The Politics/Religion/Conspiracies Deathmatch Thread

[q-money]

so hold on, you are against gay marriage? are you also against civil marriage as it effectively has nothing to do with god pretty much?

you do know that gay marriage will be the biggest boost to the economy since digging rocks out of the ground

[plague]

you do know that gay marriage will be the biggest boost to the economy since digging rocks out of the ground

Yeah, but won't we all get the Aids if that happens?
Will they have seperate drinking fountains?


I listen to talkback radio.

[parksey]

pretty sure the member is only against gay marriage because he knows plague is expecting him to pop the question soon and he's just not sure if he's ready to be tied down

[plague]

pretty sure the member is only against gay marriage because he knows plague is expecting him to pop the question soon and he's just not sure if he's ready to be tied down
Homophobe.

[MFKS]

pretty sure the member is only against gay marriage because he knows plague is expecting him to pop the question soon and he's just not sure if he's ready to be tied down

That made me laugh well done :lol:

[MFKS]

so hold on, you are against gay marriage? are you also against civil marriage as it effectively has nothing to do with god pretty much?

you do know that gay marriage will be the biggest boost to the economy since digging rocks out of the ground

Was more interested in keeping it to the subject at hand the hypocrisy of the lefties rather than the Members personal views but since you asked happy to oblige.

Marriage is a part of my religion. My religion clearly defines its opinion on same sex activities as a no no. There is no dispute in its stance. I am not overtly fussed on those who do partake in these activities. Each to their own and their choice to turn their back on god. They will be judged by god on judgement day for their sins either way

My religion respects and believes the union of marriage as being a sacrament bond between man and women. It is our right for following the word of god.

Those who choose not to do not receive the same entitlement and they can **** off for all I care trying to get the laws of this country changed to recognise their sin as legal/normal

[GazFish35]

But "the church" doesn't run this country.

Thank god.

[Skirt Boy]

What is or who is god?

Is that some hippy looking dude from space?

[MFKS]

But "the church" doesn't run this country.

Thank god.

Religious values are the starting point for the laws of the country and the values in our society.

[plague]

Marriage is a part of my religion. My religion clearly defines its opinion on same sex activities as a no no. There is no dispute in its stance. I am not overtly fussed on those who do partake in these activities. Each to their own and their choice to turn their back on god. They will be judged by god on judgement day for their sins either way

My religion respects and believes the union of marriage as being a sacrament bond between man and women. It is our right for following the word of god.

This quite possibly the best post you've ever written.
I disagree 100% with your stance but respect the fact you have one.

What no one has ever been able to explain is that who exactly 'owns' the word 'marriage'?
Is is the church or is it the state?
Because if it is the church then they get to define it.
If it's the state then by all means take it to a vote.

Does anyone know this for certain?


Also the worst bit about the whole debate back when it went to parliament the other year was the Libs not allowing a conscience vote and the absolute spineless behaviour of the big talking higher ups in the ALP who all voted no.

**** them all.

[plague]

Oh and praising you for a good post isn't hard coz geez you carry on a bit sometimes.

[Skirt Boy]

Religious values are the starting point for the laws of the country and the values in our society.

Our legal system is based on Common Law. A legal framework that can trace it's history back to pre-Christian England and Germany. Even in the first effort of codifying the laws of England by Alfred the Great he used the existing laws of the Three Kingdoms of England which was generally copied from old Saxon Law (The law in Germany)

The only reason why there is a perception that modern law is based on religion is because the early legal texts were written in a style similar to Mosaic Law. Remember we are talking about an era when only the extremely wealthy and the clergy could read and write so things had to be kept ****ing simple.

And throughout English history, the Monarch being the supreme judge, many of the important texts on law usually came at a time when a Monarch was really really opposed to the Church. (John I, Henry VIII and so forth)

[MFKS]

This quite possibly the best post you've ever written.
I disagree 100% with your stance but respect the fact you have one.

What no one has ever been able to explain is that who exactly 'owns' the word 'marriage'?
Is is the church or is it the state?
Because if it is the church then they get to define it.
If it's the state then by all means take it to a vote.

Does anyone know this for certain?


Also the worst bit about the whole debate back when it went to parliament the other year was the Libs not allowing a conscience vote and the absolute spineless behaviour of the big talking higher ups in the ALP who all voted no.

**** them all.

Conscience vote could see a political party lose office if they voted in favour of it and it got up. People get pretty wound up on shit like this abortion etc

As for who owns marriage **** is that a good question in the line of how long is a piece of string.

It is not exactly answerable definitively one way or another. Religion will claim they have had ownership of it for two thousand years of use. The state of Australia is just over 110 years old if federation is your starting point and 220odd if you use the first fleet settlement as a starting point.

The Marriage act of Australia which is the legal thing that needs altering if gay marriage was to be legalised is circa 1961 from the internet

[Buddha]

Vote Quimby

[plague]

As for who owns marriage **** is that a good question in the line of how long is a piece of string.

It is not exactly answerable definitively one way or another. Religion will claim they have had ownership of it for two thousand years of use. The state of Australia is just over 110 years old if federation is your starting point and 220odd if you use the first fleet settlement as a starting point.

The Marriage act of Australia which is the legal thing that needs altering if gay marriage was to be legalised is circa 1961 from the internet

Yeah this is why I find the debate interesting.
Regardless I think that all couples (hetro/gay/de facto) should all have the exact same rights in our society. If we get that far then I think re-defining the word won't seem as big an issue.


(Cue the South Park 'butt buddies' episode).

[snake]

Religious values are the starting point for the laws of the country and the values in our society.

thou shall not ride a bike on a footpath. leave them holy for walking

well ****en dun, god you ****. thanks for all the cancer and stillborns you ****wit. you sure showed us for having some **** who didn't exist break a stupid ****ing law so you can punish me, even thogh i'm not descendent oh him since he never existed.

why don't you drown us all you donkey-raping shit eater? surely we're more ****ed up than noah the old ****. stop the boats. p.s. how the **** did sloths get on thhe boat? penguis? polar bears?

why is ther only "record" of animals known to desert tribes of the day on the boat? how come none of them died on the way back to their natural habitat? surely a lion would be like "i cbf chasing these fast as **** zebras, i'm just gonna snack me this here badger"

imagine following a book written about a desert bloke who may not have even existed, which absolutely was written by only second and third (or worse) hand accounts, some 100 or so years after he may or may not have died. imagine still believing it 1900+ years later. wouldn't you feel like a dumb ****?

[snake]

p.s. do u talk into your hands m8?

[MFKS]

Yeah this is why I find the debate interesting.
Regardless I think that all couples (hetro/gay/de facto) should all have the exact same rights in our society. If we get that far then I think re-defining the word won't seem as big an issue.


(Cue the South Park 'butt buddies' episode).

Religion has thousands of years of history. It is a subject that people who embrace it feel incredibly passionate about. Your asking them to neglect this and disregard the word of god just to accept Adam and Steve being married and committing what is clearly defined in the book of god as a sin.

Your pushing shit up a hill

[plague]

Religion has thousands of years of history. It is a subject that people who embrace it feel incredibly passionate about. Your asking them to neglect this and disregard the word of god just to accept Adam and Steve being married and committing what is clearly defined in the book of god as a sin.

Your pushing shit up a hill

Oh I don't doubt for one second that it's a big deal. That's why I think that if we at least give all couples the same rights in our supposed non church influenced society then the god squad get to keep their term 'married' and the govt at least doesn't treat these alternate couples as outcasts.

Remember as well sex before marriage, contraception and abortion are also pretty frowned upon by the church yet they 'seem' to be fairly well accepted in society now. Yes the fringe still has a prob but I don't deal with the 1%ers.

[plague]

thou shall not ride a bike on a footpath. leave them holy for walking

well ****en dun, god you ****. thanks for all the cancer and stillborns you ****wit. you sure showed us for having some **** who didn't exist break a stupid ****ing law so you can punish me, even thogh i'm not descendent oh him since he never existed.

why don't you drown us all you donkey-raping shit eater? surely we're more ****ed up than noah the old ****. stop the boats. p.s. how the **** did sloths get on thhe boat? penguis? polar bears?

why is ther only "record" of animals known to desert tribes of the day on the boat? how come none of them died on the way back to their natural habitat? surely a lion would be like "i cbf chasing these fast as **** zebras, i'm just gonna snack me this here badger"

imagine following a book written about a desert bloke who may not have even existed, which absolutely was written by only second and third (or worse) hand accounts, some 100 or so years after he may or may not have died. imagine still believing it 1900+ years later. wouldn't you feel like a dumb ****?


Much bigger issue is that if there is a God then why did he give us Gypo's?

[MFKS]

thou shall not ride a bike on a footpath. leave them holy for walking

well ****en dun, god you ****. thanks for all the cancer and stillborns you ****wit. you sure showed us for having some **** who didn't exist break a stupid ****ing law so you can punish me, even thogh i'm not descendent oh him since he never existed.

why don't you drown us all you donkey-raping shit eater? surely we're more ****ed up than noah the old ****. stop the boats. p.s. how the **** did sloths get on thhe boat? penguis? polar bears?

why is ther only "record" of animals known to desert tribes of the day on the boat? how come none of them died on the way back to their natural habitat? surely a lion would be like "i cbf chasing these fast as **** zebras, i'm just gonna snack me this here badger"

imagine following a book written about a desert bloke who may not have even existed, which absolutely was written by only second and third (or worse) hand accounts, some 100 or so years after he may or may not have died. imagine still believing it 1900+ years later. wouldn't you feel like a dumb ****?

We may be wrong I will admit that is possible. I do not believe we are though.

I do find it hard to believe a religion that was formed 600 years after mine and has distorted a lot of the things the 2 religions share could be right though.

Logical question is why it came about 600 years after mine did and wasn't starting around the same time frame or before mine

[snake]

i find it hard to believe, too. probably because it's all total bollocks.

why did god only reveal himself throgh a fraction of the worlds population in a time when the message couldn't be spread? why were the filipinos or aboriginals not given a chance at salvation? does he not love them?

[MFKS]

Oh I don't doubt for one second that it's a big deal. That's why I think that if we at least give all couples the same rights in our supposed non church influenced society then the god squad get to keep their term 'married' and the govt at least doesn't treat these alternate couples as outcasts.

Remember as well sex before marriage, contraception and abortion are also pretty frowned upon by the church yet they 'seem' to be fairly well accepted in society now. Yes the fringe still has a prob but I don't deal with the 1%ers.

So why can the government then not give them the same rights under the law but allow Adam and Steve to achieve this through the civil union thing and not marriage??

That way Adam and Steve get their rights you want for them. Religion keeps their marriage claim.

Everyone wins except Adam and Steve in the afterlife have to pay???

[snake]

the irony isn't lost that the most cynical **** on the foz is apparently simultaneously the most gullible

fully expecting this to be some amazing troll. well done in advance.

[plague]

So why can the government then not give them the same rights under the law but allow Adam and Steve to achieve this through the civil union thing and not marriage??

That way Adam and Steve get their rights you want for them. Religion keeps their marriage claim.

Everyone wins except Adam and Steve in the afterlife have to pay???

Yeah so I think we agree.
And I'm sure Adam and Steve will take their chances in the afterlife.

[joel31]

thou shall not ride a bike on a footpath. leave them holy for walking

well ****en dun, god you ****. thanks for all the cancer and stillborns you ****wit. you sure showed us for having some **** who didn't exist break a stupid ****ing law so you can punish me, even thogh i'm not descendent oh him since he never existed.

why don't you drown us all you donkey-raping shit eater? surely we're more ****ed up than noah the old ****. stop the boats. p.s. how the **** did sloths get on thhe boat? penguis? polar bears?

why is ther only "record" of animals known to desert tribes of the day on the boat? how come none of them died on the way back to their natural habitat? surely a lion would be like "i cbf chasing these fast as **** zebras, i'm just gonna snack me this here badger"

imagine following a book written about a desert bloke who may not have even existed, which absolutely was written by only second and third (or worse) hand accounts, some 100 or so years after he may or may not have died. imagine still believing it 1900+ years later. wouldn't you feel like a dumb ****?
there are so many things wrong than this post both factually and otherwise. I'd advise that you do more research on it before you make statements like this

[joel31]

Was more interested in keeping it to the subject at hand the hypocrisy of the lefties rather than the Members personal views but since you asked happy to oblige.

Marriage is a part of my religion. My religion clearly defines its opinion on same sex activities as a no no. There is no dispute in its stance. I am not overtly fussed on those who do partake in these activities. Each to their own and their choice to turn their back on god. They will be judged by god on judgement day for their sins either way

My religion respects and believes the union of marriage as being a sacrament bond between man and women. It is our right for following the word of god.

Those who choose not to do not receive the same entitlement and they can **** off for all I care trying to get the laws of this country changed to recognise their sin as legal/normal
I agree with the member. Marriage is designed for a male and female. I believe it is a gift from God.

I do not believe the same sex equivalent should be called marriage because of the value it holds to Christians and others, etc.

Marriage may have happened in this country is formed by the view of marriage in the country that inhabited us which is formed by Christianity.

[plague]

there are so many things wrong than this post both factually and otherwise. I'd advise that you do more research on it before you make statements like this

Oh my.

[q-money]

Oh my.

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2011/05/pumped_kid.gif

http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/191238/bell_ringer.gif

http://www.cayman27.com.ky/files/2014/01/shots-fired.jpg

[q-money]

hindus and buddhists get married and they don't follow your particular god. should we deny them their right to get married?

[plague]

there are so many things wrong than this post both factually and otherwise. I'd advise that you do more research on it before you make statements like this

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--iRE-5dW1--/ocwtvwdng2lz8iprudro.gif

[GazFish35]

**** I hope we win a game soon.

[Buddha]

**** I hope we win a game soon.
:rof: :rof:

I think we all need to go watch re runs of all Xmas movies guys.

[Buddha]

This thread has gone from trains, to Islam, to police, to God, to gays and now joel31 providing his usual ineptitude

Where would we be without the foz eh?

[la bazzle]

**** this thread just got good glad I popped in. Highlights so far are member calling people nut jobs then saying he believes in sky Santa, snake delivering one of the greatest posts ever, the member coming back and saying his religion is better cause it's older (confirming my god Ra must be more real as he's older), then Joel bringing the fire and brimstone by questioning the next Nobel prize winners credentials. Really hope the jets keep losing. Carry on

[GazFish35]

God wears brown adidas shirts IMO.

[The Dunster]

Dear God,

I won't believe in heaven or hell
No saints, no sinners, no devil as well
No pearly gates, no thorny crown
You're always letting us humans down
The wars you bring, the babes you drown
Those lost at sea and never found
And it's the same the whole world 'round
The hurt I see helps to compound
The Father, Son and Holy Ghost
Is just somebody's unholy hoax
And if you're up there you'll perceive
That my heart's here upon my sleeve
If there's one thing I don't believe in

It's you

[Andy Partridge]

[Blackmac79]

Only one verse truely matters in the bible.

Love your neighbour.

Or the qur'an equivalent

Do good by... The neighbour who is a stranger.

But more of this and it would be a better place to live.

Hippies.

[plague]

Do good by... The neighbour who is a stranger.

But more of this and it would be a better place.

Except of course if they are police officers right?

[MFKS]

Got to love the hypocrisy practiced by the lefty atheists.

Quite happy to feel free to attack Christians whenever they like as Christians will disagree with them but allow them their opinion
Unwilling though to treat Muslims the same way despite Islam having a pretty clear view on where it stands with atheists ie death.

Same leftists nuts actually go out of their way to defend those who practice the Islamic faith at every turn despite what the Islamic faith has in store for atheists yet for some reason feel the need to constantly slag and ridicule the Christian faith yet the Christian Faith allows them the freedom to express their views and Christians are not interested in wiping them off the face of the world for holding an alternate view. Go ****ing figure


Rather bizarre that they feel the need to attack others beliefs because they hold an alternate view when personal choice and freedom to enjoy personal choice is such a big thing on their leftist agenda


Also I take it all you ****s are going to work next Thursday too and not observing JC's Birthday or once again does your hypocrisy not quite extend that far??

[snake]

i have just as much respect for islam as christianity. i.e, none

go science! thanks for giving us quantum mechanics. without your awe-inspiring predictions and beauty, we couldn't be having this conversation right now.

[snake]

p.s. do u talk into your hands m8?

mkfs do u do this m8?

how's the efficacy? :rof:

[GazFish35]

Learn a bit more about the Islam denominations before you swipe with such a broad brush.
Different denominations of the faith interpret and realise their text in different ways, just like Christians around the world.

The media tend to only present one side of this multi-faceted faith. And governments around the world are quick to play on, and overhype, the fear angle in order to introduce security measures designed to control the local populations.

The Christian faith is not without it's fair share of violence and intolerant killings throughout it's history too.

Islam's "pretty clear" view on atheism isn't as clear, or as practised, by the wider Islamic followers and rupert Murdoch and western political leaders are happy for us to believe.

[Jetmaster]

Sensible question re "marriage" - did it exist BC, was there a ceremony for the union.

If so, was it religious or ceremonial or was it just life time "mating"?

Curious.

[snake]

Sensible question re "marriage" - did it exist BC, was there a ceremony for the union.

If so, was it religious or ceremonial or was it just life time "mating"?

Curious.

a very sensible question

joseph was married to mary

noah had a wife

none of these people were christian, ergo marriage is a practice adopted by christianity, rather than a christian practice

[Bremsstrahlung]

Also I take it all you ****s are going to work next Thursday too and not observing JC's Birthday or once again does your hypocrisy not quite extend that far??

I will be.

[parksey]

hindus and buddhists get married and they don't follow your particular god. should we deny them their right to get married?

http://25.media.tumblr.com/bf1af9c97c694fc67c653a93fcc24f86/tumblr_mgsqdf2VP01qig1kfo1_400.gif

[plague]

a very sensible question

joseph was married to mary

noah had a wife

none of these people were christian, ergo marriage is a practice adopted by christianity, rather than a christian practice

but was it called 'marriage' back then, hence the debate about who owns the world.
wait? was Jesus the first Christian or was the religion around before that?

i am both learning lots and getting more confused all at the same time here.

[plague]

Also I take it all you ****s are going to work next Thursday too and not observing JC's Birthday or once again does your hypocrisy not quite extend that far??

To be fair, the government deems it illegal for me to operate my business on Chrissy day therefore im forced to have it off.
back in the day i played golf every Christmas day and avoided family at all costs so i dont think im one to 'celebrate' it.

nowadays though with Plague Jnr CHRISTMAS RULES LETS BUILD MORE LEGO.

[Bremsstrahlung]

Each to their own. Use the message from The Bible, The Tipitaka or whatever, to guide you to be a better person. But, sometimes, i think people take it too literally. Times have changed, the world has developed, the same 'following things blindly' approach doesn't work for everything.

If your diety, or God, is all forgiving, loves everyone etc, why does it matter? Will God not forgive some people, but forgive others?
Do people in jail who have killed/raped, that 'discover God' in jail, still go to Heaven?
Do people that don't follow a particular denomination, that go about their life respecting others and serving communities and being good people, get turned away for not believing?
If you rock up at the Pearly gates, having not believed, and God is there with his list, checking people off, denies you entry. Does God forgive the one sin, "not believing" and let you in?


Jim Jefferies take on Gay Marriage, is rather funny.
http://vimeo.com/99620602

[The Dunster]

i have just as much respect for islam as christianity. i.e, none

go science! thanks for giving us quantum mechanics. without your awe-inspiring predictions and beauty, we couldn't be having this conversation right now.

Agree about Quantum Mechanics. And it pretty much placed the dividing line between science and religion once and for all. The Christians could no longer argue about intelligent design and a deterministic universe given the existence of a universal constant with a non-zero value [Plancks Constant]

Without the Arab scholars much of our histories would have been lost throughout the dark ages and as such many of the building blocks upon which modern science and methodology were built upon.

They also made solid contributions to physics, astronomy, biology, universal healthcare, and mathematics.

As such, Islamic scholars were so highly regarded up until the end of the golden age that they were very well paid for their efforts.

Compare this to Christianity which blatantly opposes science and has absolutely no respect for evidenced based research.

The problen for the Islamic world is that they peaked a very long time ago and beyond the last of the golden age scholars it could be argued that not only was there little if any progress - they may have even regressed.

[MFKS]

Sensible question re "marriage" - did it exist BC, was there a ceremony for the union.

If so, was it religious or ceremonial or was it just life time "mating"?

Curious.

I do have the answer to this.

The ceremonial aspect of marriage came into vogue in the 1100's according to some web page I viewed last night.

Marriage still existed prior to this obviously but we did not have the ceremony part involved in the equation

[MFKS]

Learn a bit more about the Islam denominations before you swipe with such a broad brush.
Different denominations of the faith interpret and realise their text in different ways, just like Christians around the world.

The media tend to only present one side of this multi-faceted faith. And governments around the world are quick to play on, and overhype, the fear angle in order to introduce security measures designed to control the local populations.

The Christian faith is not without it's fair share of violence and intolerant killings throughout it's history too.

Islam's "pretty clear" view on atheism isn't as clear, or as practised, by the wider Islamic followers and rupert Murdoch and western political leaders are happy for us to believe.


I am a little occupied at present to reply to this and do it justice.

I will reply though when later today when I have the time

[Bremsstrahlung]

Remember as well sex before marriage, contraception and abortion are also pretty frowned upon by the church yet they 'seem' to be fairly well accepted in society now. Yes the fringe still has a prob but I don't deal with the 1%ers.

This does it for me. I don't think you can be totally opposed to something "because the bible says so", yet let other things slip under the cracks.
http://www.11points.com/Books/11_Things_The_Bible_Bans,_But_You_Do_Anyway
Included in this are:
-Shellfish, good thing we don't eat prawns at Christmas.
- Playing with pig skin, it's ok now, but football was pretty much kicking around a pig skin with air.
- No polyester clothing
- No tattoos
- Shaving a beard, or cutting hair from your temple.

[GazFish35]

I am a little occupied at present to reply to this and do it justice.

I will reply though when later today when I have the time

is this the equilivant of the modern day PR stunt to announce a forth coiming announcement about a project that will be investigated as a possible future announcment.


a bit lilke this?

http://profile.ak.fbcdn.net/hprofile-ak-snc4/50281_235594566724_5495148_n.jpg

[MFKS]

This does it for me. I don't think you can be totally opposed to something "because the bible says so", yet let other things slip under the cracks.
http://www.11points.com/Books/11_Things_The_Bible_Bans,_But_You_Do_Anyway
Included in this are:
-Shellfish, good thing we don't eat prawns at Christmas.
- Playing with pig skin, it's ok now, but football was pretty much kicking around a pig skin with air.
- No polyester clothing
- No tattoos
- Shaving a beard, or cutting hair from your temple.


I know that nine of these 11 cite the Old Testament, which Christianity doesn't necessarily adhere to as law.


Shoots down the argument straight away from another lefty aethist who wishes to take a pot shot at Christianity with selective material


New American Standard Bible
Can't say I have read this edition but would not be surprised if it had references to John Wayne and Clint Eastwood being how the Yanks like to jazz shit up

[MFKS]

is this the equilivant of the modern day PR stunt to announce a forth coiming announcement about a project that will be investigated as a possible future announcment.

No I just don't have the time to get long winded with you at present!!!

[joel31]

Compare this to Christianity which blatantly opposes science and has absolutely no respect for evidenced based research.
I see it as a real shame that many people think that Christianity and science are polar opposites. There are many Christians who are unfortunately like that but there are so many that accept both and understand the compatibility.

Science can explain the how but not the why.

Personally I see them as complementary with science explaining how God's creation operates.

See this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJMp6p3tLj4) from Professor of Mathematics at Oxford who discusses the compatibility of science and God

There are also many of the so-called formative scientists who were Christians or believed in God (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html)

[joel31]

Sensible question re "marriage" - did it exist BC, was there a ceremony for the union.

If so, was it religious or ceremonial or was it just life time "mating"?

Curious.
the word marriage is referenced in Genesis which is the first book of the bible. Of course it is a translation and would look different to modern marriage but it as a concept has been around in BC. I don't know it was a ceremony but it was always between a man and woman

[q-money]

why devalue the scientific process by having an overarching, unseen and unprovable force being the explanation for everything?

[joel31]

Each to their own. Use the message from The Bible, The Tipitaka or whatever, to guide you to be a better person. But, sometimes, i think people take it too literally. Times have changed, the world has developed, the same 'following things blindly' approach doesn't work for everything.

If your diety, or God, is all forgiving, loves everyone etc, why does it matter? Will God not forgive some people, but forgive others?
Christians believe that he loves everyone and can forgive everyone if they seek it. Not all seek it so you could say he doesn't forgive all. But if you hated God would you really want to be with him for eternity which is what heaven is.


Do people in jail who have killed/raped, that 'discover God' in jail, still go to Heaven?
Christians believe that discovering God isn't enough. They need to say sorry and seek a relationship with him but if they do, God will forgive and yes they can go to heaven


Do people that don't follow a particular denomination, that go about their life respecting others and serving communities and being good people, get turned away for not believing?
Christians believe that it is not good enough to be a good person. You need to have repented and be in a relationship with God to go to heaven. Denomination isn't important as long as the beliefs don't conflict with the bible within context.


If you rock up at the Pearly gates, having not believed, and God is there with his list, checking people off, denies you entry. Does God forgive the one sin, "not believing" and let you in?
Christians believe that not believing is the only non-forgivable sin

[Bremsstrahlung]

Shoots down the argument straight away from another lefty aethist who wishes to take a pot shot at Christianity with selective material


Can't say I have read this edition but would not be surprised if it had references to John Wayne and Clint Eastwood being how the Yanks like to jazz shit up

So, do you disregard Leviticus where it mentions homosexuality as well? Or is that verse ok?
You can't refute something and cite the bible as a reason, but ignore other things...

So, I

[Bremsstrahlung]

Christians believe that he loves everyone and can forgive everyone if they seek it. Not all seek it so you could say he doesn't forgive all. But if you hated God would you really want to be with him for eternity which is what heaven is.


Christians believe that discovering God isn't enough. They need to say sorry and seek a relationship with him but if they do, God will forgive and yes they can go to heaven


Christians believe that it is not good enough to be a good person. You need to have repented and be in a relationship with God to go to heaven. Denomination isn't important as long as the beliefs don't conflict with the bible within context.


Christians believe that not believing is the only non-forgivable sin

A genuine and respectful, thank you for the way you answered.

[GazFish35]

Shoots down the argument straight away from {insert anyone in disagreement } who wishes to take a pot shot at {insert topic here} with selective material


isn't that the crux of so many issues?
theres so much bias in everything written, at any stage in history, that any information source cant really be trusted.


media don't care about the truth, only what version of events sells more papers get smore internt traffic through their sites or protects the stocks of companies invested in the media company, or vice versa.

and goverments are just as bad.

[MFKS]

The bible also has references to Homosexuality and its stance in other parts of the old testament and new testament.

Leviticus is just probably the most famous

[pv4]

I'm not a believer or a non-believer. I've actually been in a personal research experiment for the last year to truly figure out my beliefs on religion. And I've still not even gotten close to an answer for myself. There are many stories of the bible i believe - i believe there was a man who called himself Jesus Christ, and he had followers. I believe there was a man named Moses who managed to free his people from slavery. But I'm not convinced on the divinity on it all, yet. But I do like the morals I'm able to draw from a large amount of the stories I believe from the bible (and some I definitely do not believe) - and that to me is all that matters.

What i will say is a lot of the stabs at Christianity in this thread are directly on Old Testament things. The Old Testament was taken from the Hebrew Bible. So you're basically attacking Judaism (like the shellfish, pig skin, etc type stuff), rather than modern Christianity and the beliefs that a large amount of Christians hold.

FWIW in this last year I've spent a large amount of time in churches, in bible study groups, and what I find is there's not two people I meet that have absolutely the same beliefs on everything. It's incredibly varying as to what exactly each person subscribes to. And what I like about it all is that, particularly the church I go to, they encourage the freedom to choose what you believe exactly.

[MFKS]

I'm not a believer or a non-believer. I've actually been in a personal research experiment for the last year to truly figure out my beliefs on religion. And I've still not even gotten close to an answer for myself. There are many stories of the bible i believe - i believe there was a man who called himself Jesus Christ, and he had followers. I believe there was a man named Moses who managed to free his people from slavery. But I'm not convinced on the divinity on it all, yet.

What i will say is a lot of the stabs at Christianity in this thread are directly on Old Testament things. The Old Testament was taken from the Hebrew Bible. So you're basically attacking Judaism, rather than modern Christianity.

Well said. One of the biggest things with religion is that those who embrace it need to actually find it for themselves.

My story was I had it shoved in face as a kid rejected it and at a later age came back and looked into it a bit more and embraced it.

With your situation WLG you will eventually come to a position you sit comfortably with wherever that may be.


Interesting to see how many of the lefty aethists here having a great time taken potshots at Christianity have actually read the Bible/Koran in its entirety or any other book of god for that matter before coming to their conclusions that God is horseshit

[MFKS]

WLG on another note. Where the **** are the Sheep Quiz questions??

Some **** is gonna get barred here soon :rof: and your deprivation of the Sheep Quiz questions will be high on the list of reasons why the focus has turned to this thread

[pv4]

Well said. One of the biggest things with religion is that those who embrace it need to actually find it for themselves.

The church I've been going to is a Baptist Church, who believe in believer's baptism as opposed to infant baptism. Which I absolutely love, as it's not forcing the kids to be subscribed to it from birth. Sure, the kids are taken to church etc, but I love that brief amount of apparent freedom the Baptist church gives people. They want people to consciously believe and put themselves into the church, rather than force them in. But are also extremely happy and welcoming to people who are not yet sold.

[MFKS]

The church I've been going to is a Baptist Church, who believe in believer's baptism as opposed to infant baptism. Which I absolutely love, as it's not forcing the kids to be subscribed to it from birth. Sure, the kids are taken to church etc, but I love that brief amount of apparent freedom the Baptist church gives people. They want people to consciously believe and put themselves into the church, rather than force them in. But are also extremely happy and welcoming to people who are not yet sold.

One of the biggest problems with Islam is negated by this stance. The stance of choice. Islam does not have it

[Buddha]

Why are Christians the only religion that have need a mascot just to sell their stuff?

Like Christmas, it isn't in the bible, Jesus's birth is, but not Santa Claus.

Same with Easter, come Easter time we just hear about the Easter bunny this and Easter bunny that, don't hear about Jesus being nailed to the Cross?

You don't see The Jewish out celebrating with the Passover Kanagroo?

Muslims celebrating Ramadan with a Rooster?

And Halloween? What a farce, you go to church and get told Satan is the evil one blah blah blah, but once a year you party with the Bloke

Sort it out you lot

[The Dunster]

I'm not a believer or a non-believer. I've actually been in a personal research experiment for the last year to truly figure out my beliefs on religion. And I've still not even gotten close to an answer for myself. There are many stories of the bible i believe - i believe there was a man who called himself Jesus Christ, and he had followers. I believe there was a man named Moses who managed to free his people from slavery. But I'm not convinced on the divinity on it all, yet. But I do like the morals I'm able to draw from a large amount of the stories I believe from the bible (and some I definitely do not believe) - and that to me is all that matters.

What i will say is a lot of the stabs at Christianity in this thread are directly on Old Testament things. The Old Testament was taken from the Hebrew Bible. So you're basically attacking Judaism (like the shellfish, pig skin, etc type stuff), rather than modern Christianity and the beliefs that a large amount of Christians hold.

FWIW in this last year I've spent a large amount of time in churches, in bible study groups, and what I find is there's not two people I meet that have absolutely the same beliefs on everything. It's incredibly varying as to what exactly each person subscribes to. And what I like about it all is that, particularly the church I go to, they encourage the freedom to choose what you believe exactly.

You are an agnostic. It's a good thing because you neither take or reject anything without evidence.

[Skirt Boy]

Also I take it all you ****s are going to work next Thursday too and not observing JC's Birthday or once again does your hypocrisy not quite extend that far??

A festival would still take place between the middle of December and middle of January as it matches up with many of the pagan festivals North of the Alps for the Winter Solstice.

Don't kid yourself in thinking Christianity is unique in it's festivals.

[pv4]

You are an agnostic. It's a good thing because you neither take or reject anything without evidence.

An agnostic who is actively searching for the evidence.

[Blackmac79]

Forget who it's by, but the "mind of God" is a good book.

[q-money]

pv4 - did you get baptised bruv? i can totally do them if you're keen, we'll get griff and we'll do it in the styx

[Bremsstrahlung]

Well said. One of the biggest things with religion is that those who embrace it need to actually find it for themselves.

My story was I had it shoved in face as a kid rejected it and at a later age came back and looked into it a bit more and embraced it.

With your situation WLG you will eventually come to a position you sit comfortably with wherever that may be.


Interesting to see how many of the lefty aethists here having a great time taken potshots at Christianity have actually read the Bible/Koran in its entirety or any other book of god for that matter before coming to their conclusions that God is horseshit


I had Catholic schooling from K-12. I just kind of went along with things until about Year 5, when I just couldn't handle the onslaught/constant shoving religion down my throat. As i got older, I had many questions through high school and Religion didn't have any answers/didn't appeal to me... Other interests took over and I haven't really had a need to seek anything more from religion since. It was compulsory to study Religion in 11/12 where we took a step back from the "pure catholic" driven agenda of catholic schools up to this point, and had an objective look at various religions, world peace and a few other topics, which was really great.
I think each religion, has important messages. I agree with various beliefs from a variety of difference sources.
I developed an interest in health and science, and through High School and Uni undertook a number of science and medical courses. All stressing the importance of evidence-based-practice. The need for evidence based practice in my career, largely influenced my ability to accept religion on the same scale as some people, due to the importance of "believing" and not being presented with many facts/very much evidence.

I would consider myself an agnostic. Like pv4, I can believe that there was a Jesus, had followers, and all of that. But it loses me with the "magical" "miracle" "divinity" side of things, that i can't quite bring myself to believe.
Maybe one day, it will become clear. Maybe not.

The underlying messages though, Treat everyone equally, etc are pretty good foundations to live life.

[pv4]

pv4 - did you get baptised bruv? i can totally do them if you're keen, we'll get griff and we'll do it in the styx

:rof: let's do it m8.

[joel31]

Why are Christians the only religion that have need a mascot just to sell their stuff?

Like Christmas, it isn't in the bible, Jesus's birth is, but not Santa Claus.

Same with Easter, come Easter time we just hear about the Easter bunny this and Easter bunny that, don't hear about Jesus being nailed to the Cross?

You don't see The Jewish out celebrating with the Passover Kanagroo?

Muslims celebrating Ramadan with a Rooster?

And Halloween? What a farce, you go to church and get told Satan is the evil one blah blah blah, but once a year you party with the Bloke

Sort it out you lot
The commercialisation of Christmas isn't really the fault of Christians, it is fault of this consumeristic society that took a largely celebrated holiday and turned it into something to market.

99% of the stuff about Christmas and Easter misses the point of both of them

[MFKS]

Learn a bit more about the Islam denominations before you swipe with such a broad brush.
Different denominations of the faith interpret and realise their text in different ways, just like Christians around the world.

The media tend to only present one side of this multi-faceted faith. And governments around the world are quick to play on, and overhype, the fear angle in order to introduce security measures designed to control the local populations.

The Christian faith is not without it's fair share of violence and intolerant killings throughout it's history too.

Islam's "pretty clear" view on atheism isn't as clear, or as practised, by the wider Islamic followers and rupert Murdoch and western political leaders are happy for us to believe.

Firstly agree with you media distorts shit to the angle they wish to show. Governments also lie and deceive no arguments there

Secondly Christians are not without sin over history either for their atrocities on makind. Those who partake will have been dealt with on judgement day anyway

Thirdly as far as having a swipe at islam how am I making generalisations about it??

I first up said the faith oppresses women.


Sura 4:34
Men have authority over women because God has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because God has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and forsake them in beds apart, and beat them

Thats from their Quran.

Explain to me where it is you disagree that Islam does not oppress women??

As for my claims that islam treats aethists differently. Anyone born to a mulsim parent is a muslim. There is no choice in the situation they are. If they choose to deny gods existence discrimination/victimisation/harassment/denying of legal rights/imprisonment/execution await. Apostasy is the crime and these are the punishments depending where abouts in the world you are.

Denying Gods existence to muslims isn't a good thing for atheists.

The other ironic thing I find about this is the leftist apologetic attitude. This thread has been littered with offensive views from atheists bagging christians like it is a fashionable thing to do yet no one steps up to defend the christians from persecution from their beliefs yet as soon as the islamic faith is held to account for their issues some one can not wait to jump in and defend them.

Why can they not defend themselves?? Why are they immune from Criticism??
My religion can defend itself and takes criticism all the time.



Thing is my religion can stand up for itself and believers in it can be tolerant of others with opposing views yet why is it the left feel the need to defend this religion who can not defend itself from criticism and lash out with violence and play the persecution card as soon as anyone offers any criticism or disagrees with their ways???

[Bremsstrahlung]

Same reason people defend women's rights and discrimination, but don't defend men is the same situations.
Same reason people defend African-Americans from discrimination, but don't defend Caucasians in the same situations.

It's 10 x harder to defend a majority, as they are already seen to be in the advantageous position. But much easier to defend minority groups.

Edit: not that I agree, but I think this is why.

[My2BobsWorth]

You are an agnostic. It's a good thing because you neither take or reject anything without evidence.

He'll be at the preacher for the stats.

[snake]

Christians believe that not believing is the only non-forgivable sin

i know you're only a kid, so i don't hold you responsible for this, but this sentence is quite possibly the most ****ed up statement in the history of the forum. such is the amorality of the abrahamic religions.

by this logic, i, who cannot believe, who has no faith, am a worse person that a child murderer or rapist, provided they believe.

if god were existant (pro tip: he's almost certainly not), i'd be pleased to say i'm not his mate

[snake]

Agree about Quantum Mechanics. And it pretty much placed the dividing line between science and religion once and for all. The Christians could no longer argue about intelligent design and a deterministic universe given the existence of a universal constant with a non-zero value [Plancks Constant]

Without the Arab scholars much of our histories would have been lost throughout the dark ages and as such many of the building blocks upon which modern science and methodology were built upon.

They also made solid contributions to physics, astronomy, biology, universal healthcare, and mathematics.

As such, Islamic scholars were so highly regarded up until the end of the golden age that they were very well paid for their efforts.

Compare this to Christianity which blatantly opposes science and has absolutely no respect for evidenced based research.

The problen for the Islamic world is that they peaked a very long time ago and beyond the last of the golden age scholars it could be argued that not only was there little if any progress - they may have even regressed.

no doubt they had previously made massive contributions, but you could be stronger with the last statement - they have done nothing lately. for a lazy 1+ billion people with supposedly the best textbook on the planet, they've hardly made an impact of late.

agree re: christians. not just the historical meddling but the more recent stuff in schools disgusts me. i feel sorry for the children

[plague]

i know you're only a kid, so i don't hold you responsible for this, but this sentence is quite possibly the most ****ed up statement in the history of the forum. such is the amorality of the abrahamic religions.

by this logic, i, who cannot believe, who has no faith, am a worse person that a child murderer or rapist, provided they believe.

if god were existant (pro tip: he's almost certainly not), i'd be pleased to say i'm not his mate

Ok legit question: esp for Joel and Member.
If you are a staunch non believer when you die do you still go to the pearly gates to be judged or do you just not exist so therefore go somewhere else?

[snake]

I see it as a real shame that many people think that Christianity and science are polar opposites. There are many Christians who are unfortunately like that but there are so many that accept both and understand the compatibility.

Science can explain the how but not the why.

Personally I see them as complementary with science explaining how God's creation operates.

See this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJMp6p3tLj4) from Professor of Mathematics at Oxford who discusses the compatibility of science and God

There are also many of the so-called formative scientists who were Christians or believed in God (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/sciencefaith.html)

re founding scientists. joel:

1, just abou everyone was religious in those days. there was no simpler explanation available at the time to explain seemingly 'miraculous' phenomena. statistically, the had to have been religious.

2, the founding chemists were alchemists, who believed they could convert base metals to gold throgh mixing chemicals. does this meen alchemy is a useful field of investigation?

3, if science and religion were compatible, wouldn't the general level of religosit of scientists stay at a high level? wouldn't the evidence support the belief? the decreased religosity of scientists and academics as a collective is probably due to the incompatibilty of the two systems. for instance, see Darwin.

[snake]

An agnostic who is actively searching for the evidence.

perfectly valid. may i ask "how" you are searching?

[snake]

The bible also has references to Homosexuality and its stance in other parts of the old testament and new testament.

Leviticus is just probably the most famous

it also has references to slavery, what's your point?

[plague]

The Jets won.
Clearly there is a God.
Close thread.

[The Dunster]

Dissenters were not allowed to hold fellowships at Cambridge until very late into the 19th Century.
Newton was a dissenter, an alchemist, and a practicing homosexual - so I laughed when I saw him on Joel31's god squad list.

[pv4]

perfectly valid. may i ask "how" you are searching?

Attending church and bible study groups.

Reading the bible.

Doing google searches on things that interest me as i hear/read them.

Talking to people of varying belief systems.

[pv4]

He'll be at the preacher for the stats.

I genuinely love your sig :rof:

[Blackmac79]

Understanding context of biblical text is something that those who become pastors, priests etc. spend a large portion of time learning. Particularly in the Baptist schools. I believe that there has been a significant swing recently in what the Baptist church (at least in NSW and ACT) teach, which is less to do with a change in idea, but rather a change in thinking from "set in stone" to contextulised teaching.

As for some people saying "Curse God (god) for illness, disease and death", you obviously don't want a god that doesn't control every facet of your life, so would you like a god that does? I shouldn't think so. I don't think you can have it both ways. Only those who die are truly free from this anyway.

To clarify my own position I am probably fairly similar to PV4, however due to my parental guidance I actually have some training in "scripture" say. That was before though, and would say that I am far more Gnostic rather than particularly devoted to a singular thought of salvation. Will probably land me in hell though.

[joel31]

re founding scientists. joel:

1, just abou everyone was religious in those days. there was no simpler explanation available at the time to explain seemingly 'miraculous' phenomena. statistically, the had to have been religious.

2, the founding chemists were alchemists, who believed they could convert base metals to gold throgh mixing chemicals. does this meen alchemy is a useful field of investigation?

3, if science and religion were compatible, wouldn't the general level of religosit of scientists stay at a high level? wouldn't the evidence support the belief? the decreased religosity of scientists and academics as a collective is probably due to the incompatibilty of the two systems. for instance, see Darwin.


2. Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Planck, etc. These aren't just your alchemists
3. Seeing as, as I said they answer different questions are life, scientists personal religious views shouldn't affect their scientific development. I've seen a few videos about a guy interviewing science students at some American universities about why they deny their religion and their reasoning is hardly evidence-based

[joel31]

Ok legit question: esp for Joel and Member.
If you are a staunch non believer when you die do you still go to the pearly gates to be judged or do you just not exist so therefore go somewhere else?
The bible says that everyone is going to see God in his glory and be judged by him. What that looks like idk but if the God of the bible is true then you will see God and be judged

[MFKS]

I can see in some regards our atheists supporters are preparing themselves well for eternity in the after life by their choice of football club.


After spending a lifetime supporting the Jets eternity in hell for denying Gods existence will be a walk in the park for them.

[boz-monaut]

or we might just use proof, evidence and keep an open mind when it comes to understanding the universe, rather than rely on what some bronze age goat herders in some shitty desert thought

once you make the decision to chose what some holy book says over reason and logic, it's a short slippery slide to hate crimes, suicide bombing and holy wars - all religious minds are crazy, it's just a matter of how crazy

[joel31]

i know you're only a kid, so i don't hold you responsible for this, but this sentence is quite possibly the most ****ed up statement in the history of the forum. such is the amorality of the abrahamic religions.

by this logic, i, who cannot believe, who has no faith, am a worse person that a child murderer or rapist, provided they believe.

if god were existant (pro tip: he's almost certainly not), i'd be pleased to say i'm not his mate
Think about it this way. Seeing as you hate God would you really want to be with him in heaven for eternity if he was real? You answered this yourself. This is what heaven is so its not a place that those who hate God want to be so wouldn't you want to be not forgiven.

Also how does my age have any impact of this situation, I'm not going to tell you any specifics but I am old enough to think about issues and make decisions by himself. As you've probably guessed I grew up in the church but if I thought it was all evidence-less crap, I would've left the church

[joel31]

or we might just use proof, evidence and keep an open mind when it comes to understanding the universe, rather than rely on what some bronze age goat herders in some shitty desert thought

once you make the decision to chose what some holy book says over reason and logic, it's a short slippery slide to hate crimes, suicide bombing and holy wars - all religious minds are crazy, it's just a matter of how crazy
the bible doesn't advocate the things you listed. I don't think you'll find Christians doing these types of things in the modern day in the name of God. Even if they did, they're craziness wouldn't be as a result in the belief in a God that opposes such things

[The Dunster]

2. Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Planck, etc. These aren't just your alchemists
3. Seeing as, as I said they answer different questions are life, scientists personal religious views shouldn't affect their scientific development. I've seen a few videos about a guy interviewing science students at some American universities about why they deny their religion and their reasoning is hardly evidence-based

Ask yourself this:

If my faith is so strong then why do I look both ways when I cross the road ?

It certainly is not common sense.

[snake]

Think about it this way. Seeing as you hate God would you really want to be with him in heaven for eternity if he was real? You answered this yourself. This is what heaven is so its not a place that those who hate God want to be so wouldn't you want to be not forgiven.

Also how does my age have any impact of this situation, I'm not going to tell you any specifics but I am old enough to think about issues and make decisions by himself. As you've probably guessed I grew up in the church but if I thought it was all evidence-less crap, I would've left the church

i'd say i hate god the same way i hate darth vader or the emporer. i don't waste energy on fictional entities, just their adherents.

and yes i wouldn't like to spend eternity in heaven, in the same way i don't want anything to last for eternity. it would get boring.

and your age has plenty to do with it. asking the right questions comes with experience.

[MFKS]

Ask yourself this:

If my faith is so strong then why do I look both ways when I cross the road ?

It certainly is not common sense.

This would have to be one of the most absurd things I have ever read.

If you have faith in god and walked across the road without looking and got splattered across the bonnet of a truck that would be because you are a dumb **** who didn't look and would have nothing to do with your faith in god and a sign that god is deserting you.

**** me dead

[GazFish35]

but if I thought it was all evidence-less crap, I would've left the church

Out of interest what evidence do you rely on to suggest it isn't crap?
Not digging, genuinely interested.

[The Dunster]

So what you are saying is that the evidence suggests that if you don't look both ways when crossing the road you might get splattered across the bonnet of a truck.

Why don't you apply the same logic to the god question ?

Reason:
because you are a [U]dumb **** who didn't look

[The Dunster]

2. Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Planck, etc. These aren't just your alchemists
3. Seeing as, as I said they answer different questions are life, scientists personal religious views shouldn't affect their scientific development. I've seen a few videos about a guy interviewing science students at some American universities about why they deny their religion and their reasoning is hardly evidence-based

Do you even understand the consequences of Planck's Constant being a non-zero number ? If you did you would not be religious. This is why Max Planck struggled to come to grips with the consequences of the discovery.

[boz-monaut]

how come none of you religious types are into Allah then?

what about Cao Dai? that seems pretty cool, they've got Jesus and the bloke who wrote Les Miserables

Scientology seems pretty fun, what with all them thetans and Tom Cruise

funny how you're all into the religion you were indoctrinated into

I'm an atheist because no one has put forward any arguments to make me change my mind - I'm totally open to it but I'm afraid all religions are the same to me, made up stuff to keep cultures stable, populations oppressed or more recently, make sex pests rich

I see religion as a weakness of character - can't face any harsh truth or reality so find comfort in easy lies - suitable for children, the unintelligent or the old and fearful

[GazFish35]

The opiate of the masses.

[MFKS]

how come none of you religious types are into Allah then?

what about Cao Dai? that seems pretty cool, they've got Jesus and the bloke who wrote Les Miserables

Scientology seems pretty fun, what with all them thetans and Tom Cruise

funny how you're all into the religion you were indoctrinated into

I'm an atheist because no one has put forward any arguments to make me change my mind - I'm totally open to it but I'm afraid all religions are the same to me, made up stuff to keep cultures stable, populations oppressed or more recently, make sex pests rich

I see religion as a weakness of character - can't face any harsh truth or reality so find comfort in easy lies - suitable for children, the unintelligent or the old and fearful

That's almost a call for help

Umm see the thing here is you are asking for someone to convince you to believe. Not our place to do so. You can work it out yourself

Let us know when you find god. Your a certainty to find god one day :thumbsup:

[MFKS]

So what you are saying is that the evidence suggests that if you don't look both ways when crossing the road you might get splattered across the bonnet of a truck.

Why don't you apply the same logic to the god question ?

Reason:

Logic??

By your logic every one who believes in god would be immortal as god would repeatedly be bound to save them from any activity they pursue that may harm them

That's how ****ed your logic is.

[boz-monaut]

Ihave no need in my life for a god, if I do develop a weakness of character that requires one, I'll see if I can't get me one of them sex pest ones

you're as clueless about religion as every other opinion you express on this forum

[MFKS]

Ihave no need in my life for a god, if I do develop a weakness of character that requires one, I'll see if I can't get me one of them sex pest ones

you're as clueless about religion as every other opinion you express on this forum

So you have the superiority complex now from the aethist with the its a weakness of character to believe



Of course you would say you have no need for god. Your ego is that big you probably view yourself as god.

[plague]

I know plenty of peeps who don't think of God as some dude in the sky but someone who's teachings/ethics etc they live by as taught by the bible.
People go to AA meetings, sales seminars, investment advisors who all give them advice on how to better their lives. Other people choose to take advice from the bible.
Does someone need to be best mates with Anthony Robbins/Warren Buffet/Commando to live by their words?
Also, as far as the 'science is proof' angle is concerned. Every person I know who works in that profession admits that there is a lot of 'fact' based on probability/assumptions etc that are always up for reassessment and open to interpretation.
Jeez Louise when I was growing up the boffins were changing their minds every week on whether potatoes were good for you or not.

[plague]

Of course you would say you have no need for god. Your ego is that big you probably view yourself as god.

Id say more 'ball of energy that can destroy cities' but that's another debate for another thread.

[boz-monaut]

what an ill informed lot of garbage that is

I'm comfortable with the knowledge that I, and every other human on this planet is an insignificant speck of stardust, who when I die will not continue on as some magical consciousness with some benevolent controller looking after me or caring what I think

it takes some ego to think that humanity was created by a god, and that this god gives a shit about you

[furns]

Where was this thread during the offseason?

5 stars

[furns]

Btw I will accept thread title nominations seeing this no longer seems to be limited to Politics

Maybe:
Politics & Religion - Left vs Right Deathmatch (while normal people watch)
Politics & Religion - the left will inherit the earth when the right have finished f*cking with it
Politics & Religion - enter when drunk, it's much more fun

[GazFish35]

When I was a kid, I used to pray every night for a new bike. Then I realised, the Lord doesn't work that way. So I just stole one and asked Him to forgive me ... and I got it!

[GazFish35]

Furns,

New thread name..... The "If you repeat a lie often enough" thread.


http://img0.joyreactor.com/pics/post/politics-religion-lie-234885.jpeg

[hawk]

wow, hasnt this thread taken a turn




I'm an atheist because no one has put forward any arguments to make me change my mind

http://www.geeksofdoom.com/GoD/img/2007/05/2007-05-25-deathsentance_lg.jpg
In some countries you would be dead for saying this.

http://i.imgur.com/agyD2.jpg

Makes it much easier to not bother with it.

tbh i have not the time to discuss. life gets in the way.

[snake]

That's almost a call for help

Umm see the thing here is you are asking for someone to convince you to believe. Not our place to do so. You can work it out yourself

Let us know when you find god. Your a certainty to find god one day :thumbsup:

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen."
Matthew 28:18-20

"And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen."
Mark 16:15-20

"Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”
Luke 24:46-49


:rof:

[plague]

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen."
Matthew 28:18-20

"And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen."
Mark 16:15-20

"Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”
Luke 24:46-49


:rof:

Wasn't that the final diner scene from Pulp Fiction?

[snake]

2. Copernicus, Bacon, Kepler, Galileo, Planck, etc. These aren't just your alchemists
3. Seeing as, as I said they answer different questions are life, scientists personal religious views shouldn't affect their scientific development. I've seen a few videos about a guy interviewing science students at some American universities about why they deny their religion and their reasoning is hardly evidence-based

2, no, what i was saying joel was that the initial hypothesis (if you can call it that) was abandoned due to new discoveries. just because early founding scientists may have been motivated to discover how god's universe (in their eyes) works, their findings don't support this. again, if science and religion were compatible, wouldn't the religiosity of scientists be higher than that of lay folk? why is the reverse correlation found?

3, used to be that religion answered both the how and why. now it seems to be relegated to a handful of 'why' questions of little value. seems to be the magisteria of religion is shrinking by the day. how will it continue to stay relevant?

you say you've seen videos about a guy interviewing science students in america. so what? that guy doesn't happen to be named eric hovind, does he?

[snake]

Also, as far as the 'science is proof' angle is concerned. Every person I know who works in that profession admits that there is a lot of 'fact' based on probability/assumptions etc that are always up for reassessment and open to interpretation.
Jeez Louise when I was growing up the boffins were changing their minds every week on whether potatoes were good for you or not.

true, science is not dogmatic. people make careers out of overthrowing long-held and beloved theories. that is why science is so progressive - always challenging, always falsifying.

it is true that outise mathematics and logic, the term "proof" is not all that useful as nothing can ever be known with 100%certainty. it is important however not to relate this limitation as an admission of confusion or not understanding. theories such as atomic theory or evolution probably won't be overthrown. they're as good as fact as you could probably ever hope to get.

[snake]

Christians believe that not believing is the only non-forgivable sin

i'm still yet to get an answer to this. am i as an unbeliever a less moral person than a murderer who seeks forgiveness?

anyone can have a go at answering

[plague]

true, science is not dogmatic. people make careers out of overthrowing long-held and beloved theories. that is why science is so progressive - always challenging, always falsifying.

it is true that outise mathematics and logic, the term "proof" is not all that useful as nothing can ever be known with 100%certainty. it is important however not to relate this limitation as an admission of confusion or not understanding. theories such as atomic theory or evolution probably won't be overthrown. they're as good as fact as you could probably ever hope to get.

Totally agree.
Was just relating it to some others on here that religions have evolved with time as well as science.
And I think it's all a pointless argument as we'll never be able to disprove anything so people will go on down their own road.
this is why 9/11 truthers and the Westboro Baptist church will continue to exist.

[plague]

i'm still yet to get an answer to this. am i as an unbeliever a less moral person than a murderer who seeks forgiveness?

anyone can have a go at answering
My only guess is that when this was originally written 99% of people believed in God and the other 1% were too scared to admit it.

[snake]

the bible doesn't advocate the things you listed. I don't think you'll find Christians doing these types of things in the modern day in the name of God. Even if they did, they're craziness wouldn't be as a result in the belief in a God that opposes such things

my first thought were the terror acts on abortion clinics. seems there is much more in countries not on the radar of strayas media.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism

[snake]

Totally agree.
Was just relating it to some others on here that religions have evolved with time as well as science.
And I think it's all a pointless argument as we'll never be able to disprove anything so people will go on down their own road.
this is why 9/11 truthers and the Westboro Baptist church will continue to exist.

minor techincal correction. disproving (falsifying) is how science progresses. it's best to think of it as a survival of the fittest of competing hypothesis. someone would say "if hypothesis A were true, then we should expect some reponse X when we do experiment Y" they then do the experiment. if X doesn't show up, they have to ask why? usually, hypothesis A is put on the scrap heap.

the difference is, you can never prove the non-existence of anything, because it isn't falsifiable. for instance, you probably think the blades on your mower cut your grass when you mow. you cant disprove the hypothesis that actually a series of invisible leprechauns ride the blades holding out a pair of scissors, which actually does the cutting. you can't disprove that there isnn't a teapot orbiting saturn etc. this is the unfalsifiable domain that god hides in.

[plague]

minor techincal correction. disproving (falsifying) is how science progresses. it's best to think of it as a survival of the fittest of competing hypothesis. someone would say "if hypothesis A were true, then we should expect some reponse X when we do experiment Y" they then do the experiment. if X doesn't show up, they have to ask why? usually, hypothesis A is put on the scrap heap.

the difference is, you can never prove the non-existence of anything, because it isn't falsifiable. for instance, you probably think the blades on your mower cut your grass when you mow. you cant disprove the hypothesis that actually a series of invisible leprechauns ride the blades holding out a pair of scissors, which actually does the cutting. you can't disprove that there isnn't a teapot orbiting saturn etc. this is the unfalsifiable domain that god hides in.

Yer.
That's what I ment.

[GazFish35]

Snake.

If a tree falls in the forrest and no-one is around, does it make a noise?

[q-money]

of course it ****en does m8

[GazFish35]

Urnot snake m8.

[The Dunster]

minor techincal correction. disproving (falsifying) is how science progresses. it's best to think of it as a survival of the fittest of competing hypothesis. someone would say "if hypothesis A were true, then we should expect some reponse X when we do experiment Y" they then do the experiment. if X doesn't show up, they have to ask why? usually, hypothesis A is put on the scrap heap.

the difference is, you can never prove the non-existence of anything, because it isn't falsifiable. for instance, you probably think the blades on your mower cut your grass when you mow. you cant disprove the hypothesis that actually a series of invisible leprechauns ride the blades holding out a pair of scissors, which actually does the cutting. you can't disprove that there isnn't a teapot orbiting saturn etc. this is the unfalsifiable domain that god hides in.

Karl Popper in da house.

[hawk]

falsify, prove, fittest, religious, scienentific, murder, highly probable.

Have ya hypotheses and words but follow this advice and we have a slightly better earth.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-4DPrMnl99DA/VAakHAzgTXI/AAAAAAAAAj4/uPz3Rgg0YQM/s1600/killing.png

[Blackmac79]

Why are we conscious beings then?
Why do we do things beyond natural instinct?

[parksey]

Why are we conscious beings then?
Why do we do things beyond natural instinct?

because humans are the business

[joel31]

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen."
Matthew 28:18-20

"And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen."
Mark 16:15-20

"Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”
Luke 24:46-49


:rof:
If Christians believe that this is true and good news its worth telling people, especially those who haven't heard

But it shouldn't be forcing it peoples throats, which I agree this is sometimes not the case

[joel31]

i'm still yet to get an answer to this. am i as an unbeliever a less moral person than a murderer who seeks forgiveness?

anyone can have a go at answering
It isn't a matter of morality. Morality is relative to a persons belief, I'm not going to tell you whether you're moral or not moral.

But to God all sins are the same except denying him

[MFKS]

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen."
Matthew 28:18-20

"And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. And these signs will follow those who believe: In My name they will cast out demons; they will speak with new tongues; they will take up serpents; and if they drink anything deadly, it will by no means hurt them; they will lay hands on the sick, and they will recover.”

So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God. And they went out and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the word through the accompanying signs. Amen."
Mark 16:15-20

"Then He said to them, “Thus it is written, and thus it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead the third day, and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And you are witnesses of these things. Behold, I send the Promise of My Father upon you; but tarry in the city of Jerusalem until you are endued with power from on high.”
Luke 24:46-49


:rof:

As I said not my place to convince you. It is in a book read it and think about it and make your own mind up.

Thing is with my religion you have the choice to decide which way you want to go. Contrast that with another religion where you a forced into submitting to it with aggression force and hate and face death if you don't comply and believe.


Yet for some reason you atheists see Christianity as a bigger threat despite our tolerance to your views and the lack of tolerance from this other religion towards your views. Go figure the hypocrisy in that

[MFKS]

i'm still yet to get an answer to this. am i as an unbeliever a less moral person than a murderer who seeks forgiveness?

anyone can have a go at answering

Your up shit creek and the murderer is in.

You failed to believe he did

[joel31]

my first thought were the terror acts on abortion clinics. seems there is much more in countries not on the radar of strayas media.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_terrorism
please don't turn a minority who aren't following biblical principles into a picture of what Christianity is and stands for.

Much like how a few fundamentalist Muslims doesn't mean that all muslims are evil and advocate murder of non-muslims

[snake]

please don't turn a minority who aren't following biblical principles into a picture of what Christianity is and stands for.

Much like how a few fundamentalist Muslims doesn't mean that all muslims are evil and advocate murder of non-muslims

http://rorygregg.files.wordpress.com/2011/10/shifting_goals2.jpg

[snake]

It isn't a matter of morality. Morality is relative to a persons belief, I'm not going to tell you whether you're moral or not moral.

But to God all sins are the same except denying him

so you don't believe in absolute morality? how wonderfully unchristian of you

[snake]

As I said not my place to convince you. It is in a book read it and think about it and make your own mind up.

Thing is with my religion you have the choice to decide which way you want to go. Contrast that with another religion where you a forced into submitting to it with aggression force and hate and face death if you don't comply and believe.


Yet for some reason you atheists see Christianity as a bigger threat despite our tolerance to your views and the lack of tolerance from this other religion towards your views. Go figure the hypocrisy in that

jesus told you to make a disciple of me. don't disobey jesus, his dad's kinda real jealous and vengeful :rof:

i don't come across too many muslims, certainly not on the foz. i'm just playing the cards that are dealt. as i've said before, you're both nuts.

[snake]

Your up shit creek and the murderer is in.

You failed to believe he did

fmd some club this is :rof:

no wonder the cathos are able to protect all their kiddy fiddlers with a straight face with a rule book like this

[snake]

Attending church and bible study groups.

Reading the bible.

Doing google searches on things that interest me as i hear/read them.

Talking to people of varying belief systems.

why the bible though? why not the quran? the torah? the book of mormon? dianetics? do the cargo cults have a book? serious question.

at the risk of turning this into a false dichotomy, have you read anything from the other side?

you're an engineer, right? you can appreciate the predictive power of scientific theories, then. what if a great number of these theories contradicted the bible (i'm not talking about your engineering ones)? the bible cannot therefore be inerrant as it is claimed. why then consider the rest of it seriously?

[The Dunster]

The hardest part about an Engineering degree is backing up after the nine beers and four bucket bongs you are required to induce in between lectures.

[pv4]

why the bible though? why not the quran? the torah? the book of mormon? dianetics? do the cargo cults have a book? serious question.

at the risk of turning this into a false dichotomy, have you read anything from the other side?

you're an engineer, right? you can appreciate the predictive power of scientific theories, then. what if a great number of these theories contradicted the bible (i'm not talking about your engineering ones)? the bible cannot therefore be inerrant as it is claimed. why then consider the rest of it seriously?

Why the bible - because i read a few stories i believed truly did happen. So i delved further. I don't just plan on looking into the bible and christianity but it sure is a start.

[GazFish35]

Yet for some reason you atheists see Christianity as a bigger threat despite our tolerance to your views and the lack of tolerance from this other religion towards your views. Go figure the hypocrisy in that

I'm missing where the atheists see Christianity as threat.
I'm just seeing atheists questioning the logic of faith.

[joel31]

Out of interest what evidence do you rely on to suggest it isn't crap?
Not digging, genuinely interested.
- The reliability of the bible. The bible has been compared with ancient manuscripts (which there are more of than pretty much every other text in history) and has found to have barely changed since its original writing. Also the NT was written quite closely after events so people who were witnesses would be still around to correct it, if they believed it was false
- There is historical evidence pointing towards Jesus existence as a man and supporting biblical events and thus reliability of bible
- The complexity of the universe: IMO chance could not have produced this complexity.
- The universe: something can't come out of nothing. There needed to be a catalyst to start its creation whether it came from the big bang or otherwise
- why are there uniform laws of nature? As Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
- People in the early church who KNEW Jesus were willing to die because they were so convinced that Jesus was God and their saviour. If they weren’t absolutely convinced then surely they would admit it was false and save their lives
- Un-Darwinian sacrificial actions of humans and moral conscience - How could have humans developed a conscience and sense for morality if the universe is meaningless and it is all about survival of the fittest.

I'm happy to elaborate if wanted on historical evidence, etc

[GazFish35]

Why the bible - because i read a few stories i believed truly did happen. So i delved further. I don't just plan on looking into the bible and christianity but it sure is a start.

Can I genuinely suggest you seek to understand local indigenous understandings of the world.
Some truly amazing and inspiring systems of knowing exist in one of the world longest continuous cultures.

[joel31]

I'm missing where the atheists see Christianity as threat.
I'm just seeing atheists questioning the logic of faith.
You must admit though atheists have faith too.

[GazFish35]

- The reliability of the bible. The bible has been compared with ancient manuscripts (which there are more of than pretty much every other text in history) and has found to have barely changed since its original writing. Also the NT was written quite closely after events so people who were witnesses would be still around to correct it, if they believed it was false
- There is historical evidence pointing towards Jesus existence as a man and supporting biblical events and thus reliability of bible
- The complexity of the universe: IMO chance could not have produced this complexity.
- The universe: something can't come out of nothing. There needed to be a catalyst to start its creation whether it came from the big bang or otherwise
- why are there uniform laws of nature? As Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
- People in the early church who KNEW Jesus were willing to die because they were so convinced that Jesus was God and their saviour. If they weren’t absolutely convinced then surely they would admit it was false and save their lives
- Un-Darwinian sacrificial actions of humans and moral conscience - How could have humans developed a conscience and sense for morality if the universe is meaningless and it is all about survival of the fittest.

I'm happy to elaborate if wanted on historical evidence, etc


I've no doubt JC lived it's the whole "son of god" thing I struggle to understand people's faith in. No disrespect.
Happy to be corrected but wasn't the NT largely written a few hundred years after.... Except some of the early stuff..... And if the timeframe you suggest is accurate, it'd be pretty easy to explain an inability to have things edited by way of rates of illiteracy and the literates being the ones in power.

I'm still to be convinced these early documents, and their translation/interpretation where not massively subject to political grabs for power and control of populations either by the church or whatever feudal/democratic system may have existed at any period of time, and is still happening today.

I'm sorry, but the "his disciples believed him and were willing to die" can be pretty easily argued against by looking at some modern day cults that saw leaders convince their followers that they too were some heavenly incarnation and many followers being willing to die in their name too.



Humans are largely two things, gullible or greedy, as we've become more literate and educated as a species the influence of the church has wained..... I'm not calling anyone of faith to be gullible, you have listed a number of points I've not got an answer to, I suppose what I am saying is that I can't help but think the greed of those in power has always played on the gullibility of the masses of populations they sought to control and all religious texts are being written, interpreted and re-written by power hungry people wanting to remain in power.

[GazFish35]

You must admit though atheists have faith too.

A faith in the absence of deities?

[Bremsstrahlung]

Quick question, have we fixed/increased our Bandwidth? It's gonna be a long festive period (of working) if the Foz is down...

[The Dunster]

http://www.randomfunnypictures.org/funny-pictures-1/funny-picture-20956.jpg

http://cdn.themetapicture.com/media/funny-religion-poster-school.jpg

http://www.vitamin-ha.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/funny-religious-memes-13feb12-12-W630.jpg

http://www.signsfunny.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/demotivational-posters-nunkini.jpg

[furns]

Quick question, have we fixed/increased our Bandwidth? It's gonna be a long festive period (of working) if the Foz is down...

We have plenty of bandwidth mate, no chance current levels push us over the edge

[parksey]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=35rHhxZKGes

[pv4]

Can I genuinely suggest you seek to understand local indigenous understandings of the world.
Some truly amazing and inspiring systems of knowing exist in one of the world longest continuous cultures.

I think that going to Peru and learning even a small part of what the Incans believed is what kind of put me on this journey tbh.

[Bremsstrahlung]

We have plenty of bandwidth mate, no chance current levels push us over the edge

Excellent, carry on.

[pv4]

I see religion as a weakness of character - can't face any harsh truth or reality so find comfort in easy lies - suitable for children, the unintelligent or the old and fearful

In my little journey I've seen plenty of all of the above.

But tbh I'd rather they have something to help strengthen their character, as opposed to not having it and then needing to deal with them in society.

[pv4]

Btw I'd just like to mention that Kanye's Jesus Walks is a fxxxing sick song and I listen to it most days.

[The Dunster]

- The reliability of the bible. The bible has been compared with ancient manuscripts (which there are more of than pretty much every other text in history) and has found to have barely changed since its original writing. Also the NT was written quite closely after events so people who were witnesses would be still around to correct it, if they believed it was false
- There is historical evidence pointing towards Jesus existence as a man and supporting biblical events and thus reliability of bible
- The complexity of the universe: IMO chance could not have produced this complexity.
- The universe: something can't come out of nothing. There needed to be a catalyst to start its creation whether it came from the big bang or otherwise
- why are there uniform laws of nature? As Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
- People in the early church who KNEW Jesus were willing to die because they were so convinced that Jesus was God and their saviour. If they weren’t absolutely convinced then surely they would admit it was false and save their lives
- Un-Darwinian sacrificial actions of humans and moral conscience - How could have humans developed a conscience and sense for morality if the universe is meaningless and it is all about survival of the fittest.

I'm happy to elaborate if wanted on historical evidence, etc

Don't quote mine what you don't understand it makes you look like an idiot.

Dick Feynman while an accomplished quantum theorist was also someone that wrote popularisations for money.
These popularisations may be fun to read but without the maths thay are absolutely fooking useless with respect to understanding Quantum Mechanics.
Quote mining just confirms that you do not undertstand Quantum mechanics at even the most basic level or evolutionary theory for that matter.

Your time would be much better served reading what John Polkinghorne has written on these subjects.

Polkinghorne was a student of Paul Dirac and is a very accomplished Quantum Theorist in his own right. Moreover, he is also a Chrisitan but not a fundamentalist like yourself or MFKS.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KlJ7Bt3oxE

I hope this might help open your mind a little.

[pv4]

you're an engineer, right? you can appreciate the predictive power of scientific theories, then. what if a great number of these theories contradicted the bible (i'm not talking about your engineering ones)? the bible cannot therefore be inerrant as it is claimed. why then consider the rest of it seriously?

I'm honestly yet to meet a Christian who thinks the Bible is inerrant. Even MFAW in this thread has discounted arguments for/against the Old Testament (and bible in general), as some things in the bible are best taken with a grain of salt and every/most Christian I have met will tell you this.

Me personally - I'm genuinely not phased by what the bible does and doesn't contradict, as I don't believe every single story and value the bible has written. Kind of like the youtube link Duns linked (I liked that a lot btw) - there's no Christians who will still say that the Earth is fixed and the sun moves according to it, even though it is written so in the bible.

I love the Rocky movies, particularly the first couple. They are entertaining, and I can draw a lot of life lessons/morals/whatever from interpreting it. Whether it is real or not, based on a true story, whatever - it doesn't concern me. I believe in the values, and can relate the story and values to my own life, and that's what is important to me. And that's how I interpret the bible, for the most part. It's entertaining, some of it is believable, and I can draw great life morals/beliefs/etc from interpreting it how I want to. I feel like I could study Christianity and the bible for 10 more years and draw no closer a conclusion than that. I'm enjoying it and hopefully my life and the person I am is improving from what I'm taking from it. What other people draw from it, etc just doesn't concern me greatly tbh. Jesus wept, and shouted "yo Adrian" and all that.

[GazFish35]

Very interesting dunster, I could listen to him for hours, he speaks so openly.

Is what he's saying is god created everything, therefore all the stuff evolutionists use to say there is no god, is actually just a creation of god?

Does that prove he exists? Or just as explaination/answer of the big "Why?" Questions?

"Evolution is compatible with Christian faith" he says in his closing....does this only really serve to say evolution doesn't disprove god's existence. Does this dude or any other have any science that proves god does exist?
The book of scriptures doesn't contradict the book of nature, he makes that point well, but other systems of knowing, particularly some indegienous ones, also show great parra levels and understandings of nature and "verbal scriptures"

Is this why the word "faith" is used? That at some point people need to believe in something without any emperical evidence?

[MFKS]

I'm missing where the atheists see Christianity as threat.
I'm just seeing atheists questioning the logic of faith.

All their argument is based on Christianity and our faith. Every example they wish to use is from the Christian faith not from Judaism Islam or any other religion. You want to take criticism of any of these faiths and their are plenty of areas to be critical in islam probably more so than any religion yet you don't see any of the atheists giving it to them.

Reality is most of the atheists out there in this country have rejected Christianity to be atheists. There level of exposure to other religions would be mostly small so a bit hard to reject after a thorough assessment.

To deny atheists see Christianity as a threat is pretty naïve. If they are that content with their stance that god does not exist as they believe they would not give a **** at all about what I believe or show any interest in trying to convince me I am wrong.
Aethists can not wait to ridicule religion when given the chance just look at this thread for references to skysanta gullible etc

I will answer any questions you have on my religion but as I have said before it is not my place to convince anyone god exists. You can make up your own mind and go from there. I honestly could not care whether you do or not believe I believe that is your choice and will respect that.

Aethists on the other hand are quick to ridicule religion, knock it down a peg or two when the chance arrives and generally try and convince everyone else with terms like science evolution etc that try are right.

[la bazzle]

Its like how you ridicule people who believe Bridges was a half decent player. Its a belief based on no evidence and is hilarious to those who realise that Bridges was rubbish or that his talent did not exist. You look at those Bridges believers and you think "ha...how silly are they, believing something so ridiculous, with no evidence to suggest he's any good, I shall laugh at them hadeha ha"...... You think wow how can these people be so blind to suggest he is good with no evidence. Then you try to educate those people and convince them they are wrong. But no matter what you say and all the evidence you provide they refuse to see the error of their ways, then it frustrates you. Thats how we feel about religion.

[GazFish35]

Ridiculing something doesn't mean you perceive a threat from it.

Getting defensive might though.

And it's not a long stretch to explain most australian based atheists refute the beliefs of Christianity more than other religions as it's the major religion in this country.

[boz-monaut]

baz with the post of the year

[snake]

- The reliability of the bible. The bible has been compared with ancient manuscripts (which there are more of than pretty much every other text in history) and has found to have barely changed since its original writing. Also the NT was written quite closely after events so people who were witnesses would be still around to correct it, if they believed it was false
no, the bible was written long after the event by people acting on second, third or worse hand recollections. i'm sure a lot of "correcting" went on, but not the honest type.

also, sice when are there more ancient manuscripts than every other text in history? how many people were around then? how many were literate? show your sources


- There is historical evidence pointing towards Jesus existence as a man and supporting biblical events and thus reliability of bible



sure, jc probably existed. how does that support the supernatural claims though? answer = it doesn't.

how did he turn water into wine? what's the energy release for nucleosyntheis of the carbon for the alcohol from the water?

hint: you will need to use scientific notation to reasonably express this number.



- The complexity of the universe: IMO chance could not have produced this complexity.
we agree, but i think it's unintentional on your behalf based on how you've probably mis-phrased the above


- The universe: something can't come out of nothing. There needed to be a catalyst to start its creation whether it came from the big bang or otherwise
it is hilarious that you use Richard Feynmann below seeing as a result of quantum electrodynamics is that particles do spring in and out of existence all the time from nothing.


- why are there uniform laws of nature? As Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said, "Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."

what is the full context of this quote? i assume you know this given that you've googled/copy/pasted directly, including the introductory "As Richard Feynmann, a Nobel Prize winner..." part.

protip: plagiarism is a sin.


- People in the early church who KNEW Jesus were willing to die because they were so convinced that Jesus was God and their saviour. If they weren’t absolutely convinced then surely they would admit it was false and save their lives

Jonestown


- Un-Darwinian sacrificial actions of humans and moral conscience - How could have humans developed a conscience and sense for morality if the universe is meaningless and it is all about survival of the fittest.

the phrase "survival of the fittest" is a bit unfortunate in that it is readily misunderstood, as is your case here. the fittest doesn't just mean strongest or fastest, which is where the confusion arises. selection is any action by which on average your genes become more common in a population on account of there being more copies made. for natural selection, this usually comes down to breeding success. what you are asking is how can altrustic behaviour favour your breeding success, given that it helps others (including competitors). i'll give you one simple mechanism, but there are others. when animals become more intelligent and social, it helps to cooperate since the team is stronger than the sum of its individual parts. obviously, your team also carry many of the same genes as you, so altuistic behaviour increases the chances of a gene becoming more common.

now, what if you try and do all the leaning and none of the lifting (thanks tones). well, others in the community will know and you will be shunned. this has been observed in animals other than homo-sapiens.

[Buddha]

For those who haven't stumbled across it, Atheists have rewritten the 10 commandments
And they're actually pretty spot on wrt how life should really be

http://www.inquisitr.com/1692212/atheists-rewrite-ten-commandments-mythbusters-adam-savage-judged-new-commands/

[MFKS]

Its like how you ridicule people who believe Bridges was a half decent player. Its a belief based on no evidence and is hilarious to those who realise that Bridges was rubbish or that his talent did not exist. You look at those Bridges believers and you think "ha...how silly are they, believing something so ridiculous, with no evidence to suggest he's any good, I shall laugh at them hadeha ha"...... You think wow how can these people be so blind to suggest he is good with no evidence. Then you try to educate those people and convince them they are wrong. But no matter what you say and all the evidence you provide they refuse to see the error of their ways, then it frustrates you. Thats how we feel about religion.

So your basically saying you get frustrated dealing with people who believe in god??

Why is it your place to educate them with your pearls of wisdom to correct your perception that they are wrong??

One of both sides to it is right the other is wrong. Neither can prove it. It is the epitome of arrogance to claim you are definitely right. I ain't claiming I am right. I believe in what I believe


It is also the epitome of arrogance to try and alter ones perceptions on the issue. The decision is a personal choice and everyone is entitled to their beliefs.


If your getting frustrated then maybe you need to accept the fact you should not be trying to convince someone to believe a certain way when it is their decision

[snake]

In my little journey I've seen plenty of all of the above.

But tbh I'd rather they have something to help strengthen their character, as opposed to not having it and then needing to deal with them in society.

the quote doesn't contain my words and i'm not sure i agree with them

[snake]

All their argument is based on Christianity and our faith. Every example they wish to use is from the Christian faith not from Judaism Islam or any other religion. You want to take criticism of any of these faiths and their are plenty of areas to be critical in islam probably more so than any religion yet you don't see any of the atheists giving it to them.

Reality is most of the atheists out there in this country have rejected Christianity to be atheists. There level of exposure to other religions would be mostly small so a bit hard to reject after a thorough assessment.

To deny atheists see Christianity as a threat is pretty naïve. If they are that content with their stance that god does not exist as they believe they would not give a **** at all about what I believe or show any interest in trying to convince me I am wrong.
Aethists can not wait to ridicule religion when given the chance just look at this thread for references to skysanta gullible etc

I will answer any questions you have on my religion but as I have said before it is not my place to convince anyone god exists. You can make up your own mind and go from there. I honestly could not care whether you do or not believe I believe that is your choice and will respect that.

Aethists on the other hand are quick to ridicule religion, knock it down a peg or two when the chance arrives and generally try and convince everyone else with terms like science evolution etc that try are right.

the threat of religion is that they have people in power and there policies refllect thier ridiculous beliefs. like how this all started with your bronze-age homophobia.

other concerns are related to the first. before starting a lecture series on evolution, the lecturor is obliged to aoplogise that the following content may upset those with religious views. this disgusts me.

i'm also bothered that religious people have children who they indoctrinate. could you imagine signing up your toddler to a political party? no, children are too young to have a position on such things. but religion - no, must take little billy to church and tell him he will go to hell if he doesn't believe in god or if he ever grows up and wants to kiss boys. for me, this is a disgusting abuse of power to the most vulnerable group in society.

[GazFish35]

Proof that Jesus was Australian:

He wore thongs.
He was a chippy, who like all good union members didn't work on Sundays.
His favourite past times were fishing, camping, going 4-wheel donkeying, and most of his mates were fishermen.
He seemed to know a lot of prostitutes.
His mates all had nicknames: The Rock, The Doubter, Simon Peter, The Baptist, so on and so forth.
The only time he went to church as a young bloke he got into a fight.
He was a champion surfer, it was like he could walk on water.
He did a mean barbeque, 5000 people rock up, no wuckers throw a few fresh caught fish on the barbie, some buns and a bit of mum's potato salad (it's in the Gospel of Thomas, trust me) and bob's your uncle.
No one is exactly sure where he was earning his quid from but he had a mate in the tax office so it was all sweet.
And to top it all off, he turned water into alcohol and if that isn't an Australian miracle I don't know what is!



Not my work.

[la bazzle]

Yes at times, but only in this sort of forum or discussion. Just like Bridges fans it's frustrating that people in this century still believe in such things.

Again with the Bridges example, why is it your place to educate them with your pearls of wisdom on Bridges ability because you perceive they are wrong? Because when you have a discussion and believe someone is wrong you let them know. Thats how it generally works.


Thats right and if there is proof of god, allah, odin, thor, etc existing then I will say hey I was wrong. Until that day, as discussed by snake earlier, the burden of proof is on believers. Otherwise whats the difference between someone believing in unicorns/big foot/ghosts etc and someone believing in god. They're essentially both stories invented by humans and written in books. I can't see how they differ. Again if people choose to believe Bridges is a good player you will continue to arrogantly say you're right and he's rubbish. But they believe in what they believe with Bridges.... let them believe....even though they have no evidence of his talent.

It is also the epitome of arrogance to try and alter ones perceptions on Bridges talent. The decision on being a Bridges fan is a personal choice and everyone is entitled to their beliefs in regards to Bridges.


The frustration comes from constantly seeing religion hold back the progress of man kind. From Muslims blowing people up to Christians stopping vital research. The frustration comes from religion entering the relm of politics where it doesn't belong. When decisions about issues in society are held back and debated due to religion having a problem with said issue is frustrating. You say it's your belief its personal blah blah blah yet in the same breath say oh yeah but two dudes can't get married cause I believe they can't. If it's such a personal choice why the **** does it matter if two dudes bonk each other and wear pretty rings? Its personal.....shouldnt effect you.

If your getting frustrated about Bridges fans then maybe you need to accept the fact you should not be trying to convince Bridges fans to believe a certain way when it is their decision to believe he is a good player. At the end of the day you're all well and good to tell people what they should and shouldn't believe in regards to football and politics (Bridges fans, Leftist nutjobs etc etc). Same should apply to religion (religious nut jobs etc etc).

[pv4]

the quote doesn't contain my words and i'm not sure i agree with them

woooah that was my bad - attempting to quote Boz and somehow left your quote= at the start. Have edited!

[MFKS]

the threat of religion is that they have people in power and there policies refllect thier ridiculous beliefs. like how this all started with your bronze-age homophobia.

other concerns are related to the first. before starting a lecture series on evolution, the lecturor is obliged to aoplogise that the following content may upset those with religious views. this disgusts me.

i'm also bothered that religious people have children who they indoctrinate. could you imagine signing up your toddler to a political party? no, children are too young to have a position on such things. but religion - no, must take little billy to church and tell him he will go to hell if he doesn't believe in god or if he ever grows up and wants to kiss boys. for me, this is a disgusting abuse of power to the most vulnerable group in society.

Anyone in position of power is influenced heavily by what they believe in. History is littered by their examples

I also have no ****ing idea why these lecturers you speak of need to apologise that their theory may offend religious people. I ain't offended by other religions celebrating Ramadan or Hanukah. I also ain't offended that you feel the way you do on god. People need to accept other opinions out there and the apology is not needed and it just PC bullshit going too far again


I do not disagree with you on the indoctrination of kids being a bad thing. I myself was indoctrinated (a strong word but really the reality when you a as a kid did not wish to partake) not what you would call heavily but enough that I rejected it. I came back to it later in life because I wanted to. I chose it.


It is an issue that I would be heavily conflicted by if I had to make decisions on in the event I had kids. As a parent you would want to protect your kids and with my views being what they are baptism etc would be what I would want. This directly contrasts with my views on religion you need to find yourself.

Good news is I don't have to define the answer to that question and ain't planning on needing the answer anytime soon

[MFKS]

Yes at times, but only in this sort of forum or discussion. Just like Bridges fans it's frustrating that people in this century still believe in such things.

Again with the Bridges example, why is it your place to educate them with your pearls of wisdom on Bridges ability because you perceive they are wrong? Because when you have a discussion and believe someone is wrong you let them know. Thats how it generally works.


Thats right and if there is proof of god, allah, odin, thor, etc existing then I will say hey I was wrong. Until that day, as discussed by snake earlier, the burden of proof is on believers. Otherwise whats the difference between someone believing in unicorns/big foot/ghosts etc and someone believing in god. They're essentially both stories invented by humans and written in books. I can't see how they differ. Again if people choose to believe Bridges is a good player you will continue to arrogantly say you're right and he's rubbish. But they believe in what they believe with Bridges.... let them believe....even though they have no evidence of his talent.

It is also the epitome of arrogance to try and alter ones perceptions on Bridges talent. The decision on being a Bridges fan is a personal choice and everyone is entitled to their beliefs in regards to Bridges.


The frustration comes from constantly seeing religion hold back the progress of man kind. From Muslims blowing people up to Christians stopping vital research. The frustration comes from religion entering the relm of politics where it doesn't belong. When decisions about issues in society are held back and debated due to religion having a problem with said issue is frustrating. You say it's your belief its personal blah blah blah yet in the same breath say oh yeah but two dudes can't get married cause I believe they can't. If it's such a personal choice why the **** does it matter if two dudes bonk each other and wear pretty rings? Its personal.....shouldnt effect you.

If your getting frustrated about Bridges fans then maybe you need to accept the fact you should not be trying to convince Bridges fans to believe a certain way when it is their decision to believe he is a good player. At the end of the day you're all well and good to tell people what they should and shouldn't believe in regards to football and politics (Bridges fans, Leftist nutjobs etc etc). Same should apply to religion (religious nut jobs etc etc).
Any point you are trying to make is lost by mentioning that blokes name as many times as you did in your post. I am sure you have some points your trying to make but they are lost because of the method you have used by naming that bloke 20 times in you post that I am unsure now if we are talking religion or shit footballers

[la bazzle]

Now you get it. Its frustrating when someone talks about someone whose talent doesnt exist/they don't exist. There's hope for you yet.

[pv4]

before starting a lecture series on evolution, the lecturor is obliged to aoplogise that the following content may upset those with religious views. this disgusts me.

I remember one of my first lectures in anatomy at uni, the lecturer was talking about the palmaris longus and how it was commonly used as a climbing muscle, but as we evolve further away from apes, fewer and fewer humans have this muscle as we just don't use it anymore. The lecturer said "so all you religious, creationist nuts out there - do this test to see if you have it or not, and try and tell me evolution isn't real HA-HA-HA" heaps forcefully :rof:

[Bremsstrahlung]

The frustration comes from constantly seeing religion hold back the progress of man kind. From Muslims blowing people up to Christians stopping vital research. The frustration comes from religion entering the relm of politics where it doesn't belong. When decisions about issues in society are held back and debated due to religion having a problem with said issue is frustrating. You say it's your belief its personal blah blah blah yet in the same breath say oh yeah but two dudes can't get married cause I believe they can't. If it's such a personal choice why the **** does it matter if two dudes bonk each other and wear pretty rings? Its personal.....shouldnt effect you.


Agree.
Why does it matter to some people, if somebody they've never met and never will meet, marries another bloke/or lady(Put away that lesbian porn while you're at it...). Marriage isn't monopolised by religion anymore. I went to a wedding recently, not a single mention of God, no priests, no churches. I'm not saying let them get married in a church, but let them be legally recognised.

Can a homosexual be forgiven for being gay?

[Bremsstrahlung]

I remember one of my first lectures in anatomy at uni, the lecturer was talking about the palmaris longus and how it was commonly used as a climbing muscle, but as we evolve further away from apes, fewer and fewer humans have this muscle as we just don't use it anymore. The lecturer said "so all you religious, creationist nuts out there - do this test to see if you have it or not, and try and tell me evolution isn't real HA-HA-HA" heaps forcefully :rof:

Probably my most favourite course at uni, tbh.

[Bon]

Guys, guys, guys..
Take a breath.. Relax, cause I've got some news for you..
Griff is the only true God.. :thumbsup:

[Skirt Boy]

Guys, guys, guys..
Take a breath.. Relax, cause I've got some news for you..
Griff is the only true God.. :thumbsup:

Michael Caine says otherwise. (think the monologue starts here) go to 1:30:25


http://youtu.be/-dItSpmQtlE?t=1h30m27s

[joel31]

Can a homosexual be forgiven for being gay?
Yes.

[joel31]

Don't quote mine what you don't understand it makes you look like an idiot.

Dick Feynman while an accomplished quantum theorist was also someone that wrote popularisations for money.
These popularisations may be fun to read but without the maths thay are absolutely fooking useless with respect to understanding Quantum Mechanics.
Quote mining just confirms that you do not undertstand Quantum mechanics at even the most basic level or evolutionary theory for that matter.

Your time would be much better served reading what John Polkinghorne has written on these subjects.

Polkinghorne was a student of Paul Dirac and is a very accomplished Quantum Theorist in his own right. Moreover, he is also a Chrisitan but not a fundamentalist like yourself or MFKS.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KlJ7Bt3oxE

I hope this might help open your mind a little.
I admit I didn't know the context to that quote, I saw it in an article and thought it went well with the point. I will do more research before blindly quoting in the future.

Also what makes me a Christian fundamentalist?
This isn't a term that I see used very often and my limited research on it doesn't see it as a position that I align myself with

Also you have made many posts about Quantum mechanics and I have done some reading to get to grips with some of the basics but can you explain to me how it disproves God like you said in one of your earlier posts

I like the video as well. The guy makes some very good points some of which I had heard before and some of which I hadn't and expresses the them in a simple yet profound way. I have never said I am against evolution or science

[joel31]

no, the bible was written long after the event by people acting on second, third or worse hand recollections. i'm sure a lot of "correcting" went on, but not the honest type.

also, since when are there more ancient manuscripts than every other text in history? how many people were around then? how many were literate? show your sources
Of the gospels (first 4 books of NT, those that tell the story of Jesus life, death and resurrection). The dating varies a fair amount sources such as this http://carm.org/when-were-gospels-written-and-by-whom propose earlier dates written and sources but to take Wikipedia which proposes later dates with sources:
- Matthew is written in the last quarter of the first century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Matthew#Setting_and_date)
- Mark - between 63-70AD (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#Composition)
- Luke - late 1st century or early second (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Luke#Luke-Acts:_unity.2C_authorship_and_date)
- John - near end of 1st century (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_John#Date)

So its not long enough that everyone who knew Jesus would have been dead

I heard that there were more manuscripts from someone who was discussing the historical evidence of the bible. This site has a simple table showing there were more copies: http://carm.org/manuscript-evidence

also an extract from that same article raises a valid point about your issue of correction:
"Almost all biblical scholars agree that the New Testament documents were all written before the close of the First Century. If Jesus was crucified in A.D. 30., then that means the entire New Testament was completed within 70 years. This is important because it means there were plenty of people around when the New Testament documents were penned--people who could have contested the writings. In other words, those who wrote the documents knew that if they were inaccurate, plenty of people would have pointed it out. But, we have absolutely no ancient documents contemporary with the First Century that contest the New Testament texts."

I couldn't find exact figures on literacy rates but this article shows that there was a decent enough level of literacy - http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1573658/posts

This is another article that I found on how the text would have been changed over time - http://www.str.org/articles/is-the-new-testament-text-reliable#.VJjdIjABg

I am going to do some further research about the accuracy of original texts compared to actual events.

But one last thing is that there were 9 different authors of the NT and no archaeological evidence has been found to contradict the claims of the NT that I am aware of. It's not as if people could have successfully conspired together for something like this (http://carm.org/new-testament-writers-conspired-together-gain-power-and-influence)


sure, jc probably existed. how does that support the supernatural claims though? answer = it doesn't.
I agree if the bible is false that Jesus existence means nothing.


how did he turn water into wine? what's the energy release for nucleosyntheis of the carbon for the alcohol from the water?

hint: you will need to use scientific notation to reasonably express this number.
Christians believe that Jesus is God and thus he can be not limited by what is impossible for humans.


the phrase "survival of the fittest" is a bit unfortunate in that it is readily misunderstood, as is your case here. the fittest doesn't just mean strongest or fastest, which is where the confusion arises. selection is any action by which on average your genes become more common in a population on account of there being more copies made. for natural selection, this usually comes down to breeding success. what you are asking is how can altrustic behaviour favour your breeding success, given that it helps others (including competitors). i'll give you one simple mechanism, but there are others. when animals become more intelligent and social, it helps to cooperate since the team is stronger than the sum of its individual parts. obviously, your team also carry many of the same genes as you, so altuistic behaviour increases the chances of a gene becoming more common.

now, what if you try and do all the leaning and none of the lifting (thanks tones). well, others in the community will know and you will be shunned. this has been observed in animals other than homo-sapiens.
The way I phrased my response did show my misunderstanding and naivity to use the words that I did. But still where does the difference in morality and intelligence between animals and humans come from? Why haven't more intelligent species involved to a near intelligence to that of humans?

[GazFish35]

What was life expectancy back in 34-199 AD?

If jc was about 30 when crucified, and gospels written 70 yrs later, would those around at his time of living were still alive 70 years later.

Social media didn't exist, massive rates of illiterate populations would make it possible for almôst anything to be written and not neccusarily challanged. Particularly with the way any dusts enters would have been dealt with by the 'justice' system.

[joel31]

I've no doubt JC lived it's the whole "son of god" thing I struggle to understand people's faith in. No disrespect.
If the bible is true which is what most of my claims are made according to. The bible clearly says Jesus is both the son of God and God. If he wasn't one of these things then the rest of the story would not really mean anything or be true and thus having faith in Jesus at all would be pointless.


Happy to be corrected but wasn't the NT largely written a few hundred years after.... Except some of the early stuff..... And if the timeframe you suggest is accurate, it'd be pretty easy to explain an inability to have things edited by way of rates of illiteracy and the literates being the ones in power.
It wasn't written hundreds of years after, it was all written within a hundred years. I agree that literacy levels were not at what they were today but they would have still been sufficient for people to enough people to know enough of the stories to correct inaccuracies (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/1573658/posts).


I'm sorry, but the "his disciples believed him and were willing to die" can be pretty easily argued against by looking at some modern day cults that saw leaders convince their followers that they too were some heavenly incarnation and many followers being willing to die in their name too.
I agree but the bible claims that after Jesus died, he rose again and was seen by his disciples and multiple disciples became martyrs because of what they saw. But even if you were pretty gullible after much torture and large times in prison, surely you would just say what I claimed was wrong and spared yourself of more torture or spared your life unless you were 100% convinced that it was worth it to die for this person


I'm still to be convinced these early documents, and their translation/interpretation where not massively subject to political grabs for power and control of populations either by the church or whatever feudal/democratic system may have existed at any period of time, and is still happening today.

Humans are largely two things, gullible or greedy, as we've become more literate and educated as a species the influence of the church has wained..... I'm not calling anyone of faith to be gullible, you have listed a number of points I've not got an answer to, I suppose what I am saying is that I can't help but think the greed of those in power has always played on the gullibility of the masses of populations they sought to control and all religious texts are being written, interpreted and re-written by power hungry people wanting to remain in power.
Those in power at the time didn't like Jesus, it wasn't them who wrote the bible. The bible hasn't been greatly re-written or changed by those in power as the earliest manuscripts when translated are very similar to the modern bible

[joel31]

What was life expectancy back in 34-199 AD?

If jc was about 30 when crucified, and gospels written 70 yrs later, would those around at his time of living were still alive 70 years later.

Social media didn't exist, massive rates of illiterate populations would make it possible for almost anything to be written and not neccusarily challanged. Particularly with the way any dusts enters would have been dealt with by the 'justice' system.
According to my googling just then it Is very low around 28 and most men wouldn't make it to 45

[la bazzle]

According to my googling just then it Is very low around 28 and most men wouldn't make it to 45

So potentially two generations later. You can understand how non-believers can be sceptical about the accuracy of these texts. Hey I get that it's a matter of "faith" in believing these stories. But to me by using that logic any story can be true if you have faith in it. Why for example are scientologists considered crazy for believing what they believe, it was written down after all. Yet it's apparently not as crazy to believe a dude walked on water, turned water into wine, fed 4-5k people with a few loaves of bread/couple of fish and came back from the dead. What I'm saying is, let's say I'm a potential religious convert, what makes one religion more legitimate then another (genuine question)?

[The Dunster]

According to my googling just then it Is very low around 28 and most men wouldn't make it to 45

Psalm 90:10 for **** sake what kind of Christian are you ?


"The days of our years are threescore years and ten; and if by reason of strength they be fourscore years, yet is their strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away"

[GazFish35]

70-80!

Wow.

[The Dunster]

Before the fall life expectancy was infinite.
"in the day that you eat of it you shall die" Genesis 2:17

In the pre-diluvian times [after the fall and before the flood ]900 years or so was the life expectancy.

Then Labour got into power, ****ed the hospital system and Medicare over then people started dying in their 70's.

[MFKS]

Rather disturbing the hypocrisy from the law in this country.

Couple of blokes go hang outside a mosque hurling abuse at those going in and they get arrested.

Bloke who is involved in 40 odd claims of sexual misconduct is allowed bail probably because he is a Muslim and we can not offend Muslims and allowed to walk the streets and get a gun and inflict terror on the country.


Also poignant to note with the anti christian sentiment going on in this thread how that is tolerated by the law yet criticism of Islam is apparently a crime.

Leftist apologetic nutters have a lot to answer for

[plague]

Rather off topic (but actually on topic) how is the John Rovertdon news.
I mean he was seriously unelectable but to be rissoled for essentially forwarding a letter to help a bloke see his kids on fathers day is weak as piss.

[boz-monaut]

for the record, I reckon Islam is stupider than Christianity

not that I'm left wing but I find the logical backflips you hear from that side of politics about Islam is ridiculous

judge Islam by the same standards you judge Tony Abbott - he might be a sexist moron but at least he's not mutilating your lady bits

[The Dunster]

Rather disturbing the hypocrisy from the law in this country.

Couple of blokes go hang outside a mosque hurling abuse at those going in and they get arrested.

Bloke who is involved in 40 odd claims of sexual misconduct is allowed bail probably because he is a Muslim and we can not offend Muslims and allowed to walk the streets and get a gun and inflict terror on the country.


Also poignant to note with the anti christian sentiment going on in this thread how that is tolerated by the law yet criticism of Islam is apparently a crime.

Leftist apologetic nutters have a lot to answer for


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-roBPhD-G3U

It was only a matter of time before the Member made a video explaining his position.

[plague]

for the record, I reckon Islam is stupider than Christianity

not that I'm left wing but I find the logical backflips you hear from that side of politics about Islam is ridiculous

judge Islam by the same standards you judge Tony Abbott - he might be a sexist moron but at least he's not mutilating your lady bits

Can we also all agree that the Scientologists are the most batshit?
**** those people.
Loons.

[la bazzle]

Also poignant to note with the anti christian sentiment going on in this thread how that is tolerated by the law yet criticism of Islam is apparently a crime.



On this we can agree. Like I said before I think they're all bullshit. If we can bag out Christians we can bag out Muslims. I agree nothing should be tolerated purely for the fear of criticising or offending people. Everyone should be held to the same standards. I feel as an atheist I'm actually in a better position to bag them out. I think anyone who blindly follows a book written 100s or 1000s of years ago and uses it to justify oppression, violence, murder etc are the scum of the earth and should be treated accordingly.

[la bazzle]

Can we also all agree that the Scientologists are the most batshit?
**** those people.
Loons.

See I can't see the difference....sure they believe in some crazy arse alien shit.....but is that so much more batshit crazy then dudes walking on water, magically healing the blind, coming back from the dead, bearded dude in the sky, getting every species of animal on a boat, turning water to wine etc etc?........ (They're pretty ****ing nuts but...)

[plague]

See I can't see the difference....sure they believe in some crazy arse alien shit.....but is that so much more batshit crazy then dudes walking on water, magically healing the blind, coming back from the dead, bearded dude in the sky, getting every species of animal on a boat, turning water to wine etc etc?........ (They're pretty ****ing nuts but...)

Yeah but Tom Cruise and John Travolta.
I mean, cmon man.

[la bazzle]

Yeah but Tom Cruise and John Travolta.
I mean, cmon man.

Haha I concede, they're two terrible ****ing mascots

[Grimario]

So... the rail lives on, for the time being.

[Thomas477]

The line may stay, but I doubt the service will run to Newcastle.

[Buddha]

933
Merry Christmas everybody

[MFKS]

Just like to take the opportunity to announce two things.

Firstly wish my lord and saviour JC a happy birthday for tomorrow. Really appreciate your sacrifice to die for our sins

Secondly wish you all a Merry Xmas particularly to the two best posters on the foz Plague and FR

[plague]

Just like to take the opportunity to announce two things.

Firstly wish my lord and saviour JC a happy birthday for tomorrow. Really appreciate your sacrifice to die for our sins

Secondly wish you all a Merry Xmas particularly to the two best posters on the foz Plague and FR

ah, you're too kind Member.

100% correct, but too kind all the same.

Merry Christmas to you and yours as well.

[Blackmac79]

I think, from memory, historically Jesus would have more likely been born in August. This is because it was during a roman census which would have taken place in the warmer period of the year, not in the middle of winter.

Enjoy a pagan holiday chosen to make conversion of the masses easier.

It's not your holiday anymore anyway, it's the capitalists.

[plague]

It's not your holiday anymore anyway, it's the capitalists.

Geez mate, you make it sound like that's a bad thing.
Obvs didn't get any Lego.

[plague]

"Country's in a mess"
"No money to do anything"
"Sting the poor to go to the GP"


"Oh hey old white guy who's married to the Queen, let's give you a new title".

FFS.

[MFKS]

"Country's in a mess"
"No money to do anything"
"Sting the poor to go to the GP"


"Oh hey old white guy who's married to the Queen, let's give you a new title".

FFS.

Abbott??? I am not certain this bloke isn't gonna get strung up by his own party prior to the next election.

Still amazes me the punters out there who are disappointed in him. He was weasel and a slimy grub of the highest order before people voted him as PM.


Nothing has changed just cause he moved into the Lodge



I just can't understand how Griffo was over looked for Australian of the Year again

[Buddha]

If he wasn't so socially stupid he would be alright (not good, but alright) he has made some plonking decisions, but some good ones too, like getting FT agreements with big Asian countries

[hawk]

no can fix the hole we are in so might as well put my hand up & do the same crap job for much less

[belchardo]

oh the delicious ****ing irony!

[plague]

oh the delicious ****ing irony!

Amazing isn't it. Dead set these idiots heads are so far up their asses they can't even see back 12 months ago to what the public thinks of this behaviour.
They all deserve what they get, which hopefully is a massive foot in the ass.

Can't wait for Shorten to come out in support of Abbott then knife him 30mins before the vote.
Old habits die hard I guess.

[MFKS]

Maybe Abbott should talk to Stubbins and Tinkler as they just a bit more popularity than him at the moment.

[q-money]

after all the goo feasting that the abbott booger-man is on the way out, isn't the real nightmare for da strayan Left if turnbull actually gets up and we have a somewhat respectable, reasonable leader?

[plague]

after all the goo feasting that the abbott booger-man is on the way out, isn't the real nightmare for da strayan Left if turnbull actually gets up and we have a somewhat respectable, reasonable leader?

The ABC and Murdoch press all wouldn't know what to do with themselves.

Turnbull is the absolute worst case scenario for the ALP isn't he? I don't think Oz will vote for Bishop or Morrison.
Would love to see Pyne given the keys for a few weeks tho, deadset lulz turtles all around.

[q-money]

rofl could you imagine big scotty morrision in there, gee whiz

[plague]

rofl could you imagine big scotty morrision in there, gee whiz

Problem is he'd get all of the issues solved but do it with a 0% approval rating.

[plague]

2016 Election spiel.
Vote for Morrison.
Stop the boats
Stop the bludgers
Stop the poor
Stop the terrorists
Stop the sick

Photo would be of him pulling the wings off a fly.

[plague]

Prob vote for him over Shorten still tho.

[q-money]

2016 Election spiel.
Vote for Morrison.
Stop the boats
Stop the bludgers
Stop the poor
Stop the terrorists
Stop the sick

Photo would be of him pulling the wings off a fly.

lol

[Grimario]

after all the goo feasting that the abbott booger-man is on the way out, isn't the real nightmare for da strayan Left if turnbull actually gets up and we have a somewhat respectable, reasonable leader?

On account of being my third cousin, he would get my vote :yes:

[Buddha]

I wouldn't mind Turnbull or Bishop taking over

Am a fan of Morrison and his green bashing at every opportunity.

[hawk]

Prob vote for him over Shorten still tho.

Shorten's forehead is too big, out.

[plague]

Here comes big Mal............

[furns]

One thing is for sure - Micallef is going to have a field day on Wednesday night

[plague]

Congrats Tony, only 40% of your work colleagues hate your guts.
Good for you lad.

[MFKS]

Congrats Tony, only 40% of your work colleagues hate your guts.
Good for you lad.

To give him credit he is more popular than Phil Stubbins is in Newy

[The Dunster]

I wouldn't mind Turnbull or Bishop taking over

Am a fan of Morrison and his green bashing at every opportunity.

Good luck with that.

Turnbull and Bishop believe that households should spend more than they earn, and Morrison snarls a lot to hide the fact he wouldn't know shit from clay when it comes to macroeconomics.

[plague]

Morrison snarls a lot to hide the fact he wouldn't know shit from clay when it comes to macroeconomics.

To be fair to Big Daddy Moz, to be a leader doesn't mean you need to know every detail about every aspect of your job, it's knowing who to put in charge of areas you aren't strong in.

Abbotts failing in the 'common sense' portfolio seem to be an example of this.
(Sadly he hasn't seemed to put anyone in charge of that yet either).

[The Dunster]

To be fair to Big Daddy Moz, to be a leader doesn't mean you need to know every detail about every aspect of your job, it's knowing who to put in charge of areas you aren't strong in.

Agree. He can be leader. Just not a succesful one without some external miracle like China driving the economy for him [ Much like old shit for brains John Winston Howard was gifted].

[Blackmac79]

I have never heard members of the liberal party talk about solidarity so much.

[plague]

Agree. He can be leader. Just not a succesful one without some external miracle like China driving the economy for him [ Much like old shit for brains John Winston Howard was gifted].

This country would kill for a leader like Howard, Hawke or Keating right now.

[goaliepersempre]

This country would kill for a leader like Howard, Hawke or Keating right now.

and all 3 of them would get destroyed into todays media age, short term thinking. Popularity staked society......!!!!

[MFKS]

This country would kill for a leader like Howard, Hawke or Keating right now.

As if blokes like that in this day and age would waste their time in politics.

More money to be made in the private sector for their skills.

That's why we get stuick with dills like Abbott Rudd Shorten etc.

Blokes who would get found out in the private sector can hide now in politics and make some good coin

[Grimario]

Blokes who would get found out in the private sector can hide now in politics and make some good coin

That's total bollocks, mate. Turnbull was huge in the private sector, invented the internet remember?

[lquiquer]

That's what we r stuck with
http://youtu.be/O15bmoRePIU

[The Dunster]

That's what we r stuck with
http://youtu.be/O15bmoRePIU

lol. very funny.

[plague]

The more I see Morrison the more I'm impressed.
If he somehow pulls off successful welfare reform without burning the place down he'll be lauded as a miracle worker.

I like Ed Husic too. Shorten needs to get him a better role and **** off stupid turnips like Bowen and Burke.
Bowen, Plibisek and Burke are the ****ing worst.

[The Dunster]

Tanya Plibersek could well be the most useless politician in history. Oh Wait.. I forgot about Penny Wong.

[Blackmac79]

Tanya Plibersek could well be the most useless politician in history. Oh Wait.. I forgot about Penny Wong.

I think that Penny Wong does a far greater job as leader of the opposition in the senate than bill shorten does as leader of the opposition in the house of reps.

I met Tanya once, prior to the last election which may have affected it, however she only seemed able to regurgitate the lines without explaining the details. Probably why she is on the front bench.


The more I see Morrison the more I'm impressed.
If he somehow pulls off successful welfare reform without burning the place down he'll be lauded as a miracle worker.


Trick of welfare reform is to close the holes that people sneak through, as well as those people fall through. The NDIS, from those I have worked with that need to go through the process, is quite a difficult system to get an end result from. While the end result is eventually worth the effort, people who have fallen through the system prior to the NDIS still fall through because they don't have the capacity to attend the required documentation etc.

I don't think that either party in this sense is the right one to bring through beneficial reform to Australia's welfare. I think that a bi-partisan committee in which the entire system is looked at and agreed outcomes are accepted would work, except for the fact that such a thing would never occur with the pure aim of achieving the best for the people.

Liberals are likely to destroy the system as they don't get that not everyone is on $200k/pa
Labor are likely to allow the continued systematic failure which allows dicks to get away with rorting the system.

[My2BobsWorth]

The only way we can pay for the combined pensions, including NDIS(maybe for not much longer) is to buy back the public corporations that have been sold, that's how stupid it really was.

[plague]

The only way we can pay for the combined pensions, including NDIS(maybe for not much longer) is to buy back the public corporations that have been sold, that's how stupid it really was.

Oh I'm gonna enjoy hearing how you'd pull this one off.
Please explain.

[The Dunster]

The only way we can pay for the combined pensions, including NDIS(maybe for not much longer) is to buy back the public corporations that have been sold, that's how stupid it really was.

The Australian government has absolutely no budget constraint in terms of spending in Australian dollars.

In simple terms the government is able to purchase all goods and services available that are denominated in Australian Dollars.

Learn how to construct a stock flow consistent macroeconomic model and then get back to us.

[Skirt Boy]

Go back through the pages and you will see my opinion on welfare/minimum wage correlation and then you will see where our problem lies.

[q-money]

oi dunst dawg

what's your position on the libs position on superannuation?

yer man paul keating had a spray in the SMH today - i know he's right on one bit, that capital is available like never before to developers in this country, so surely the current system works (however is open to people exploiting the juicy mango....)

seems a bit redundant to let people get to their super early in order to put deposits down to properties they will never be able to afford - but in turn this keeps the debt in the system forever, right?