answer it.

[Cherie]

Totally offtopic but I do like how KL underlines words for maximum impact :laugh:

[kirklancaster]

Totally offtopic but I do like how KL underlines words for maximum impact :laugh:

:joker:

Yes, Cherie, but I didn't take it off topic, and am just responding to already off topic posts.

I'm glad you like my underlining. :hehe: I am currently composing a rational critique of Krauss's BS book - quite lengthy by necessity and loaded with lovely underlings. :wavey:

[Crimson Dynamo]

Totally offtopic but I do like how KL underlines words for maximum impact :laugh:


His posts remind me of smallest LT boys Tom Gates books :joker:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Z0cjujGn2l4/UpjZ_aVzcjI/AAAAAAAAEYQ/l1lWI57sFb4/s1600/WP_20131124_010.jpg

[Cherie]

:joker:

Yes, Cherie, but I didn't take it off topic, and am just responding to already off topic posts.

I'm glad you like my underlining. :hehe: I am currently composing a rational critique of Krauss's BS book - quite lengthy by necessity and loaded with lovely underlings. :wavey:


:laugh: No it was I who took it offtopic with my ramblings about your underlining :hehe:

[Cherie]

His posts remind me of smallest LT boys Tom Gates books :joker:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-Z0cjujGn2l4/UpjZ_aVzcjI/AAAAAAAAEYQ/l1lWI57sFb4/s1600/WP_20131124_010.jpg

:o Using my psychic ability I foresee a post with lots of underlining being written in response to this. :laugh:

[Crimson Dynamo]

:o Using my psychic ability I foresee a post with lots of underlining being written in response to this. :laugh:

at last a psychic i can believe in :joker:

[Niamh.]

In response to your reply to my post Kirk, for me the fact that there's a lot of evidence to suggest how we started and how life was actually created on Earth, dispels the notion of the "gods" presented to us through the religions, clearly we weren't made in anyone's image and space is so vast I doubt we were purposefully made either. Is there some higher power some where that created it all? I have no idea and I doubt I ever will

[Kazanne]

This thread will have no conclusion,but Kirk what a GREAT thread,the differing opinions are an interesting read,all I will say scientists are just 'men' prone to exaggeration,Chinese whispers ,mistakes and a few porkies so to me they are no more credible than the person/persons who wrote the Bible.

[kirklancaster]

[QUOTE=LeatherTrumpet;7372708]His posts remind me of smallest LT boys Tom Gates books :joker:

Ahhh YAWN.... More attempts to conceal the fact that you have no relevant intelligent answer by trying to use ridicule to distract from the important issues at hand. :sleep::sleep:

You really have a lot to say when criticising earnest posts by others but never ever offer genuine reasons for your criticism nor ever offer anything relative by way of counter argument.

Before anyone reports me, I am merely offering a legitimate response to repeated ridicule by someone - and surely this is my right on a democratic forum?

If it isn't then why is the original groundless ridicule allowed to persist unchecked?

Humorous 'ribbing' as part of, or additional to, relevant and serious posts is always acceptable, but that is a far cry from mere ridicule for ridicule's sake in splendid isolation from any accompanying and worthwhile contribution to the subject under debate. Such inane tactics become tedious and intellectually wearing, and lead those who genuinely wish to discuss matters, to think; "Why bother", and this - surely - leads to an impoverished quality of discussion.

So LT, instead of your usual tactics (look back through this thread or any other if anyone does not believe me) keep your sense of humour by all means - it is admirable - but please try to envelope it with at least some type of relevant comment which contributes to the subject matter.

[kirklancaster]

In response to your reply to my post Kirk, for me the fact that there's a lot of evidence to suggest how we started and how life was actually created on Earth, dispels the notion of the "gods" presented to us through the religions, clearly we weren't made in anyone's image and space is so vast I doubt we were purposefully made either. Is there some higher power some where that created it all? I have no idea and I doubt I ever will

No, Niamh, I wasn't even considering 'God' when I said your post was brilliant.

I was referring - on a purely physics level - that you had mentioned the one insurmountable obstacle that Krauss and others encounter and cannot surmount: "Nothing' comes out of 'Nothing'.

The very idea of 'A Universe From Nothing' breaches the 'First Law of Thermodynamics'- that universally long held tenet that; "nothing in the Universe (i.e., matter or energy) can pop into existence from nothing" --

-- and flies in the face of another principle of physics - 'The Conservation of Matter' - which states that matter and energy can neither be created nor destroyed. In the words of revered evolutionary astronomer, Robert Jastrow: "Matter can be converted into energy, and vice versa, but the total amount of all matter and energy in the Universe must remain unchanged forever”

So if - according to the physicist's 'Bible' - 'Nothing' can ever be suddenly created from 'Nothing', and if both 'Matter' and 'Energy' cannot be created, then Krauss's preposterous and B.S. proposition is a non-starter, and no matter how he tries to 'disguise' thefact that his proposition is B.S. (more later in another post) then we are left with the fact that 'Something' came out of 'Something'.

This has nothing to do with God, it is physics, and you echoed as much when you wrote: .

"Well it is really, we might know how life started and evolved on earth but where did the stuff that made that possible come from etc etc etc you could go back and back and back and probably never get to the end...".

Exactly! 'Something' was there in the first place, or in other words; there was 'something' which already was in existence which was not dependent on 'something else' for it's existence.

In physics, you simply cannot create 'Anything' out of 'Nothing'.

And to us believers - using the bastardised principles of Occam's Razor - that only leaves God.

[Crimson Dynamo]

This thread will have no conclusion,but Kirk what a GREAT thread,the differing opinions are an interesting read,all I will say scientists are just 'men' prone to exaggeration,Chinese whispers ,mistakes and a few porkies so to me they are no more credible than the person/persons who wrote the Bible.

Well we can talk to scientists today, look at their work and critique them. We can build on what they say and no scientist ever says that their word is final


Pray tell me who are the men who wrote the bible and why does the bible end thus?:

Nothing May Be Added
…19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. 20He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. 21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen.



(and Peer Review is what stops "exaggeration,Chinese whispers ,mistakes and a few porkies " - for an explanation of what that is look here: http://www.senseaboutscience.org/pages/peer-review.html)

[Crimson Dynamo]

Our universe may well indeed well be part of a multivers and if the multiverse theory is right, it would have been born among an infinite number of older sibling universes.

We have currently zero information of what came before the Big Bang. While we can say we know nothing and see nothing pre-Big Bang, we cannot say there was nothing from nothing line.

We are always learning and moving forward, that is the beauty of science. :spin:

[kirklancaster]

Well we can talk to scientists today, look at their work and critique them. We can build on what they say and no scientist ever says that their word is final


Pray tell me who are the men who wrote the bible and why does the bible end thus?:

Nothing May Be Added
…19and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God will take away his part from the tree of life and from the holy city, which are written in this book. 20He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming quickly." Amen. Come, Lord Jesus. 21The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all. Amen.

In 2,000 to 3,500 years time, future LT's may be similarly dismissing the written words of Stephen Hawking, Lawrence M. Krauss and Richard Dawkins as primitive 'fable' tellers.

As for your intimation that the Bible is irrelevant because we can't talk to or question its authors, when was the last time you talked to or questioned Albert Einstein, Hans Bethe, or Robert Oppenheimer?

Finally, and as I have previously informed you in a previous thread, the Judeo Christian Bible was written by many authors over thousands of years, so - again - to intimate that the entire book is flawed or irrelevant because of one minuscule portion is typically inane, and akin to throwing away a ton of apples because one is bruised.

[Crimson Dynamo]

In 2,000 to 3,500 years time, future LT's may be similarly dismissing the written words of Stephen Hawking, Lawrence M. Krauss and Richard Dawkins as primitive 'fable' tellers.

As for your intimation that the Bible is irrelevant because we can't talk to or question its authors, when was the last time you talked to or questioned Albert Einstein, Hans Bethe, or Robert Oppenheimer?

Finally, and as I have previously informed you in a previous thread, the Judeo Christian Bible was written by many authors over thousands of years, so - again - to intimate that the entire book is flawed or irrelevant because of one minuscule portion is typically inane, and akin to throwing away a ton of apples because one is bruised.

I was replying to Kaz's statement regarding scientists today against what she said about the men who wrote the bible.

so it was not really addressed to you or the 3 topics you replied about which are not related.

However I have a question for you:spin:

Can you say why the lady in question said she saw jesus and explain why you think that and how that would come about?

[kirklancaster]

Our universe may well indeed well be part of a multivers and if the multiverse theory is right, it would have been born among an infinite number of older sibling universes.

We have currently zero information of what came before the Big Bang. While we can say we know nothing and see nothing pre-Big Bang, we cannot say there was nothing from nothing line.

We are always learning and moving forward, that is the beauty of science. :spin:

The 'Multiverse' is just another theory. The Big Bang is just a theory, but this theory is physically impossible given all known laws of physics, and is currently - as with all scientific theories which you consistently hail as 'Gospel' - being discredited by other eminent physicists as baloney.

What's more; cast your mind back to a previous thread in which I asked you a question on Physics - your favourite subject:

"If the universe is expanding (Big Bang et al) and as light 'diffracts' - spreads out as it travels - independently of this expansion, and if some of these 'dead stars' which are the source of this light are trillions of light years from our vantage point on Earth, then why do we still see the travelling light from these distant dead stars as starlight? Why hasn't it acted in accordance with the 'Laws of Physics' and spread out and dimmed as a massively wide glow of light? Why hasn't it changed colour even as it has 'cooled'? "


And remember that - here again - you did not answer me except with the usual non-relevant ridicule.

Well, I knew the answer and it is highly pertinent here.

Starlight does not diffuse and does not spread out and dim, because the latest thinking among physicists is that the universe is not expanding - which makes further nonsense of your prized 'Big Bang Theory'.

According to the Big Bang theory, distant objects appear fainter but bigger in an expanding Universe, because the surface brightness decreases with the distance, and the light is stretched and further dimmed as the Universe expanded.

Therefore, in an expanding Universe the most distant galaxies should be hundreds of times dimmer than nearby galaxies, but observations in new studies have been published in the International Journal of Modern Physics, which contest that the universe is expanding.

Scientists carefully compared the size and magnitude of about a thousand nearby and extremely distant galaxies, and chose the most luminous spiral galaxies for comparisons, matching the average luminosity of the near and far samples.

Contrary to the 'Big Bang theory', they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical. These results are consistent with what would be expected from ordinary geometry if the Universe was not expanding, and are in contradiction with the drastic dimming of surface brightness predicted by the expanding Universe hypothesis.

Finally, given that you are such a 'science and physics' groupie, how can you state:

"We cannot say there was nothing from nothing line."

By the First Law Of Thermodynamics and other tenets and principles of physics, "Out of Nothing, comes Nothing".

Now your view thoroughly deserves a few; :joker::joker::joker:

[Kazanne]

I'm not into all the ins and outs and whys or wherefores,I don't study science or religion,all I can say there are two books,both supposedly written by men,so who is to say which one is accurate,we do not know,personally the Bible has some home truths for me,albeit the stories have been exaggerated in films etc,but some words are definitely true such as the nations will go to war(just one example)East against West,we will destroy ourselves as some of us are arrogant,greedy,cruel and selfish.

[kirklancaster]

I was replying to Kaz's statement regarding scientists today against what she said about the men who wrote the bible.

so it was not really addressed to you or the 3 topics you replied about which are not related.

However I have a question for you:spin:

Can you say why the lady in question said she saw jesus and explain why you think that and how that would come about?

Wow! Your last question is back on topic -- I do hope it's not an attempt to deflect from the subject which you started and on which you ridiculed others for their responses, because you have no answers now when challenged to substantiate your secular physics-based claims?

Anyway, I will answer you but I have pressing work and a deadline, and I have already spent hours on this. I will address your points which I have emboldened though, and say that; I know your point was "not really addressed" to me, but I am interjecting - contributing - as you often do.

Further; the "3 topics in question" are definitely "related" by virtue of being on this thread on this forum. That being so, any relevant response is valid.

[Crimson Dynamo]

The 'Multiverse' is just another theory. The Big Bang is just a theory, but this theory is physically impossible given all known laws of physics, and is currently - as with all scientific theories which you consistently hail as 'Gospel' - being discredited by other eminent physicists as baloney.

What's more; cast your mind back to a previous thread in which I asked you a question on Physics - your favourite subject:

"If the universe is expanding (Big Bang et al) and as light 'diffracts' - spreads out as it travels - independently of this expansion, and if some of these 'dead stars' which are the source of this light are trillions of light years from our vantage point on Earth, then why do we still see the travelling light from these distant dead stars as starlight? Why hasn't it acted in accordance with the 'Laws of Physics' and spread out and dimmed as a massively wide glow of light? Why hasn't it changed colour even as it has 'cooled'? "


And remember that - here again - you did not answer me except with the usual non-relevant ridicule.

Well, I knew the answer and it is highly pertinent here.

Starlight does not diffuse and does spread out and dim, because the latest thinking among physicists is that the universe is not expanding - which makes further nonsense of your prized 'Big Bang Theory'.

According to the Big Bang theory, distant objects appear fainter but bigger in an expanding Universe, because the surface brightness decreases with the distance, and the light is stretched and further dimmed as the Universe expanded.

Therefore, in an expanding Universe the most distant galaxies should be hundreds of times dimmer than nearby galaxies, but observations in new studies have been published in the International Journal of Modern Physics, which contest that the universe is expanding.

Scientists carefully compared the size and magnitude of about a thousand nearby and extremely distant galaxies, and chose the most luminous spiral galaxies for comparisons, matching the average luminosity of the near and far samples.

Contrary to the 'Big Bang theory', they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical. These results are consistent with what would be expected from ordinary geometry if the Universe was not expanding, and are in contradiction with the drastic dimming of surface brightness predicted by the expanding Universe hypothesis.

Finally, given that you are such a 'science and physics' groupie, how can you state:

"We cannot say there was nothing from nothing line."

By the First Law Of Thermodynamics and other tenets and principles of physics, "Out of Nothing, comes Nothing".

Now your view thoroughly deserves a few; :joker::joker::joker:




http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-universe-not-expanding-01940.html


basic copypasta from the above article

and preaching from Eric Learner the guy who makes his living saying the big bang did not happen....:umm2:


Jesus H on a bike



What next "Why I think 9/11 was an inside job"?

[Northern Monkey]

Impho,The human brain is not capable of understanding the beginning of everything.We are the most intelligent species on our planet but we are'nt intelligent enough to answer the most perplexing of questions and either won't ever be or if we survive long enough,Until we evolve into a higher,more intelligent species(if that's where evolution takes us).Here are a couple of questions in which i believe our species as it is won't ever answer(imo).....

1.What is existence?
2.If there is a God,How did he come into existence?
3.How did existence come to be and what existed before?

Now these questions i believe are too complex for the human brain.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Impho,The human brain is not capable of understanding the beginning of everything.We are the most intelligent species on our planet but we are'nt intelligent enough to answer the most perplexing of questions and either won't ever be or if we survive long enough,Until we evolve into a higher,more intelligent species(if that's where evolution takes us).Here are a couple of questions in which i believe our species as it is won't ever answer(imo).....

1.What is existence?
2.If there is a God,How did he come into existence?
3.How did existence come to be and what existed before?

Now these questions i believe are too complex for the human brain.

To be fair most people dont even know the capital of Australia....

:dog:

[kirklancaster]

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-universe-not-expanding-01940.html


basic copypasta from the above article

and preaching from Eric Learner the guy who makes his living saying the big bang did not happen....:umm2:


Jesus H on a bike



What next "Why I think 9/11 was an inside job"?

I read that article and perhaps 20 others and my post is a summary of what I read and research from as many sources as time allows. If it was 'copy pasta' the words would be identical. Where in the quoted article do you see any of the other points I raise or comments I make?

Obviously (except to a cretin) there are only so many ways of writing about a given subject and therefore the idiom of the source material and post will by necessity sometimes be similar - that much is unavoidable. Describe such an article without sometimes being compelled to use the correct terminology and occasional statements of the source.

You do it all the time, but you merely scour the internet then past a link without really reading, digesting or understanding the subject matter you are linking, I read, absorb, and analyse the article, then weigh it against other articles or books, before relating in my own manner.

Anyway, once again you have proved my point that you are bereft of any real, worthwhile views - no matter what the source, because you do not understand the subject - instead, you do not answer, and resort to deflecting ridicule.

Also; is it not yet more hypocrisy on your part to ridicule me for agreeing with Lerner's valid viewpoint (among others) - no matter if he makes money from his expertise - when you constantly quote Dawkins and Klauss whose viewpoints are far less credible than Lerner's and from which their primary aim is to make money? They do not give their books away.

So; ridicule wasted, deflection unsuccessful - now will you answer my questions?

[Crimson Dynamo]

I read that article and perhaps 20 others and my post is a summary of what I read and research from as many sources as time allows. If it was 'copy pasta' the words would be identical. Where in the quoted article do you see any of the other points I raise or comments I make?

Obviously (except to a cretin) there are only so many ways of writing about a given subject and therefore the idiom of the source material and post will by necessity sometimes be similar - that much is unavoidable. Describe such an article without sometimes being compelled to use the correct terminology and occasional statements of the source.

You do it all the time, but you merely scour the internet then past a link without really reading, digesting or understanding the subject matter you are linking, I read, absorb, and analyse the article, then weigh it against other articles or books, before relating in my own manner.

Anyway, once again you have proved my point that you are bereft of any real, worthwhile views - no matter what the source, because you do not understand the subject - instead, you do not answer, and resort to deflecting ridicule.

Also; is it not yet more hypocrisy on your part to ridicule me for agreeing with Lerner's valid viewpoint (among others) - no matter if he makes money from his expertise - when you constantly quote Dawkins and Klauss whose viewpoints are far less credible than Lerner's and from which their primary aim is to make money? They do not give their books away.

So; ridicule wasted, deflection unsuccessful - now will you answer my questions?

It was a cut and paste job with a few words changed but a basic highlight and google search is your friend

:spin:

[kirklancaster]

It was a cut and paste job with a few words changed but a basic highlight and google search is your friend

:spin:

No - it is your friend, you are the one who is incapable of actually learning knowledge then relating it in your own terms, which is why you are the one who pastes links to everything 'internet'. Unfortunately, your way is like cheating at exams by covertly having the answers: because you have not actually read and learnt the material, you do not ever understand the subject matter.

The majority of my post was written months ago on here in response to another post of yours about Ghosts etc, so I am not the one who suddenly ran to google any subject. You are the one who ran to google (as normal) when stumped for a legitimate response to my posts.

I already possess most of my learnt knowledge and don't have to take the time to google - which is also why I can answer quickly, whereas you cannot answer at all, or if you do, it only by way of a minimalist response or a pasted link with long intervals in between, because you know nothing and have to google each and every time.

I also notice that you still have not answered any of my points but once again resort to attempted ridicule.

Shallow Hal.

[Josy]

Either stick to discussing the topic and NOT other members or the thread will be closed.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Either stick to discussing the topic and NOT other members or the thread will be closed.

Thank you Josy

I would like to ask Kirklancaster



Can you say why the lady in question said she saw jesus and explain why you think that and how that would come about?

[kirklancaster]

Thank you Josy

I would like to ask Kirklancaster

Can you say why the lady in question said she saw jesus and explain why you think that and how that would come about?

It was not a rhetorical question LT - I genuinely do not know why. I have my own ideas - theory if you will - obviously biased and based upon my faith, but I don't know.

I wanted to discover other viewpoints for the very reason that I wasn't sure.

I would like to think that because she was an atheist and not a religious person (according to her own testimony in articles I have read, and in a documentary which someone on here mentioned) that Christ did actually appear to her.

I am not concerned that the vision she actually saw was an image -- a medieval artists impression -- of the 'Veronica Cloth', because no one can look upon the countenance of God, and if she did 'perceive' a vision of Christ, then her mind would project the image of Christ which she could identify.

Incidentally, the image of Christ - long hair and bearded - on that particular painting, is notable, because it is the sterotypical image that most artists depicted once the image on the Shroud of Turin had become known. Before then, depictions of Christ in art were diverse and generic.

Anyway, in this particular case - I just don't know.

[lostalex]

Oxygen depravation makes crazy stressed out fat woman see Jesus. (how she knew it was jesus is what proves it's fake. because no one knows what Jesus looks like, so how would she know it was Jesus?

This woman went through something horrific and clearly lost a lot of brain cells in the process. I hope she feels better and gets some psychological help.

All religions are a lie.

[Jules2]

We have to accept that everyone has a point of view which is totally valid to many people. As we/I have said before in my view it is life and shouldnt be claimed as religion. It is a way of using the mechanics within our own being. The alternative state of being can be accessed through darkness and stress but imo the vision may not have been JC but one of the guardians who are there to help us in distress.

I do really feel that religion is man made as I may have said before, we just have to look within our own personal identities to reach a goal.

I have got well into the Deep Sea Scrolls but I can see how many who believe totally in JC could be disillusioned. As I have previously said I do believe in him but not in the same way. I guess I could class myself as an atheist but I have strong beliefs in the experiences of life which we are sometimes afraid to accept.

[Jules2]

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

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

Imo though LT whilst I can appreciate what you are saying it was through the act which caused her to experience. We are so bogged down with our everyday lives and worries that we are kept anchored to the physical plain of thought it is often when we are in trouble that another door opens and a light is allowed to shine in sad but true.

It is hard to say what the dear little souls will be feeling but an understandable point. We can but hope that there is some comfort somewhere for them.

[Jules2]

Impho,The human brain is not capable of understanding the beginning of everything.We are the most intelligent species on our planet but we are'nt intelligent enough to answer the most perplexing of questions and either won't ever be or if we survive long enough,Until we evolve into a higher,more intelligent species(if that's where evolution takes us).Here are a couple of questions in which i believe our species as it is won't ever answer(imo).....

1.What is existence?
2.If there is a God,How did he come into existence?
3.How did existence come to be and what existed before?

Now these questions i believe are too complex for the human brain.

and...............who created the first word? Such a complex situation because no matter what we have to go right back to the beginnng to see how things did evolve. In the beginning there wasnt such a thing as religion as we know it. So much has been lost through fighting over the political side of life and religion.

Jose Silva teaches people to use both sides of the brain, in so doing we are able to see things more clearly but no one seems to have the true answers of true existence, we just have to take it a step at a time. Perhaps one day when the time is right we will all know. :wavey: (have just found the smilies again :laugh:).

[Marsh.]

All religions are a lie.

And atheism is a false sense of superiority. :spin:

[Jules2]

Our universe may well indeed well be part of a multivers and if the multiverse theory is right, it would have been born among an infinite number of older sibling universes.

We have currently zero information of what came before the Big Bang. While we can say we know nothing and see nothing pre-Big Bang, we cannot say there was nothing from nothing line.

We are always learning and moving forward, that is the beauty of science. :spin:

I agree LT, the beauty of science cannot be denied, there was a piece quite a while back now where they were researching that which came before the supposed big bang theory. I haven heard anymore about it but I have to admit I felt quite interested in the aspect.

[Jules2]

And atheism is a false sense of superiority. :spin:

Why would you feel that Marsh, isnt it just another point of view? I find it easier to think that way because to me we are all equals and it is interesting to know how others feel......:wavey:

[Jules2]

So as a logical extension then Niamh - can we expect all Atheists at the hour of their death to suddenly start frantically believing? Why would an Atheist suddenly need confirmation that there is no God?

And I cannot accept that the sub-conscious mind of an Atheist would project a vision of Christ no matter how dire the circumstances she was in.

Unless - deep down inside her conscious - she was never really Atheist at all.

Hi Kirk, in your view what is the true definition of an Atheist? If we join a "society" we have to conform to rules, now as I cannot accept JC or "God" in the same light as Born Again Christians I term myself as an atheist but I know and accept the other side of life, the beginnings of all things and the joy of discovering that we are not alone.

I have said before that I believe in the seperation of the bodies, now this can be brought upon by the energy of distress, the sleep state or by ones own efforts. It is in this state that imo we come into touch with our visions.

I guess most of us have faith in something or another.....:wavey:

[Jules2]

I agree with pretty much everything Livia said (especially the "you have no more proof that God doesn't exist than i have that he does) so true.

I watched the documentary about Stephanie Slater, really horrible what she went through.
My uncle (who sadly is now an angel) was an Atheist, but he saw God whilst he was in hospital with a serious illness. I know peoples minds can play tricks on them when they're in a state of shock or whatever but my uncle really believed he saw God (even though he'd been an Atheist his whole life) and i believe he did too.

Aw that is lovely, imo "strange" things happen before crossover :wavey: If we discovered more we would know that they arent strange, just a change of lifestyle.

[Kizzy]

I think the near death experiences are explained away too easily, pain relief, lack of oxygen and disassociation for example.
We will always try to apply logic to experiences I suppose :shrug:
It's a shame as I'm a believer in so much as I think we've forgotten more than we'll probably ever know.

[Jules2]

Actually there is more evidence of extra terrestrial life than there is of God, although to be honest any form of alien life could be perceived as a God.

If you do a bit of research you will find hundreds of thousands of cases of reported sightings of unidentified craft, taken together with credible witness reports from Military personnel and as a large proportion of these sightings are captured on photographs, film and video together with radar sightings and anomalous physical data, this constitutes way more evidence than simply

I believe therefore it's real...????

Maybe we were actually created by an advanced Alien life form millions of years ago.



Simple fact is we haven't got a bloody clue who we are or where we came from and what our purpose is.....




.

I think your maybe is a possible maybe, then we have the question of where did they come from and so it goes on and on and on, we are only a tiny spec of the total truth. :wavey:

[Jules2]

I think the near death experiences are explained away too easily, pain relief, lack of oxygen and disassociation for example.
We will always try to apply logic to experiences I suppose :shrug:
It's a shame as I'm a believer in so much as I think we've forgotten more than we'll probably ever know.

I agree Kizzy....:wavey:

[Crimson Dynamo]

I think the near death experiences are explained away too easily, pain relief, lack of oxygen and disassociation for example.
We will always try to apply logic to experiences I suppose :shrug:
It's a shame as I'm a believer in so much as I think we've forgotten more than we'll probably ever know.

yes, damn logic and the truth, we want anecdotal tales that make people mysterious and interesting...

[Kizzy]

yes, damn logic and the truth, we want anecdotal tales that make people mysterious and interesting...

You can't lump these two together as in this instance the truth doesn't follow logic as it can't be proven.

[Jules2]

You can't lump these two together as in this instance the truth doesn't follow logic as it can't be proven.

The trouble is we have to experience, it then becomes logic within our own being. My first experience was as a child at the dentist. I saw myself in the chair, I hovered above it and watched myself having a tooth pulled. I didnt realise what it was at the age of 5 but have learnt a lot since. :wavey:

[Ammi]

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

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

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

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

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

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

...hmmmm, well..you're asking for 'explanations'..?....why that would be...?...but isn't that the thing though...not everything can be explained...there are 'explanations' that would make perfect sense, that would kind of 'box it up' type thing and I could think of some myself but I guess the fact is that she believed she saw Jesus, she's convinced of that and so therefore she did...she saw the vision that she believed to be Jesus ..why..?...who knows, really..?...maybe it's what she needed to see to help her survive but I really don't know and I doubt that she does either....it's just one of those 'unexplained' things I guess....we could rationalise and explain but it still wouldn't necessarily be the 'answer'.....wouldn't it be boring having 'answers' to everything anyway....much more interesting to have 'mysteries'....

[Jules2]

Morning all, Kirk did you get any answers to your OP, what would you like to think is the answer?

One thing seems for certain, it helped her and it has put her onto a different level of thought, hopefully this will help her to get over the turmoil of such a horrible event.

Have you had a look at the Deep Sea Scrolls at all, have to admit that it has explained at least three things for me, one of which I have had to change my original thought. I believe for myself it has been to easy to compare things to this days rules and regulations but I have to accept that it was not the same then. Consequently some of the so called miracles are explained, if the scrolls are fact. They have been scientifically processed for the age and material around at that time.

[kirklancaster]

Morning all, Kirk did you get any answers to your OP, what would you like to think is the answer?

One thing seems for certain, it helped her and it has put her onto a different level of thought, hopefully this will help her to get over the turmoil of such a horrible event.

Have you had a look at the Deep Sea Scrolls at all, have to admit that it has explained at least three things for me, one of which I have had to change my original thought. I believe for myself it has been to easy to compare things to this days rules and regulations but I have to accept that it was not the same then. Consequently some of the so called miracles are explained, if the scrolls are fact. They have been scientifically processed for the age and material around at that time.

Morning Jules,

I reproduce my answer to LT Jules to save duplication:

It was not a rhetorical question - I genuinely do not know why. I have my own ideas - theory if you will - obviously biased and based upon my faith, but I don't know.

I wanted to discover other viewpoints for the very reason that I wasn't sure.

I would like to think that because she was an atheist and not a religious person (according to her own testimony in articles I have read, and in a documentary which someone on here mentioned) that Christ did actually appear to her.

I am not concerned that the vision she actually saw was an image -- a medieval artists impression -- of the 'Veronica Cloth', because no one can look upon the countenance of God, and if she did 'perceive' a vision of Christ, then her mind would project the image of Christ which she could identify.

Incidentally, the image of Christ - long hair and bearded - on that particular painting, is notable, because it is the sterotypical image that most artists depicted once the image on the Shroud of Turin had become known. Before then, depictions of Christ in art were diverse and generic.

As to the Dead Sea Scrolls, yes, I have always been interested in them, and have a couple of books which I've had for years and have also researched them - as you have Jules.

I have no reason to doubt the scrolls authenticity, or the Copper Scrolls.

Do your ideas on the connection between the Scrolls and Christ come from reading the works of Edmund Wilson Jules?

[lostalex]

And atheism is a false sense of superiority. :spin:

actually atheism says that we are all small insignificant creatures, How is that arrogant? That's the exact opposite of arrogance or superiority.

Thinking there is a God that loves you and makes you special and gives you special powers by praying to him is arrogant and gives YOU the faLSe sense of superiority,.

[lostalex]

believing in God is no different than believing in Zeus or Ganesh or any of the thousands of Gods that came before God. How can any religious person not see that?

Christians think believing that God is a blue elephant with 8 arms is ridiculous, but believing in Jesus is equally as silly.

[kirklancaster]

believing in God is no different than believing in Zeus or Ganesh or any of the thousands of Gods that came before God. How can any religious person not see that?

Christians think believing that God is a blue elephant with 8 arms is ridiculous, but believing in Jesus is equally as silly.

No Alex, 'blue elephants with 8 arms ' do not exist and never have, whereas Jesus did exist.

[lostalex]

No Alex, 'blue elephants with 8 arms ' do not exist and never have, whereas Jesus did exist.

yes, we all know that con artists exist, but a son of God that could perform miracles has never existed. Jesus the con artist man existed, but Jesus the miracle worker, that could walk on water, turn water in wine, heal the sick with his touch, forgive humanity for all it's sins....is just as silly as the blue elephant with 8 arms.

[Crimson Dynamo]

No Alex, 'blue elephants with 8 arms ' do not exist and never have, whereas Jesus did exist.

whoooah there

Can you prove that they dont exist? You seem so certain..

[lostalex]

whoooah there

Can you prove that they dont exist? You seem so certain..

eggasactly. Ganesh works in mysterious ways, how dare you ask him to show himself. just because you haven't seen a blue elephant with 8 arms personally doesn't mean that he doesn't exist!

That's exactly the same logic christians use whenever you ask them for any evidence.

[Crimson Dynamo]

eggasactly. Ganesh works in mysterious ways, how dare you ask him to show himself. just because you haven't seen a blue elephant with 8 arms personally doesn't mean that he doesn't exist!

Its about having faith it does exist, how dare people attack my faith

:nono:

[lostalex]

Its about having faith it does exist, how dare people attack my faith

:nono:


How VERY dare they! :nono:

[Crimson Dynamo]

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l6dzma4wRC1qb5oo0.jpg

[kirklancaster]

whoooah there

Can you prove that they dont exist? You seem so certain..

Well, LT - I've forensically searched every written text I can, and examined the fossil records in minute detail during the last 2 minutes, and I can't find any whisker of a hint that they existed. I've even - swear on Jihadi John's life - just bought a copy of the '8 Armed Blue Elephants Guide For Dummies' and still cannot find any conclusive proof.

Unlike Christ's existence which is well documented within the Bible and in dozens of extraneous documents. But you know that anyway from previous little 'tete a tetes'.

God Bless LT.

[Crimson Dynamo]

Well, LT - I've forensically searched every written text I can, and examined the fossil records in minute detail during the last 2 minutes, and I can't find any whisker of a hint that they existed. I've even - swear on Jihadi John's life - just bought a copy of the '8 Armed Blue Elephants Guide For Dummies' and still cannot find any conclusive proof.

Unlike Christ's existence which is well documented within the Bible and in dozens of extraneous documents. But you know that anyway from previous little 'tete a tetes'.

God Bless LT.

What you really mean is that you are agnostic to it.

I am aware of the tenuous mentions of a man called Jesus in other places like Josephus but all they tell me is that there may have been a bloke kicking around at that time who was being hailed as a messiah - but a cursory glance at the life of Brian will tell you that was fairly common at that time and no document supports the claims made in the bible books.

I would not trust any information coming from the middle east in 2014 never mind back in biblical times

[kirklancaster]

eggasactly. Ganesh works in mysterious ways, how dare you ask him to show himself. just because you haven't seen a blue elephant with 8 arms personally doesn't mean that he doesn't exist!

That's exactly the same logic christians use whenever you ask them for any evidence.

Nothing of the sort Alex - and we're going down the same 'Avenue Of Silliness' which these threads always lead down, no matter how well meaning they start off.

I could fill 20 pages of thread on here with evidence for - not only Jesus's existence - but that he was the Christ. Evidence not Proof - no one can prove the existence of God no more than anyone can prove God's non existence.

I could fill 20 pages, but I'm not. I cannot do with the hassle of deliberately nonsensical responses and unnecessary ridicule.

[lostalex]

Well, LT - I've forensically searched every written text I can, and examined the fossil records in minute detail during the last 2 minutes, and I can't find any whisker of a hint that they existed. I've even - swear on Jihadi John's life - just bought a copy of the '8 Armed Blue Elephants Guide For Dummies' and still cannot find any conclusive proof.

Unlike Christ's existence which is well documented within the Bible and in dozens of extraneous documents. But you know that anyway from previous little 'tete a tetes'.

God Bless LT.

there is evidence that the man existed, but there is ZERO evidence that he was God or performed any miracles. right?

[Crimson Dynamo]

and if you are asking god to bless me then state which one as there are hundreds and hundreds of man made gods around at the moment

[kirklancaster]

and if you are asking god to bless me then state which one as there are hundreds and hundreds of man made gods around at the moment

I'm - once again - being friendly to you, and merely asking whichever God YOU believe in to bless you.