ok calm down:hehe:

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

i mean my dead grandad John died of a heart attack

it was too detailed to be coincidence....

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

I must be very hard to read:shrug:

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

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

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

"My mum in law" i said.

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

"yes" i replied

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

How true she was!

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

Have you been talking to my hubby:fist:

Thanks Kaz:love:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Yeah... they can.

Sorry Redway i added as you posted:)

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

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

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

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

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

Good points Ammi.

And the proof for such a definite statement?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Edit: never mind

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

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

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

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

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

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

:joker::joker::joker:

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

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


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



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

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

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

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

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

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

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

:clap1:

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

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

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

Further; your statement;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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