The Pope's death

Dear Tones: How come you know so much about almost everything?! I'm glad I did not offend you. I hate doing it in religious matters.

By the way, thank you for the welcome message at the classical forum.

 

I am a mine of completely useless information. Ask me something actually useful (such as, "what cable should I use to brighten up my dull, dull, dull all-Krell system?" ) and I'm lost.

 

I find the religious posturing of Bush and Blair totally abhorrent. In this case, it's being used as an excuse to cover up for the oldest (and most human) characteristic of all time - we want what we want and we're going to get it, by any means, fair or foul. The sight of Bush posturing and pretending care over the Terri Schiavo affair, having been guilty of the murder of thousands of innocent Iraqis and currently being guilty of the incarceration and torture of thousands more, was sickening. However, it does show that his politicking instincts are alive and well.

 

'Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.'

Also from Chesterton:

'Once people stop believing in God, they do not believe in nothing; they believe anything'.

 

OK - so you got me - that's the Gospel according to four mushroom-heads...

The bible probably took more creative power, since there's multiple books and two testaments; I should think maybe 20 or so people - either way, I still refuse to accept that any of it happened.

Religion, as far as I can tell, was invented to keep people busy with something, long before tv or radio had been invented. If you really believe in the power of prayer or what-have-you, more power to you, but I firmly believe that if there is ANY kind of afterlife, it's reincarnation.

I also believe that that (footballer?) who claimed disabled people did something bad in a previous life was probably right. Silly mode on: based on my current life, I was probably a total sleaze with hundreds of birds - maybe a dead GP driver or something, since I can't drive and am pants with women in this life!!!

...I also have some weird theory about the Titanic, but let's not go there...

 

Is that the one about what's the difference between an Essex girl and the Titanic?

 

There isn't one - they both go down slow and are full of seamen...

If you really WANT to know my Titanic thing - here goes...

Nope - I reckon I was on it (there's some very odd memories I have which don't seem to "fit" anywhere in my life - the main one is being held over the side of a big black-hulled ship in port to see a crowd of people down below (I must have been about 8); I could see my shoes and clothes and ALL were very old fashioned - methinks I was being held over the railings or wall of either the poop deck or aft well deck - all third class areas). I can also remember from this vision that the cranes were very old and large, and there were DEFINITELY horses (probably with carts) down there, and LOTS of smoke.

The only other times I could have seen over a boat in the relevant ages of THIS life are 1982 (Sealink, blue hull, no smoke, no horses, no crowd!), 1984 (Townsend Thorrsen, red hull, no smoke, no crowd - ONE Of the x of free enterprise sisters - don't think it was the Herald mind you) and 1986 (DFDS, white hull, no crowd). None of the ports had these massive cranes, and in fact, the only place I've been in this life that still has them is Portsmouth, which I visited in 1987. I've actually sailed a tall ship from Ocean Dock, Southampton (1992) to Cherbourg - the exact same route as the first leg of Titanic's journey, and nothing struck me as creepy or deju vu in particular mind you...

Also, when I was 5 (definitely in THIS life!), at the blind school, we were getting ready for a swimming lesson (I wasn't scared of the pool), and they wanted a few of us to get into this medium sized open dinghy thingy. I freaked, convinced it was going to sink. No idea why mind you, since I'd been in the pool itself a few times before with no worries.

Finally, when I saw "Titanic" for the first time in the cinema, I freaked out during the scene where "Rose" is stuck running around third class - totally irrational; oh, and that main room where they danced looked awfully familiar.

Now here's the thing - we went to the Isle Of Wight in 1978 (I was 3), and I have two memories. The first is being scolded with half a flask of BOILING HOT coffee (cheers brother Mark!), and a boat. Now, I might be getting the internal rooms of Titanic mixed up with the boat we went on, but it was white hulled, NOT black (according to my dad), and the public rooms had carpet (the third class ones on Titanic were lino tiled. So this memory doesn't fit. And Dad certainly has never held me over the side of a large black hulled ship...

So something very strange there - and I would KILL to be regressed to see what's what... I don't think I died on the ship IF I was there, but my other theory (being Frederick Fleet, the lookout, hence crap eyesight in THIS life) also doesn't fit, as that would make the memory of being held over the side totally wrong, as I'd have been crew and early 30s IIRC. Very strange...

Or maybe I'm just psychotic, since I've also had two incidents in this life where things have either appeared from nowhere (a bottle of orange juice) or changed colour overnight (a large battery operated toy car), so maybe the Matrix is alive and well and we're all just copper tops!

Send for the white coats! Restraint!

 

Very interesting.

I have vivid memories of floating in the air as a toddler, launching myself from the top of the stairs and landing unharmed at the bottom. I always thought this was a bit odd, and never told anyone about it, until a few years I read the autobiography of a writer called Richard Church who said that, as a small child, he had precisely the same ability!

In my teens I had two what I would definitely describe as 'psychic' moments, when I was aware of events that I couldn't possibly have known about it.


I'm a very prosaic characater hese days though!

 

Hehehe. Interesting how a conversation evolve slowly into totally predictable or perhaps unpredictable routes. The most difficulty I have that really could challenge with the Biblical version of how nature comes to be is the implication of Darwin's book. Reading one of the newpaper article today bring this up again. If he is right there is really no need to have God to create the world as we know it.

Richard Dawkins Charles Simonyi professor of the public understanding of science at the University of Oxford, and a science writer and broadcaster

Susan Blackmore Science writer and broadcaster, and visiting lecturer at the University of the West of England in Bristol

Which is nice a thought but then again is it really religion that is the tyrant or just the very selfish nature that human being have evolved slowly to acquire by natural selection that is the true tyrant?

 

Trouble is, humans appear to come programmed to believe in something. If it's not a supernatural being, they will find something else to fill the gap. Consider the most recent two secular religions, Naziism and Communism -and they really were just that. (And they managed to dispose of more of the human race than any supernatural-based religion ever did). And when Dawkins talks of evolution, he sounds, well, frankly, religious! Evolution is his particular faith. Which is fine by me. What I don't like are absolutist positions on both sides - the US drift into religious fundamentalism, where creationist students theoretically have the ability to sue professors who teach evolution, is totally out of whack. But then, much of the current USA is exactly that.

 

HOLY SH**!!! I have the same memory too - a CLEAR recollection of actually jumping ALL the way down the stairs, and stopping PERFECTLY at the bottom. Odd... - especially when there's a glass window at floor-ish height only 3 feet from the bottom of the stairs (I was always a cautious kid!). I *definitely* remember doing this too... Mind you, I used to slide down the stairs on my butt (we had these open-plan (but with bannister!) stairs made out of wood) until dad stopped the fun by putting carpet on the steps. I think he freaked out when he saw my stair antics, and didn't want me bashing my skull in (the eyesight thing I have probably forced this one though!).

 

What's really strange is that I can remember being suddenly *not* able to do it, and wondering why!

 

Well, i don't think i actually did that, but i have had umpteen gazillion dreams as a kid were i am doing exactly what you describe, jumping from the top of the stairs, floating, then landing nimbly at the bottom like a gymnast. When i have examined this daring feat in reality i have always wondered how it wold be possible to achieve this skillful leap without actually clattering my head on the ceiling. Funny how these dreams seemed to cease when my parents moved us to a bungalow. Maybe i was doing this regularly in reality until the stairs ran out, and this is just a dream.

 

i never quite saw the great contention between evolution and 'god'. surely an omnipotent being with the whole universe to manage on his own would invent something like evolution to take the drudgery out of godding all day? (except sunday - or saturday of course that's when he diy's things and you end up with the duck billed platypus - obviously made mushrooms the same day).
cheers


julian.

 

all very fascinating, particularly tones who seems extremely well informed about catholics despite being protestant.

footballer was glen hoddle I believe.

what's happend to cranky David Icke?

used to be a moderately church going 'real' christian myself, but sort of lost interest, then shit hit the fan ( I must've been hitler in a previous life, and really don't fancy the idea of coming back to this planet with all the effin neanderthal monkies, banana dictators, tortures et. al) and now don't know what to believe dont really believe in anything now, certainly not a perfect god, but also man pretty depraved too. slight buddhist leanings.

to be fair, the pope has had loads of media coverage, definately whipped up, but a good guy all the same, great? dunno, important, yes.

not sure why he is loved so dearly tho', he's just a leader, why the fondness and adulation?

 

Frankly, neither did I, but there are folk who insist on taking the creation stories as absolute fact, rather than allegory. Well, assuming that Moses wrote Genesis, what's the point of explaining the Big Bang to a wandering tribe of nomads?

 

As the people above suggested what we have is a rather neat explanation as to how the many wonderful and diverge biological world comes into being, which one has to admit Darwin's has offer a very elegant and simply hypothesis. If you apply Occam's Razor when you have two alternative explanations, the simplest version is preferred. Wikipedia authors gave an analogy of a charred tree on the ground. There are many way to explain what has caused this from a landing alien ship to a lightning strike. The later is the preferred explanation as it requires the fewest assumptions. The biblical account required a big assumption that is the existence of an omnipotent supernatural being to come up with all the designs of each and every one of these diverge life. We now have a very persuasive explanation that don't necessary require that at all.

By the way, I am quite convinced the inspiration for the Big Bang theory actually comes from reading the first few sentences of Genesis. In the beginning there is nothing then suddenly……. and like wise that is where Darwin also got his inspiration form. See the sequence of the creations.

 

People used to think if there were storms, earthquakes, volcanic eruptions etc that the Gods were angry with them. We now have understanding of what causes the weather, earthquakes and other events. Man does not have the answer to much of the questions regarding the Universe etc, so it is quite convenient to place it's creation in the hands of some supreme being, thereby negating the necessity to ask questions.

 

That would appear to the end of the debate. However, when you tried to look for the historial evidence of the Christ, whether he actually lived and how reliable the accounts of what happen then it becomes a bit more complicated. It is almost unable to deny such a person named Christ actually lived historically just as you would never questioned whether Cleopatra and Mark Antony actually lived. Some historian would even claimed the historical evidences are actually stronger and even more reliable then many these other historical people as the primary documents to support them were actually written as much as 500 years after the events took place.