I'm a New Testament guy. You take the Old Testmant figures with a grain of salt. Too many round figures. really do have to log off now- back to the grindstone.

@Steve:  Why can't a belief be proved wrong?  I don't think this is a particularily hard notion to counter.  Also, feel free to read that one sentence above as "ALL religions AND Atheism" if that helps.
 
As for my beliefs about a separate entity apart from the physical body, you may be able to decide this for yourself.  Just consider that EVERY cell in your body has been replaced at least once (the bones take the longest, seven to ten years, the skin, only a matter of hours or a couple of days) so, if your physical body isn't "you," then what are your other options?  The real question is whether this "you" persists after the supposed complete disintegration of the physical body.  Of course, that then leads to the next complexity of what, exactly, is the "physical" body anyway.  Just scratch the surface of Quantum Mechanics and you'll see that there are many more layers to everything than most people realize.
 
The term "soul" is just another word or label, and another concept that isn't exactly accurate from my point of view.

backwoods
I'm a New Testament guy. You take the Old Testmant figures with a grain of salt. Too many round figures. really do have to log off now- back to the grindstone.

Cherry picking the elements that we are going to interpret in a non literal way. I'm sure a lot of christians would call you out as an heretic. Some would also say that you deserve to be punished because the Bible itself says that you cannot add or remove anything from the perfect word of God. It's heresy.
 
And you know what? The minute that you decide that a non literal interpretation is as valid as anything else, you gave those fanatics the right to interpret the Bible any way they want. That's the door we open. 

OK, I'm back. My fellow "non-believer" office manager and I have the "soul" argument all the time. I'm in the electrical and chemical school while she is in the soul or "collective consciousness" school. I do, however, think it might be possible to tap into a collective energy burst if you will, so who knows. I probably shouldn't have watched and taken to heart the movie "Forbidden Planet" when I were a lad. Anywhoo...the ancient, mystical and religious explanatory beliefs continue to inexorably fade away...one by one...as our knowledge base grows. There is no stopping it. And, eventually, the as yet unknown mysteries of the cosmos will be revealed. I'm sorry I won't be around to learn the final truths...but I'm thankful I happen to have been born during a time where that understanding is self evident and I don't have to cower in a cave begging some imaginary being to take the bright flashing lights and the "sky explosions" away. YMMV.

craigb
Also, feel free to read that one sentence above as "ALL religions AND Atheism" if that helps.

Thanks mate
 

craigb
 
Why can't a belief be proved wrong?  I don't think this is a particularily hard notion to counter.

To take my example from above, how could one possibly prove the non-existence of fairies?
 
There is not one shred of evidence to suggest that they do exist, but that doesn't prove that they don't.
 
What we choose to believe or not surely must have a base in rationality, and maybe even probability. If I choose to believe in fairies, there's absolutely nothing you can do or say to prove I'm wrong. Being the intelligent and thoughtful guy you are though, I'm guessing that you probably wouldn't believe that fairies exist on my say so? You'd most likely weigh up the chances/probability that fairies could exist, and then toss out the idea based on the extreme unlikelihood of it being true.
 
But as Krist mentions above, you'd also probably expect me to prove to you that fairies exist, after all, it's me that put forward the supposition.
 
Incidentally, as far as I'm concerned, the word 'fairies' is interchangeable with the word 'god' in this particular example.
 
Look at it from another point of view. The only things we can ever deem to be completely true and provable are to be found in mathematics. These are the only things we can know for certain, one doesn't 'believe' that the internal angles of a triangle (on a flat surface) add up to 180 degrees. We know that's true, and it can be proved why (not by me, I'm no mathematician). It always has been true and it always will be true.
 
 

craigb
 
As for my beliefs about a separate entity apart from the physical body, you may be able to decide this for yourself.  Just consider that EVERY cell in your body has been replaced at least once (the bones take the longest, seven to ten years, the skin, only a matter of hours or a couple of days) so, if your physical body isn't "you," then what are your other options?  The real question is whether this "you" persists after the supposed complete disintegration of the physical body.  Of course, that then leads to the next complexity of what, exactly, is the "physical" body anyway.  Just scratch the surface of Quantum Mechanics and you'll see that there are many more layers to everything than most people realize.
 
The term "soul" is just another word or label, and another concept that isn't exactly accurate from my point of view.

 
Yeah, I'm fully aware of this fact, although I fail to see how cells and tissues being replaced over time is relevant. I don't believe there is such a thing as a separate 'soul' (I appreciate your dislike of the use of the word, but I can't think of a better word to express what I'm trying to say) and a separate physical body. The question of what is "me" doesn't arise - I consider myself to be the sum of my physical body (even though it is replaced over time) and my thoughts and consciousness, which are nothing more than a manifestation of organic chemistry and electrical impulses. It doesn't need to be anything more esoteric than that in my opinion.
 
Edit to add: And I'm also fully aware that the "me" that is my physical body is mostly not "me" anyway. I seem to remember off the top of my head that bacteria and other microbes account for 90% of the cells that make up dear old Straummy.
 
And not directed toward you in particular Craig...
 
It also raises the question of when one's 'soul' comes into being, and how this is connected to the creation of one's physical body in the fallopian tube/womb. If I had a distinct and separate soul at the age of three months, I sure don't remember a thing about it.
 
And are humans the only animals who have a 'soul'?
 
Are there animals in heaven (or hell)?
 
If one accepts that the precepts that humans are the only animal to possess a soul, and that our souls live on after our physical death, and that humans evolved from a common ancestor with chimps, it does raise the question of exactly when the first 'soul' came into being along that evolutionary journey. Somewhere along the line, the first human with a soul must have been born, before which, I presume, none of his predecessors possessed one, and after which, all subsequent humans had one.
 
It could be argued that there never was a true first Homo sapien (if that is how theologists define a human). Species are very transient things and can only really be used to describe a snapshot in the evolution of an organism; in truth every organism on the planet is very slowly evolving from one 'species' into another.
 
 
 
 

Rain
 
And you know what? The minute that you decide that a non literal interpretation is as valid as anything else, you gave those fanatics the right to interpret the Bible any way they want. That's the door we open. 

This ^^^^^
 
You put it so much better than me Krist.

Literalist or cherry picker...both pretty much indefensible. Not to make a bad joke but...this ain't exactly rocket science.

SteveStrummerUK

craigb
 
Why can't a belief be proved wrong?  I don't think this is a particularily hard notion to counter.

To take my example from above, how could one possibly prove the non-existence of fairies?

You said:
 

SteveStrummerUK
I don't think any religious belief (or for that matter, any intangible belief) can ever be proved wrong.

 
I didn't say that ALL beliefs could be proven wrong (though that could be due to my relatively limited knowledge in this reality).  However, some sure seem to be easy.  Without taking too much time, how about this:  "I believe if I jump out of this plane at 20,000 feet above the airport runway that Divine Intervention will cause angels to save me before I hit the tarmac!"  Don't you think that one could be proven wrong?  I don't have a problem with your statement, only the absoluteness of it.
 
As for your interest in proving the non-existence of fairies, I'd say that all you have to do is find some information about Sir Elton John.

craigb

SteveStrummerUK

craigb
 
Why can't a belief be proved wrong?  I don't think this is a particularily hard notion to counter.

To take my example from above, how could one possibly prove the non-existence of fairies?

You said:
 

SteveStrummerUK
I don't think any religious belief (or for that matter, any intangible belief) can ever be proved wrong.

 
I didn't say that ALL beliefs could be proven wrong (though that could be due to my relatively limited knowledge in this reality).  However, some sure seem to be easy.  Without taking too much time, how about this:  "I believe if I jump out of this plane at 20,000 feet above the airport runway that Divine Intervention will cause angels to save me before I hit the tarmac!"  Don't you think that one could be proven wrong?  I don't have a problem with your statement, only the absoluteness of it.
 
As for your interest in proving the non-existence of fairies, I'd say that all you have to do is find some information about Sir Elton John.

The problem is not whether or not we can prove that wrong - it's how cognitive dissonance can help re-interpret it. 
 
1: I believe if I jump out of this plane at 20,000 feet above the airport runway that Divine Intervention will cause angels to save me before I hit the tarmac.

2: I hit the tarmac, therefore God must be displeased that I put his existence into question - therefore God is real.


As for fairies, they do exist, as chronicled by the old wise men. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8kYrIWu14E

 I'm really upset. I thought there were fairies. The flying kind *ahem*. I guess that might depend on what you call a fairy...never mind...
 
 OK I want to comment but still keep it not unfunny. That's probably not possible under the current circumstances. Strummy I'm sure we could have some real humdinger discussions here with me being an apologist and all that. I do think that the current trend in Atheism tends toward a movement that sure looks like a religion from the outside looking in. With Hitchens, Dawkins and a few others being the leaders. Like Darwin influenced contemporary scientific thought on origins so do the likes of Hitchens and Dawkins influence moral thought or the lack therof. Mind you I'm not an Atheist and I'm looking from the outside in and it sure looks a lot like a religion to me.JMO.  A movement with leaders that are determining the general moral direction of an unsaid number of people.
 
 The Agnositc says there is something, The Atheist says there is nothing, the Theist knows there's something but doesn't know what it is. The Christians need to get organized and trained. What a mess...Mooch look what you started here:)
 
 Let me offer a small attack on us the Christians. Why do we think we know exactly how old the earth is? Where do you read that exactly? Many of us hypothesize and adopt a favorite theory. Theories are usually ok as long as we know they are theories.Don't take said theory use it as a fact and use it as ammo against your opponent. Truth be told it's all mostly theories.Some of the theories are developed pretty well. Data backs up some parts and doesn't other parts. Strummy might argue that he knows within a few million years or not.
 
 Don't approach a cosmologist and attempt to tell him much he doesn't know. Who knows? God could have used the big bang if it happened that way. Things blew up and started to move apart. Lots of these things can hold hands and we don't even realize it IMO. From my perspective which I think is shared by others, the Bible isn't primarily a book of science. It may support science but it doesn't explain it. On the contrary. It is partly a book of the supernatural which by its very nature functions outside known laws and sometimes requires the use of this much misunderstood thing we call faith. Hitchens faith isn't the same faith Christians have.
 
 Now for a small attack on Atheists ( Strummy this won't hurt a bit, if it does I didn't intend it to). The general message you will hear in any atheist circles, that the Bible is totally contradictory and inaccurate. I would say that if you only read the answers as they give them you might be inclined to believe that pitch. Yeah the copyists made a few boo boos in some of the translations.Same with the idea that God is a mean calloused cruel murderer. You will hear plenty of that. This is where I could write a small book in defense of God and how good He is. It is precisely the fact that the Atheist concentrates all his energy on proving the cruelty of this God  and the supposed inaccuracy of the Bible that he totally misses all of those parts about how He loves all of us and wants the best.Why not read the whole book? Take it all into consideration? Strummy we could get deep into why I think the way I do and it would bore at least half the CH. And you likely don't want to hear it. 
 
 As I understand it you want to make your own calls. I totally understand that. We should all be able to choose for ourselves.After all choice is a freedom I think is God given. I don't want to make anyone feel like that. I'm glad I never felt as if something were being shoved down my throat.
 
 In these days my perception is that those people who seem to be Christians are backward in sharing anything. Maybe I live in the wrong part of the country to be objective about that. I only walk in my own shoes. I have maybe had Jehovahs Witnesses stop by the house once or twice in 10 years. I'm pretty strong willed and they don't usually hang around my place for very long. I consider that to be a cult. I had the local Mennonites stop by to offer their Bible school if I had kids. That doesn't bother me. Most Christian people I know wouldn't dream of forcing anything. Some are prone to share if the person wants to be shared with. So unless you are offended by seeing a church on the corner or seeing Judeo Christian concepts written into laws I'm not quite grasping the concept of being force fed, but as I say, I haven't been everywhere and seen everything.
 
 Ol Pal I think science has gotten us a long ways. I agree that it will continue to move us forward. I guess I would kindly part with you on thinking that it alone is the answer to all of our ills. It might eventually unravel a ton of the worlds problems. Since science is the effort of humans though I doubt that it will ascend us to godhood. I had better stop now my little pea brain is starting to smoke.