The non-thinking that is Religion.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by LesMts

I was just making a general point when I said "overwhelming evidence to the contrary", I wasn't talking about anything in particular (there is overwhelming evidence that the Bible is full of nonsense, though).

So many people have gone on about providing the evidence for something more (E.g. in my case, a consciousness not connected to the body), and then you come out with that.
I think that totally negates your argument.

YouTube - Rowan Atkinson Live: Welcome to hell.

[RiseAgainst]

It is a fair point to be made, although there is also some hisotrical knowledge to suspect parts of the bible are indeed true (for instant tidal currents can cause the sea to part like it did for some guy, who's name i forget!)

Out of interest, whats your opinion of past life regression? is that the soul being re-born? if so surely those memories are attatched to the soul, therefore anyone getting memories from heart transplants must also be having some kind of soul graft done as well?

thats how i view it from what points you have brought up, would you not agree?

[LesMts]

Originally Posted by freakonaleash

So many people have gone on about providing the evidence for something more (E.g. in my case, a consciousness not connected to the body), and then you come out with that.
I think that totally negates your argument.

How does it totally negate my argument? Please explain.

I went on to explain why an overwhelming lack of evidence is almost as bad. There is a total lack of evidence for consciousness not being connected to the body (and some evidence against it: I was reading a very interesting piece of research a few months ago that demonstrated that, in any particular task, the relevant parts of the brain had become electrically active prior to the conscious decision of the subject to act (i.e. electrical activity in parts relevant to understanding and decision making) - the extrapolated implication being that consciousness and, more freakily, free will are both illusions).

I think the problem is that we have differing views on what it means to have no evidence for something. You see lack of objective evidence for a controversial phenomemon that you believe in as an advantage (i.e. no evidence so it could be true), I see it as a weakness.

[LesMts]

Originally Posted by RiseAgainst

there is also some hisotrical knowledge to suspect parts of the bible are indeed true (for instant tidal currents can cause the sea to part like it did for some guy, who's name i forget!)

Moses. But that's a bad example, that almost certainly didn't happen.
There are things in the Bible that are true, yeah, but the vast majority of the meat of the Bible, the fundamental assertions made in it, are demonstrably untrue.
Age of the Earth, a flat Earth, the nature of the cosmos, creation of mankind, the fall of the walls of Jericho etc etc etc.

[RiseAgainst]

dont get me wrong, i believe the bible is nothing more than stories too :P

Ive always seen the church's denials of Science throughout the years as proof that even they know deep down what they believe maybe inaccurate, but again thats just my opinion.

Take the same arguments to court, if you have no proof someone did something you cant successfully argue they might have based on something we do not yet know. Id prefer to base my knowledge on what is known, rather than speculating what may happen such as in 10years we will all live on Mars based on things i dont know about, and Science hasnt yet proven this is what the case will be.

[Hecate]

Originally Posted by RiseAgainst

It is a fair point to be made, although there is also some hisotrical knowledge to suspect parts of the bible are indeed true (for instant tidal currents can cause the sea to part like it did for some guy, who's name i forget!)

Out of interest, whats your opinion of past life regression? is that the soul being re-born? if so surely those memories are attatched to the soul, therefore anyone getting memories from heart transplants must also be having some kind of soul graft done as well?

thats how i view it from what points you have brought up, would you not agree?

That's a good question. Personally, I wouldn't touch past life regression with a bargepole! I really have no opinion on whether we live many lives or one, probably because my beliefs about the consciousness are not fixed to one bias, but just that I find the notion of a consciousness not connected to the body, possible and intriguing.

I am not proposing that the soul has its seat in the heart, but merely used that as an example of how our so-called fixed knowledge about organs in the human body can be shown to be inaccurate, or need modifying.

And the court example? If you could find a gap in time when the defendent could not explain where they were/what they were doing i.e. an anomoly, then you could follow that path and pursue a conviction if successful.

[Rebelius]

if it was illegal to "believe in a god that doensn't exist" would it be possible to prove that people were guilty in a modern court?

[LesMts]

Originally Posted by Rebelius

if it was illegal to "believe in a god that doensn't exist" would it be possible to prove that people were guilty in a modern court?

Depends how the "God" was defined.
If we're talking about the biblical God of Abraham (the God of the Bible, the Torah and the Koran) then it would probably be possible to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he's unnecessary and that most of the Bible is either mythology or analogy. Whether or not you could extrapolate "unnecessary" to "doesn't exist" I don't know, but I'm inclined to think you could.
If we're talking about an indifferent, unseen divine power, no, it's probably not possible (a deistic or pantheistic God, for example).

[Thee Alex]

So what happened while I was away? (After I got banned without any warning whatsoever....)

[Becca Bomb]

Originally Posted by Thee Alex

So what happened while I was away? (After I got banned without any warning whatsoever....)

jesus came back and proved you wrong

L0LL

[Thee Alex]

And only posted on this board? How 'niche' of him.

[Thee Alex]

Here's a thought for the religious types -

How can 'God' be Omnipotent (all powerful) and Omniscient (all knowing).

If 'he' is omniscient then 'he' knows what 'he's' going to do before 'he' does it.....meaning 'he' can't change 'his' mind.....meaning 'he' can't be omnipotent.

Riddle me THAT, believers!!