h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

>>why is it that everyone seems to think im religious?<<

I can't possibly imagine..

Ed: My mistake. I thought you were insisting that marriage involves a priest and a church.
Terry: no, you choose only to read that part because it suited *your* argument.

Referring to Terry's post 3002:

F19585?thread=5985941&skip=3001&show=1

Granted, there's some wiggle room there, but still this insistence upon a christian symbol and a qausi-religious ceremony. The act of a civil wedding as I understand it, is that the marriage is a legal union and a civil celebration. Full stop. End of.

And I refute the idea that this only takes place in a courthouse. The wedding I referred to was in a reception facility on a golf course. (and before you get all snooty it was in a converted barn and was a dramatic and beautiful venue) and the religious or even the seemingly religious shouldn't possibly object to acts of significance taking place in farm buildings, now can they?


Ed: Your abnormal views on homosexuality.
Terry: not were im from heres people with more extreme views then me!

Yes, where *are* you from? I think we should know so we can give the place as wide a berth as possible.

My idea is looking more sensible by the minute.

Thatprat

Sounds like one of my chat up lines to women.

Hey everybody,

Looks like Terry is the latest one to take up the troll passtime of 'I never said it'.

You will note, for instance, that he hasn't actually said he *doesn't* believe in God - only asked why you think he does. Just as he never said he *does* believe in God - only that marriage is an exclusively Christian rite.

As a genuine query: are there atheist trolls on religious boards? I don't hang round on boards dedicated to religion (OK, religious threads on otherwise secular boards I might), but it does seem that all the trolls here are theists. Is it just cos there's so many atheists here, or are (some) religous folk more prone to trolling?

Gif

>Granted, there's some wiggle room there, <

Yes well that's the difference between arguing with some people other than others. Slipperiness.

Earlier myself and 3Dots disagreed about the concept of a GP prescribing placebos. He was upfront and honest about his reasoning - no whiff of a dishonest agenda. It allows for a proper interesting discussion about the actual issue.

From the evidence I keep on seeing, slipperiness in debate and a basically religious agenda are synonymous.

Has anyone else noticed that the Bible contradicts itself a lot, as I hear does the Qu'ran and the Vedas. To me this seems to indicate that it should be "horse for courses" i.e. do what you believe is right for the times you are living in. The Muslims have this thing called Haj, dunno too much about it but as I understand it's a journey in which they are supposed to look out for signs. This sounds daft that they should be looking for signs left 1600 years ago, isn't it supposed to be encouraging them to maintain situational awareness?

Any way I seem to recall that the last "commandment" from the Apostles in the Bible were to remain Chaste and refrain from the ways of blood, maybe someone with a Bible resource can confirm that then, I'll tell y'all why I mention it.

At one time the Bible did not have Chapter and Verse numbers, it was passed down by voice initially and translated, lord knows how many times, so the point of correction of Chapter and Verse to the KJV or any of the latter ones is lost on me. The Qu'ran was written in Arabic from the voice in Muhammad's head. And the return of Jesus or ISA has got nowt to do with people hearing voices?

going away back there was the ludicrous post that animals have souls

what i want to know is

are animals in India with souls, Hindu or Christian,???

what about in this country are the cows in the field Catholic or CofE???

are north African termites Islamic while south African termites protestant

come on warner let me know as i have been up all night pondering this!!!!!

Hey warner, don't sweat it, I think that leaving Taff to have a few more sleepless nights pondering total stupidity is adequately justified here.

Unless of course he's just lying?

docsharp
Well, I haven't heard any voices in my head, yet, and I would be freaked out, if I did. But I have got access to Qur'an and Bible and vast collections of "tradition" or sayings of the most recent Apostle who lived his life on earth for approx 60 years. These sayings along with history go back many centuries and I believe they are fairly accurate, particularly if they are approached on a statistical basis.
ie. the ones that occur most often even if expressed in different words.

And the saying of Jesus' return is very reliable indeed, if you acknowledge the existence of Almighty God, and his Apostles.

>> And the saying of Jesus' return is very reliable indeed, if you acknowledge the existence of Almighty God <<

IIIIIIIIIIFFFFFFFFF
IIIIIIIIIIFFFFFFFFF
IIIFFF
IIIFFF
IIIFFF
IIIFFFFFFFFF
IIIFFFFFFFFF
IIIFFF
IIIFFF
IIIFFF
IIIIIIIIIIFFF
IIIIIIIIIIFFF

(That's a mighty big "if")

RF

-Well, I haven't heard any voices in my head, yet, and I would be freaked out, if I did. But I have got access to Qur'an and Bible and vast collections of "tradition" or sayings of the most recent Apostle-

Yet you're not freaked out by voices in someone else's head? That's what scriptures are after all, at least the one's that are not outright frauds.

>most recent Apostle who lived his life on earth for approx 60 years.

Sai Baba?

Gif

>most recent Apostle who lived his life on earth for approx 60 years.


take your pick of these guys: http://www.ldsapostles.org/

Jesus has been dead for 2000 years. He really isn't coming back.

"take your pick of these guys: http://www.ldsapostles.org/" Blimey, the church of latter day enyclopaedia salesmen. No matter how deluded the Christians are, they ain't got anything on the Mormons. How gullible is it possible to be? Very. Very gullible.

>>No matter how deluded the Christians are, they ain't got anything on the Mormons. How gullible is it possible to be?<<

Scientology?

'Scientology?'

I don't believe in Scientology: it's all a massive wind up for Tom Cruise. The reveal will be something special.

I have to mildly disagree with you Roymondo. The LDS church is no more ridiculous than the others: they all make claims about history and natural history which are on various points absurd, wildly inaccurate and easily discounted revisionist. The difficulty the Latter Day Saints run into is the fact that the explosion of knowledge, both of science and of historical method, which came with the Enlightnment and the Industrial Revolution, came so close to the inception of their church. They face the same uphill battle to reconcile the teachings of their church (which would not have seemed absurd in early 19th century Upstate New York) with modern knowledge that every church faces. But, unlike mainstream Christianity, they never had the time to establish themselves in public consciousness as some sort of foundation of society.

Scientologists, however, are more gullible than those who fall for Nigerian internet scams, and the rank and file scientologists are worthy of pity, unlike the leaders.

Effers;


Of course, because I'm right.

I would discuss it more elsewhere but I've had a brain-duck of a week commissioning and our conversation would be quite taxing as

a) I can see exactly where you are coming from but,
b) I still think placebos are useful and it would be great to work out how to get over your issues with placebos to make them 'acceptable' because they do have a place...

Anyway, on with the thread...

Of course, religion is the ultimate placebo and as Ed said it would be interesting to know whether placebos have negative symptoms...I think we can say 'yes' with the religion placebo.

Blimey - nearly 100 posts in less than 9 hours. The usual stuff from the usual suspects and one of the most blatant, hateful lies I've seen in my 6 years as a hootooer: 3Dots >>this hasn't happened to me as no gay bloke has tried to chat me up...the b1tches<< 3Dots, I refer you to post 1902 of the following - http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/alabaster/F79498?thread=5293700&post=69232075#p69232075 3Dots: Oh...OK...as long as HonestIago promises not to use tongues Me: I promise nothing! TerryG, you seem to have found a loophole in the over-16s only rule, the board for silly, bigoted children is elsewhere. Now hush-a-bye while the grown-ups are talking. There's a good lad. Does the *09* bit of your name refer to your physical/mental age?

>>Now hush-a-bye while the grown-ups are talking. There's a good lad.<<

I can't help myself.

I'm feeling much better now, thank you.