There is definetely a god - apparently

[jaffka]

Has anyone mentioned the "But Byrom puts in the rebound" gag yet?

pray tell, I don't know this one.

[TANGODANCER]

Lots of your arguments could make me irritated, but what's the point. As for the Nicene Creed, as I said, an invention of man (Constantine in fact, who had spent his entire life as a non-believer almost up to his death) based on existing beliefs which shouldn't need re-vamping to suit man's wishes. . As for being too wise to argue being an admission of defeat, hardly, just from prior atheistic opposition I know it's a pointless waste of time and breath. As for being dead being the end of it all, do you have proof?

Soul isn't just music with black roots. Then again, it's all down to what you believe. Peace in your little valley brother and a Merry Dawkinsmas to you all.

[Lord Kangana]

Has anyone mentioned the "But Byrom puts in the rebound" gag yet?

pray tell, I don't know this one.

Jesus Saves...

An oldie but goldie I've oft heard at the Wanderers

[Puskas]

As for being dead being the end of it all, do you have proof?

Well, I don't see many walking corpses outside of zombie movies.

Maybe I shouldn't draw universal conclusions from that, but the general medical consensus is that there's not much happening after you die. I didn't think that was very contraversial...

[Lord Kangana]

If you are talking at atomic level, surely there is conclusive proof of life after death?

[TANGODANCER]

As for being dead being the end of it all, do you have proof?

Well, I don't see many walking corpses outside of zombie movies.

Maybe I shouldn't draw universal conclusions from that, but the general medical consensus is that there's not much happening after you die. I didn't think that was very contraversial...

Yes, that's why the whole concept of religion is based around the soul, not the body. If you can't accept that then we're on different tracks altogether. Nothing about the end product of religion has to do with bodies, that's the whole idea. The body dies, the soul lives on. That's what religion is. What's so hard to believe, you believed Bolton could have won the EUFA Cup didn't you?

[Puskas]

As for being dead being the end of it all, do you have proof?

Well, I don't see many walking corpses outside of zombie movies.

Maybe I shouldn't draw universal conclusions from that, but the general medical consensus is that there's not much happening after you die. I didn't think that was very contraversial...

Yes, that's why the whole concept of religion is based around the soul, not the body. If you can't accept that then we're on different tracks altogether. Nothing about the end product of religion has to do with bodies, that's the whole idea. The body dies, the soul lives on. That's what religion is. What's so hard to believe, you believed Bolton could have won the EUFA Cup didn't you?

Could you explain what the word "soul" means, please?

No, didn't think so...

[TANGODANCER]

Could you explain what the word "soul" means, please?
No, didn't think so...

You ask me a question and answer it yourself in the same message? Shades of Commie. Why not Google "The spiritual soul" or something, for yourself. There are plenty of explanations out there. Again, what you choose to believe is what you choose to believe.

[CrazyHorse]

I see that yet another religious thread is starting its slow, painful descent towards lockage. Brilliant.

[Puskas]

Could you explain what the word "soul" means, please?
No, didn't think so...

You ask me a question and answer it yourself in the same message? Shades of Commie. Why not Google "The spiritual soul" or something, for yourself. There are plenty of explanations out there. Again, what you choose to believe is what you choose to believe.

I was merely pointing out that the concept doesn't make sense.

The soul is, I assume you would claim, immaterial, differentiating it from the body. However the soul also needs to control the body, otherwise it's pointless (for instance, if I want to lift my arm, I do so. If the soul can't do that, it's not me, is it?) How, then, can something which is immaterial control a material body?

A slightly trimmed down version of the argument, but you get the general drift.

As for what I believe being what I choose - well, yes, obviously. It's just that what I choose to believe is supported by evidence and rationality. Given your refusal (inability, presumably) to defend any claims you make, it seems to me that what you believe isn't.

[Puskas]

I see that yet another religious thread is starting its slow, painful descent towards lockage. Brilliant.

Why?

No abuse, as far as I can see.

Simply a difference of opinion, and some requests for clarification...

[TANGODANCER]

I see that yet another religious thread is starting its slow, painful descent towards lockage. Brilliant.

Not really seeing any declarations of war Hoss. Just an exchange of views this time. Of course, it will go nowhere as usual as the concept of belief without proof is beyond the imaginations of most folk.

[CrazyHorse]

I see that yet another religious thread is starting its slow, painful descent towards lockage. Brilliant.

Why?

No abuse, as far as I can see.

Simply a difference of opinion, and some requests for clarification...

Don't mind me - 'twas just an observation that's all. It's just we've had about twenty religious threads before now and they all start out as differences of opinion and always end up getting locked. Hey, what do I know - maybe this one will be different...carry on; prove me wrong.

[Puskas]

I see that yet another religious thread is starting its slow, painful descent towards lockage. Brilliant.

Not really seeing any declarations of war Hoss. Just an exchange of views this time. Of course, it will go nowhere as usual as the concept of belief without proof is beyond the imaginations of most folk.

Belief without evidence, rather than belief without proof, I'd suggest - most of my beliefs aren't "proven" - simply "very likely"...

And not beyond the imagination. Rather, as I said earlier, a bit silly. And not very helpful in making an effort to understand the world.

But you're right in that it'll go nowhere, so I'll stop...

[Montreal Wanderer]

I won't stop because I must note it is good to see a discussion of a touchy subject that has not descended to lockage levels. On the other hand there is no possibility of one side convincing the other - but no harm in viewing both sides.

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

If there is a God, he's seriously testing my character!

[Prufrock]

I'm far too wise to even bother arguing what faith and belief mean. Suffice to say we've been doing it for a very long time even as Christianity which is 2000 years old. Why shouldn't Christians celebrate Christmas as the birth of Christ? That's what it's about after all. We're supposed to live in a world of equality and free speach, yet that's exactly what we aren't doing. Do you deny Christ was born? If not, why deny the right to celebrate that to believers?

It isn't just about creation; more about looking inside yourself, something that becomes progressively more important the older you get. If you can't live with the thought of a supreme being, fine, your choice.

Are you superstitious, do you believe in the occult, ghosts, why are people afraid of the dark? Surely all these things have parallels on the other side of the scale? As for churches, Jesus never advocated them and even said that people need not be seen to worship and pray. Even the history of religion is more about the word of man than that of God. You have to untangle a lot of myth and legend to even come near understanding what God is about. Atheism, to me, is a convenient excuse not to have to answer about anything to anyone but yourself. Well, fine. Carry on then. Nobody's stopping you. You'll just have to keep on wondering till the day you die, then you'll know for sure. I'll add, "One way or the other" just for your benefit.

See, that's the bit i don't get, if of course this message is still aimed at the message on the bus. My problem is your man from Christian Voice is a straight up hypocrite, and is making himself a barrier agaisnt free speech.
The bus messages arent forbidding folk to have faith, just pointing out the statistical fact that god doesn't exist. Mainly however i think it a publicity stunt just to draw attention to the subject and make folk think, somethink the modern world is scared to do. It has caused debates on here and doubtless other places and makes people come out of their comfort barrier's and challenge things. If after that they still believe in the big man upstairs then fine, no problems. I have absolutely no problem with personal faith even if i don't share it.

All this Christian Voice bloke has done has reinforced my intense dislike for organised religion as the backward hypocritical vile blind thing it is. I thought faith was suupposed to be a personal thing? So what is the need for massive institutions preaching how contraception is evil in the face of AIDS epidemics, promoting homophobia and sexism and investing in arms shares? No doubt some people take strength from their faith, and it makes some people happy, and thats great. Their right to that belief should not be taken away, but nor should it stand in the way of everybody having all the information they need on important subjects. Nor should it stretch to indoctrinating children too young to make their own choices.

I honestly cant see the man's point, and his response made me actually laugh. I don't massively disagree with a lot of what TD says about freedom of speech and thought, and that if he has his faith he is entitled to it, all true, but there just is no valid argument for banning the BHA's messages.

[Bruce Rioja]

Has no-one mentioned the giant turtle theory yet? Jolly things along a bit!

[Lord Kangana]

Was his name Jesus?

[Montreal Wanderer]

Has no-one mentioned the giant turtle theory yet? Jolly things along a bit!

That is a prevalent one amongst the local Mohawks although, like them, I have reservations.