Ahmadiyya Muslim Association to host peace conference in Chipperfield (From Watford Observer)
Get involved: send your pictures, video, news and views by texting WO to 80360, or email us
Peace conference organised by Ahmadiyya Muslim Association to be held in Chipperfield
9:00am Tuesday 3rd May 2011 in News
A peace conference, organised by the Watford branch of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association, is to be held in Chipperfield.
The talk, which will focus on the topic of “Muhammad; A Man of Peace or War?”, will be given by Imam Faiz Ahmad Zahid, the Hertfordshire Imam of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community.
With more than 90 branches throughout the UK, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community actively works to spread the peaceful message of Islam.
The event will be held in the village hall on Sunday, May 15, starting from 3pm.
To attend call organiser Lutf ul Islam on: 07725 722 726 or by emailing: watford.ama@gmail.com.
Comments(116)
The Rover
says...
12:16pm Tue 3 May 11
garston tony wrote:Well said Tony, Maybe if the people who make negative comments regarding Islam/Muslins etc. on this forum took the time out to attend this meeting their views may change, or at least they would understand that it is a very small minority of extremist Muslim groups who create the image some people see as the normality.
I'm running a sweepstake around my office regarding how long it will take Roy Stockdill to post a negative message about this. I'm sure he has his drivel saved on a word document and he just cuts and pastes accordingly.
Seriously though, to all those who complain about Muslims etc. here is a group who promote the true Islamic message of peace to all. Hell will freeze over i'm sure before this happens but it would do Roy a world of good to attend this meeting
LSC
says...
3:49pm Tue 3 May 11
While I am pleased that people are being positive about peace and tolerance, I don't see what I would gain by attending. It would be like me attending a discussion about what god actually said to Adam and Eve. As none of them ever existed, what does it matter to me what was or wasn't supposedly said? But I repeat, I'm very pleased to see the muslim community actively preaching peace, and long may they continue to do so.
garston tony
says...
6:26pm Tue 3 May 11
LSC you may not believe in a God but attending a meeting like this may help to remove the stereotype that all Muslim are after 'infidels' blood, something that a lot of people who have no contact with that community or who wish to believe the hype believe
LSC
says...
9:16pm Tue 3 May 11
Agreed Tony, and hence I welcome the meeting but won't be attending. That religion does call for the death of non-believers; however, I believe that these muslims are humans first, muslims second and are therefore willing to interpret their holy book into a way of life that more befits the modern world for the advantage of everybody. I applaud this. One day the interpretation of the koran and the bible will be so watered down they will have no relevance whatsoever. It has already happened with the bible to a huge extent. I look forward to the day.
garston tony
says...
11:15pm Tue 3 May 11
lsc if you attended the meeting this group would be happy im sure to show you that the Koran does not call for the death of non believers, hence why I say again it would be great if people actually bothered to find out the truth rather than just believing and propogating the same old stupid lies. As to the Koran and Bible having no relevance tell that to the billions of people for which it has every relevance in the world today
Lutf
says...
11:26pm Tue 3 May 11
Well said tony.
Religious scriptures contain all the wisdom we require to live fulfilling lives. Its just a matter of understanding them properly.
Religious scriptures contain all the wisdom we require to live fulfilling lives. Its just a matter of understanding them properly.
LSC
says...
12:35pm Wed 4 May 11
I'll happily tell them Tony; if only they would listen. Ok, it would be a bit awkward telling a child dieing of AIDS that it didn't have to be this way, it is all because of a book and a man in Rome who for some reason is reckoned to be better than you or me, but I'd do it. I'd also feel awkward explaining it to the families of people killed by bombs. But again, I'd do so. I have admitted many times that I am ignorant of some of what the holy books say. I'm also ignorant of what the Harry Potter books say. I have never seen any of the Batman films. Because they are all fiction, so why should I care what they say? The holy books all claim to be the actual word of god. They aren't, so why bother going into further detail? And the numbers mean nothing. Millions of people can't read or write, does that make it a good thing or a tragedy? Millions of people are starving, so is that what we should all aspire to? Millions of people watch Eastenders, for crying out loud! That doesn't mean it is quality telly. Or real. Numbers don't prove anything at all.
LSC
says...
1:11pm Wed 4 May 11
Lutf wrote:No, your own brain contains all the wisdom you need; or are you suggesting that you can't tell right from wrong or good from bad without an instruction book? Not something I'd want to shout about.
Well said tony. Religious scriptures contain all the wisdom we require to live fulfilling lives. Its just a matter of understanding them properly.
garston tony
says...
2:52pm Wed 4 May 11
LSC we seem to cover the same old ground time and again but I don’t see what is so hard to grasp about the fact that the Koran and Islamic faith does not call for all non believers to be killed? Its not rocket science and you don’t have to believe in the Koran or become a convert to find this out for yourself but hey remain ignorant if you want. The problem is that ignorance helps fan the flames but it’s a free world, if you want to remain a sheep going along with the ignorant crowd believing all the rubbish you are told and not bothering to think or find out for yourself then that’s your choice. Baaa.
Personally I like to find things out for myself, do some investigating and that is why I know that the Koran actually calls for hospitability, friendship and compassion to be shown to all including and even especially non believers. And that is why I know that those extremists and terrorists calling for and doing attrocities in the name of Islam are actually going against their professed religion. They are just as ignorant and non thinking as those that believe they actually represent Islam, how nice both sides have something in common. Youre all sheep! Baa.
Personally I like to find things out for myself, do some investigating and that is why I know that the Koran actually calls for hospitability, friendship and compassion to be shown to all including and even especially non believers. And that is why I know that those extremists and terrorists calling for and doing attrocities in the name of Islam are actually going against their professed religion. They are just as ignorant and non thinking as those that believe they actually represent Islam, how nice both sides have something in common. Youre all sheep! Baa.
garston tony
says...
2:54pm Wed 4 May 11
As to the spread of AIDs, the pope etc. Once again IF you bothered to investigate for yourself you'll find that the position of pope has no basis in the Bible either (and the whole idea of praying to saints reeks of idol worship), nor does it say condoms or contraception are wrong. What the Bible DOES promote is abstinence from sex before marriage and once married that that relationship should be exclusive. Now then, if people followed that advise wouldn’t the spread of AIDS be severely curtailed if not stopped altogether? That’s the kind of wisdom Lutf was on about LSC. Wisdom is not inherent it is learned LSC and the wisdom contained in the Bible is very useful and relevant even today. Is it really a coincidence that the decaying ever more violent and depraved society we live in now has coincided with the casting aside by many of Biblical standards?
LSC
says...
3:24pm Wed 4 May 11
If I am mistaken in what the Koran says, then I apologise. As I don't read arabic I'm not very up on it, and I don't trust translations (like the bible) because they often get things fundamentaly wrong (like the bible). As for thinking for myself, I do try to. I certainly wouldn't allow myself to be told what to think by an ancient book or man in a collar. Who is the real sheep? You are the one who accepts absurdities purely 'because it says so'.
So Baa to you too!
The pope may not figure in the bible, so where did the catholics go wrong? Could they have mis-interpreted the bible? That couldn't happen could it? Could a billion catholics be wrong? Well, yes, and so are a billion protestants and muslims too. As for our depraved society today, it can't be that bad can it; god flooded the whole world once when he was cross with the people. Sodom and Gamorah didn't fare well either. As he isn't doing that these days, I'm guessing you must think he is pretty content.
So Baa to you too!
The pope may not figure in the bible, so where did the catholics go wrong? Could they have mis-interpreted the bible? That couldn't happen could it? Could a billion catholics be wrong? Well, yes, and so are a billion protestants and muslims too. As for our depraved society today, it can't be that bad can it; god flooded the whole world once when he was cross with the people. Sodom and Gamorah didn't fare well either. As he isn't doing that these days, I'm guessing you must think he is pretty content.
garston tony
says...
8:12pm Wed 4 May 11
Humans are not perfect as we are all too aware and yes mistakes are made all too often so yes some people have read the Bible and either genuinly or on purpose mis represented it hence why there are such things as popes etc, and I agree with you that many Christians whilst sincere have not bothered to study the Bible properly for themselves and can be and are misled. However just because I believe in the Bible does not make me a sheep, I and many other Christians have studied that book, tested and questioned it time and time again and have still come to the personal conclusion that what it contains is true. That is vastly different to being told that I should believe x or y and just going along with it unthinkingly.
I do understand why you might think the Bible absurd, especially considering the chip you have on your shoulder from the experiences you had when you were younger however from what you have said it comes back down to the fact that you have not studied it for yourself. Someone told you x or y and you have decided that is wrong and thrown the baby out with the bath water, what a shame for you.
Some people just cant handle the truth as that famous movie quote goes and are happy to believe what they are fed unquestionably and what a shame for them
I do understand why you might think the Bible absurd, especially considering the chip you have on your shoulder from the experiences you had when you were younger however from what you have said it comes back down to the fact that you have not studied it for yourself. Someone told you x or y and you have decided that is wrong and thrown the baby out with the bath water, what a shame for you.
Some people just cant handle the truth as that famous movie quote goes and are happy to believe what they are fed unquestionably and what a shame for them
Lutf
says...
9:56pm Wed 4 May 11
Human nature is programmed to tell right from wrong. But human nature is also prone to make mistakes. And you will agree, we keep on making mistakes as a species/civilization and cause a lot of suffering.
Scriptures tell us how to avoid such mistakes. But being human, we keep on making them. Ultimately, we are tryign to achieve a balance and God is the best Guide.
Scriptures tell us how to avoid such mistakes. But being human, we keep on making them. Ultimately, we are tryign to achieve a balance and God is the best Guide.
LSC
says...
12:07am Thu 5 May 11
Tony; you know i respect the fact you have looked into this, unlike many (or indeed most), and made your choice. But I'm never going to be convinced that your arguement stands up. It isn't a chip on my shoulder that makes the bible ridiculous. the bible IS ridiculous to any serious thinker. I don't even see that as a debate point. Now; even though it makes no sense you still choose to believe it; fine. I don't object to that; you think what you want. You can believe the sky is pink and the moon is made of cheese. What I object to is people telling it as fact, rather than just a belief. I object to it being taught in schools. I object to children too young to understand being told they will go to hell. I object to christians working sundays then having a prawn on the BBQ and then telling me I'm in the wrong. I object to people pointing out the world is getting worse, yet 2000 years ago god sent his only son etc (like a male Diana 4evar in r hartz) to save us all because we were in such a state. What went wrong there? I object to Mary being called a virgin, when the normal translation is 'maiden' or 'young woman'. I object to joseph being called a carpenter, when in fact the original text has him down as a merchant. I object to lambs at the nativety. i object to the 3 wise men who, as a bible scholar, you will know weren't wise and weren't there. I object the notion the family were poor yet owned a donkey; the equivilent of having a Porsche in those days.
I could go on. And on. And on, about where the bible is just wrong; or the modern myth of it as taught to children is just lies. But you get the point.
I could go on. And on. And on, about where the bible is just wrong; or the modern myth of it as taught to children is just lies. But you get the point.
LSC
says...
12:16am Thu 5 May 11
Lutf wrote:Well; he isn't doing much of a job is he? Millions of people are dieing from AIDS because of some peoples interpretation of gods word. You'd think he'd sort that. After all, he was a burning bush once, and a donkey. He even sent his only son (though why only one? He created the universe and Jesus isn't even dead now; send a few more) to help us out. I admit he does appear from time to time in weeping statues and on burnt bits of toast, so i suppose that is proof enough.
Human nature is programmed to tell right from wrong. But human nature is also prone to make mistakes. And you will agree, we keep on making mistakes as a species/civilization and cause a lot of suffering. Scriptures tell us how to avoid such mistakes. But being human, we keep on making them. Ultimately, we are tryign to achieve a balance and God is the best Guide.
garston tony
says...
10:05am Thu 5 May 11
LSC, I congratulate you on taking up the batton that Roy usually holds and diverting the discussion so well away from what the actual article was about.
garston tony
says...
10:09am Thu 5 May 11
LSC I think you'll find that many highly intelligent people (including a great number of prominent scientists in various fields and winners of Nobel prizes) do believe in the Bible and in God and therefore your argument is absolutely invalid. Its not a matter of intelligence and yes it is a lot to do with personal experience but LSC a lot of the Bible can be proven as fact which is not something that can be said about the theory of evolution for instance.
AS Lutf has pointed out humans make mistakes and it is these mistakes which has led to people like you having a poor impression of Christianty be it because you (and others) have come across a judgemental 'Christian' or because too much emphasis has been placed on the negativity or you just plain cant be bothered. We are all sinners and no Christian is any better than anyone else, it is not for us to judge and it is wrong when that happens. God is about love also, that is His single biggest theme if you like and again it is wrong if the emphasis is being placed on hell or whatever. But the mistakes and negativity are of human origin, not Gods.
AS Lutf has pointed out humans make mistakes and it is these mistakes which has led to people like you having a poor impression of Christianty be it because you (and others) have come across a judgemental 'Christian' or because too much emphasis has been placed on the negativity or you just plain cant be bothered. We are all sinners and no Christian is any better than anyone else, it is not for us to judge and it is wrong when that happens. God is about love also, that is His single biggest theme if you like and again it is wrong if the emphasis is being placed on hell or whatever. But the mistakes and negativity are of human origin, not Gods.
garston tony
says...
10:19am Thu 5 May 11
It is a shame that people do not take the time to find out for themselves often enough about important issues but instead follow the crowd choosing to believe for instance the stereotype that Islam is a blood thirsty murderous faith or that just because some 'Christians' have given a bad impression the whole faith is wrong. But for someone who has no chip on their shoulder about past experiences you don’t half object a lot, especially about some really inconsiquential matters.
Objecting to nativity plays and displays for instance! If someones faith, or not, is based on that then they are in trouble arent they. Joseph plays such a small part in the grand or even small scheme of things and to get caught up on his job is getting caught up on something really insignificant. He is barely mentioned in the Bible and not at all after Jesus was 12 and really doesn’t have a bearing on Jesus' ministry and works/deeds or our salvation but for the record the word used to describe Joseph is tekton which could be carpenter or a craftsman in wood, stone or even iron. I've never ever heard him being described as a merchant, not that it matters but what is your source for that LSC?
Don’t get caught up on the little things because it seems to be keeping you from the bigger picture.
Objecting to nativity plays and displays for instance! If someones faith, or not, is based on that then they are in trouble arent they. Joseph plays such a small part in the grand or even small scheme of things and to get caught up on his job is getting caught up on something really insignificant. He is barely mentioned in the Bible and not at all after Jesus was 12 and really doesn’t have a bearing on Jesus' ministry and works/deeds or our salvation but for the record the word used to describe Joseph is tekton which could be carpenter or a craftsman in wood, stone or even iron. I've never ever heard him being described as a merchant, not that it matters but what is your source for that LSC?
Don’t get caught up on the little things because it seems to be keeping you from the bigger picture.
garston tony
says...
10:27am Thu 5 May 11
The original text both in the old and new testament uses the word bethula which means Hebrew, when it was translated into Greek the word used was parthenos which also means virgin. There is no doubt that Mary was a virgin when she conceived Jesus, or Jesus was conceived in her or whatever way you want to put it.
I do get your point and couldn’t agree more that a lot of what is taught about God or how we should live our lives is wrong and has no actual basis in the Bible. This again is a HUMAN failing not one of God or the Bible.
We already started bashing Catholics previously so lets continue, and having mentioned Mary the whole idea of praying to her or other saints etc is basically idolotary and contrary to what the Bible teaches. The idea that the last pope is being given a sainthood because a nun or someone was cured of an illness after praying for his blessing AFTER he had died is horrendous and wrong on so many Biblical levels too.
Yes people have interpreted the Bible incorrectly or just as bad have put in their own ideas which have no foundation or actually run contrary to the Bible and God into the mix. But we have Gods word in the form of the Bible, that really is all the information we need and each individual is given freedom of choice. They can either choose to study it properly and sincerely themselves praying to God for guidance, or they can scan it and rely on what someone else tells them they should do and believe or they can not bother with any of it and reject it all.
If people choose to follow incorrect interpretations then that is their choice hence why yes many people do not use contraceptives and contract diseases (but again if they practises abstinence before marriage and exclusivity once married as advised in the Bible that wouldn’t be an issue) or have unwanted pregnancies or believe in praying to very dead people, and therefore going against Gods word, can help them.
And this brings it neatly back to my original point regarding the actual article, people should make the effort to find things out for themselves rather than just take what they are told as the truth. Sometimes it might be, quite a lot of times it isnt and I say it again a lot of people who have the wrong idea about Islam would be enlighted by attending the meeting on the 15th
I do get your point and couldn’t agree more that a lot of what is taught about God or how we should live our lives is wrong and has no actual basis in the Bible. This again is a HUMAN failing not one of God or the Bible.
We already started bashing Catholics previously so lets continue, and having mentioned Mary the whole idea of praying to her or other saints etc is basically idolotary and contrary to what the Bible teaches. The idea that the last pope is being given a sainthood because a nun or someone was cured of an illness after praying for his blessing AFTER he had died is horrendous and wrong on so many Biblical levels too.
Yes people have interpreted the Bible incorrectly or just as bad have put in their own ideas which have no foundation or actually run contrary to the Bible and God into the mix. But we have Gods word in the form of the Bible, that really is all the information we need and each individual is given freedom of choice. They can either choose to study it properly and sincerely themselves praying to God for guidance, or they can scan it and rely on what someone else tells them they should do and believe or they can not bother with any of it and reject it all.
If people choose to follow incorrect interpretations then that is their choice hence why yes many people do not use contraceptives and contract diseases (but again if they practises abstinence before marriage and exclusivity once married as advised in the Bible that wouldn’t be an issue) or have unwanted pregnancies or believe in praying to very dead people, and therefore going against Gods word, can help them.
And this brings it neatly back to my original point regarding the actual article, people should make the effort to find things out for themselves rather than just take what they are told as the truth. Sometimes it might be, quite a lot of times it isnt and I say it again a lot of people who have the wrong idea about Islam would be enlighted by attending the meeting on the 15th
LSC
says...
11:51am Thu 5 May 11
That is a lot to reply to Tony and I'm at work at the moment. But I will answer one point. I'm an engineer by trade, although that is not what I do now. As such I know it is the small things that count. If every component is perfect, then the big picture will look after itself. If just one tiny part is faulty, then the whole machine will not work correctly. And if one tiny part was made badly, what trust can I have in all the other parts made by that company, large or small? That is the way I think. The bible has lots of tiny parts that are faulty, and therefore it cannot work as a whole; and therefore I don't trust it.
garston tony
says...
1:46pm Thu 5 May 11
LSC I totally appreciate where you are coming from but the Bible is not a machine and a problem even amongst Christians of the same let alone different denominations let alone non believers is getting bogged down in the minutia which stops you/us/them from seeing the bigger picture.
Whether Joseph was a carpenter, a mason, a merchant or (almost) whatever is immaterial. We do not study the Bible to learn about Joseph we study it to learn about God and Jesus and how to live our lives and how to gain salvation and eternal life. Ditto a nativity scene is there as a symbol of Jesus' birth, it is not there to be studied in itself, we don’t gain any insight into salvation from looking at one or attending a play, we don’t worship it (or I hope people don’t!) and to be turned off from Christianity because this or that character is present in a picture or on stage in a kids play is frankly ridiculous. Its not as if December is even the time of year that Jesus was born and the Bible certainly does not ask us to celebrate his birth in this manner anyway!
You believe the translation of the original language shows that Mary was not a virgin, if you actually study it for yourself (and you don’t have to learn Hebrew or Greek) then you would see that the Bible says she was. You say that the Bible is all myth, a little independent study would show you that other historical sources as well as archeological finds and scientific facts prove much of it is true.
It always comes back to this, you believe because of commonly held general stereotypes and because you think you were misled (by humans) in the past that the Bible is wrong. However if you look at it for yourself, looking at the context etc, you'll find out for yourself instead of believe what you have been told by others. Its as simple as that and the choice is yours. To use your anology its like you've been shown a machine but been told that the manufacturer is a bit dodgy and that their parts often fail so you reject it out of hand when if you'd spoken to people who already use it and know it well and tried it for yourself and even spoken to the manufacturer you'd find for yourself that it’s a great bit of kit with a ever lasting lifetime guarantee.
Whether Joseph was a carpenter, a mason, a merchant or (almost) whatever is immaterial. We do not study the Bible to learn about Joseph we study it to learn about God and Jesus and how to live our lives and how to gain salvation and eternal life. Ditto a nativity scene is there as a symbol of Jesus' birth, it is not there to be studied in itself, we don’t gain any insight into salvation from looking at one or attending a play, we don’t worship it (or I hope people don’t!) and to be turned off from Christianity because this or that character is present in a picture or on stage in a kids play is frankly ridiculous. Its not as if December is even the time of year that Jesus was born and the Bible certainly does not ask us to celebrate his birth in this manner anyway!
You believe the translation of the original language shows that Mary was not a virgin, if you actually study it for yourself (and you don’t have to learn Hebrew or Greek) then you would see that the Bible says she was. You say that the Bible is all myth, a little independent study would show you that other historical sources as well as archeological finds and scientific facts prove much of it is true.
It always comes back to this, you believe because of commonly held general stereotypes and because you think you were misled (by humans) in the past that the Bible is wrong. However if you look at it for yourself, looking at the context etc, you'll find out for yourself instead of believe what you have been told by others. Its as simple as that and the choice is yours. To use your anology its like you've been shown a machine but been told that the manufacturer is a bit dodgy and that their parts often fail so you reject it out of hand when if you'd spoken to people who already use it and know it well and tried it for yourself and even spoken to the manufacturer you'd find for yourself that it’s a great bit of kit with a ever lasting lifetime guarantee.
garston tony
says...
1:52pm Thu 5 May 11
PS if you don’t want me to post so much then don’t make so many points that need responding to!
podnew
says...
7:06am Fri 6 May 11
garston tony wrote:"a lot of the Bible can be proven as fact which is not something that can be said about the theory of evolution for instance"
LSC I think you'll find that many highly intelligent people (including a great number of prominent scientists in various fields and winners of Nobel prizes) do believe in the Bible and in God and therefore your argument is absolutely invalid. Its not a matter of intelligence and yes it is a lot to do with personal experience but LSC a lot of the Bible can be proven as fact which is not something that can be said about the theory of evolution for instance.
AS Lutf has pointed out humans make mistakes and it is these mistakes which has led to people like you having a poor impression of Christianty be it because you (and others) have come across a judgemental 'Christian' or because too much emphasis has been placed on the negativity or you just plain cant be bothered. We are all sinners and no Christian is any better than anyone else, it is not for us to judge and it is wrong when that happens. God is about love also, that is His single biggest theme if you like and again it is wrong if the emphasis is being placed on hell or whatever. But the mistakes and negativity are of human origin, not Gods.
What parts of the Bible are those then, you moron?
garston tony
says...
10:12am Fri 6 May 11
Thank you for your contribution Podnew, maybe before you name call you should check up on the facts? If you had you would have discovered there is plenty of evidence to support the Bible. Have you heard of archaeology by any chance, do you know what it is? Well archaeology has found plenty of evidence to show that the people and places mentioned in the Bible did exists and that events recounted did take place. And almost everyday new finds are being made that support Biblical accounts of events.
A few big examples, archaeology supports the flood, the tower of Babel, the parting of the Red Sea (not reed sea LSC), Sodom and Gomorrah, the Exodus from Egypt. Archaeology has proven the existence of almost every place and person mentioned in the Bible and most of the events described in it. Archaeology has even found that Prophets did indeed make accurate predictions about events that took place hundreds of years after their lifetime. Everyday almost new finds are being made that prove the Bible and disproves the critics.
As to the text itself over 25,000 copies of new testament text documents, scrolls, parchments, carvings, tablets and inscriptions etc. have been found spread over three continents all recounting New Testament events and lets not forget the Dead sea scrolls themselves dated nearly 2 thousands year old with the text found to be the same as the Bible of today.
Oh, I nearly forgot contemporary historians like Pliny the Younger, Thallus and Lucian amongst others record the existence of Jesus. Along the same lines other evidence has been found that a census was indeed being taken at the time of His birth.
Do I really need to go on Podmoron? There are rooms full around the world of archaeological and literary evidence found in thousands of sites dated thousands of years apart as well as the thousands of actual sites themselves that prove the Bible. And lets not forget the amount of statements in the Bible about astronomy, mental and physical health, geology, geography, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology and physics. All statements made between 2000 to 4000 years ago, all proven to be correct but only relatively recently by science.
All this evidence for the Bible and yet not one shred of concrete evidence evolutionary theory. Yet those that believe the Bible for which there is evidence to back it up are scoffed at by those that believe something which is acknowledged as being totally man made. Anyone see the irony/hypocrisy?
Podmoron, do you see it?
A few big examples, archaeology supports the flood, the tower of Babel, the parting of the Red Sea (not reed sea LSC), Sodom and Gomorrah, the Exodus from Egypt. Archaeology has proven the existence of almost every place and person mentioned in the Bible and most of the events described in it. Archaeology has even found that Prophets did indeed make accurate predictions about events that took place hundreds of years after their lifetime. Everyday almost new finds are being made that prove the Bible and disproves the critics.
As to the text itself over 25,000 copies of new testament text documents, scrolls, parchments, carvings, tablets and inscriptions etc. have been found spread over three continents all recounting New Testament events and lets not forget the Dead sea scrolls themselves dated nearly 2 thousands year old with the text found to be the same as the Bible of today.
Oh, I nearly forgot contemporary historians like Pliny the Younger, Thallus and Lucian amongst others record the existence of Jesus. Along the same lines other evidence has been found that a census was indeed being taken at the time of His birth.
Do I really need to go on Podmoron? There are rooms full around the world of archaeological and literary evidence found in thousands of sites dated thousands of years apart as well as the thousands of actual sites themselves that prove the Bible. And lets not forget the amount of statements in the Bible about astronomy, mental and physical health, geology, geography, meteorology, biology, anthropology, hydrology and physics. All statements made between 2000 to 4000 years ago, all proven to be correct but only relatively recently by science.
All this evidence for the Bible and yet not one shred of concrete evidence evolutionary theory. Yet those that believe the Bible for which there is evidence to back it up are scoffed at by those that believe something which is acknowledged as being totally man made. Anyone see the irony/hypocrisy?
Podmoron, do you see it?
Enoch Powell
says...
10:51pm Fri 6 May 11
It would be interesting to find out the inextricable relationship Islam has with Shariah Law, and what the long term perspective is in the UK with accelerating Islamic birth rates and 40% of Muslims advocating the beauty of the Shariah in a survey in 2006, over the well established foundations of English Law, which is replicated in many democracies all over the world. All perpetuated by a man's dream to rub the right's nose into diversity (but not in it himself). These are the interesting questions, the practice and not the principles of Islam. Any BBC 5 live presenter would ask the same searching questions. I personally concur with Sir Winston Churchill's opinion on Mohammedism, and the recent comments by Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt who rarely said that Sir Winston was rarely wrong. Furthermore, I should not be castigated for having an opinion.
LSC
says...
6:16pm Sat 7 May 11
Oh, here you go by the way Tony: "Yam Suph (Hebrew: יַם-סוּף) is a phrase which occurs about 23 times in the Tanakh (Hebrew Bible/Old Testament) and has traditionally been understood in - christian dominated societies, due to a mistranslation of the hebrew term in the diverse christian bible editions - to refer to the salt water inlet located between Africa and the Arabian peninsula, known in English as the Red Sea. More recently, alternate western scholarly understandings of the term have been proposed for those passages where it refers to the Israelite Crossing of the Sea as told in Exodus 13-15. These proposals would mean that Yam Suph is better translated in these passages as Sea of Reeds or Sea of Seaweed; see Egyptian reed fields, also described as the ka of the Nile Delta. In jewish sources I Kings 9:26 "yam suph" is translated as Sea of Reeds at Eilat on the Gulf of Eilat."
Or: "General scholarly opinion is that the Exodus story combines a number of traditions, one of them at the "Reed Sea" (Lake Timsah, with the Egyptians defeated when the wheels of their chariots become clogged) and another at the far deeper Red Sea, allowing the more dramatic telling of events. Some Creationists who follow a literal interpretation believe that the event occurred how it is written in the Bible."
Just for info.
Or: "General scholarly opinion is that the Exodus story combines a number of traditions, one of them at the "Reed Sea" (Lake Timsah, with the Egyptians defeated when the wheels of their chariots become clogged) and another at the far deeper Red Sea, allowing the more dramatic telling of events. Some Creationists who follow a literal interpretation believe that the event occurred how it is written in the Bible."
Just for info.
John Dowdle
says...
5:51pm Sun 8 May 11
I believe the Ahmadiyyans are peacable but see http://www.jihadwatc
h.org/2009/08/is-the
-death-penalty-for-a
postasy-in-the-quran
-yes-it-is-sweet-lit
tle-rifqa.html on the topics of Muslim honour and apostasy killings.
Also, http://www.usc.edu/s
chools/college/crcc/
engagement/resources
/texts/muslim/hadith
/bukhari/084.sbt.htm
l#009.084.057 on the reported words of Mohamed on the topic of apostasy killing.
It seems like some of the people above have never heard of the doctrine of papal infallibility. Can this be true?
h.org/2009/08/is-the
-death-penalty-for-a
postasy-in-the-quran
-yes-it-is-sweet-lit
tle-rifqa.html on the topics of Muslim honour and apostasy killings.
Also, http://www.usc.edu/s
chools/college/crcc/
engagement/resources
/texts/muslim/hadith
/bukhari/084.sbt.htm
l#009.084.057 on the reported words of Mohamed on the topic of apostasy killing.
It seems like some of the people above have never heard of the doctrine of papal infallibility. Can this be true?
garston tony
says...
7:49pm Sun 8 May 11
LSC as I understand it the main driving factor behind this idea that a reed sea was parted was that some scientists not being willing to accept the Biblical event looked around for a place that could conceivably be crossed and thats how they came accross this 'reed sea' and proposed it as the real place the Israelites crossed. This theory is not based on any new interpretation of place names but is based on scientific theory and sceptism and it falls down in four places. A) the location of the 'reed sea' is actually in the wrong direction than the route we are told the Israelites took, the 'reed sea' is also located within Egyption territory and the Bible states that the Israelites had already left Egypt when they crossed the Red Sea. B) this reed sea would indeed have allowed people to cross and the Egytpian charriots would have been bogged down but this presumes that the Egyptians were stupid enough to take their charriots into the reed sea knowing they could not get far and does not explain why they were all drowned C) there is a place in the Red Sea where the depth drops dramatically to become relatively shallow accross its entire width and archeologists have found along this under sea shallow ridge remains of Egyptian charriots and other war materials. Also on either side of this shallow bit there is a collum, on one side there are no inscriptions on the otherr inscriptions indicating it was erected by king Solomon and the Bible in Isaiah mentions these pillars.
Sorry LSC but this idea of a reed sea is proposed by sceptics and its location does not fit whilst archeological fact does support the Israelites crossing the Red Sea as per the Bible
Sorry LSC but this idea of a reed sea is proposed by sceptics and its location does not fit whilst archeological fact does support the Israelites crossing the Red Sea as per the Bible
garston tony
says...
8:00pm Sun 8 May 11
John as with the Bible it is important to look at the context of the time a passage is written, I admit to not knowing enough to say for certain but an educated guess would be that at the time that the passages quoted in the articles you posted links to things like honour killings did happen and culturally continued to be 'acceptable' in certain parts of the world. The key point, at least in the first article, was that the writer himself admitted that there is no actual text in the Koran that calls for honour killings. Not taking things into context can lead genuine people aside and is also something detractors love to do in order to try and make a point that doesnt actually exist.
garston tony
says...
8:11pm Sun 8 May 11
John I dont think you're ignorant enough the believe that the Pope speaks for/is the head of every Christian denomination so not sure what your comment about his supposed infallibility is about? Sure the Roman Catholic church is the biggest denomination but the position of Pope let alone any alleged infallibity has zero, zip, nada basis in the Bible and many beliefs of the Roman Catholic church such as praying to saints, the belief that dead people can cause miracles to happen etc are possitively contrary to what the Bible teaches. Having said that i'm sure that most Catholics are genuine/sincere in their beliefs but the reality is they are misguided with the Catholic church caring more about the catholic church than Biblical truth
John Dowdle
says...
11:06pm Sun 8 May 11
So, having denied papal infallibility, are you also denying the beatification of the former pope based on the miracle according to Sister Marie Simon-Pierre?
Why should they lie?
Why should they lie?
garston tony
says...
10:17am Mon 9 May 11
John I already answered your question in my last post as well as in a post of a few days ago. I appreciate you have joined the discussion late on but might have been worth while you scanning the posts before asking already answered questions. The beatification of former popes or any other person not only has no Biblical basis but the reasoning behind it actually runs contrary to Bible teachings.
I'm sure that most Catholics are sincere in their beliefs however it is historical fact that many of their beliefs are not based in the Bible but introduced by man either due to politics, convenience or even greed. The corruptions are very human in origin and thankfully there are many denominations out there who take their beliefs from the Bible instead of from tradition.
John getting back to the article (you are an equal master in diverting from the original point) dont you agree that it is important that people investigate things for themselves, that many like to believe things like the myth Islam is a blood thirsty death to all non believers faith without having taken any steps to find out for themselves and that a meeting such as the one taking place on the 15th would be a wonderful opportunity for those myths to be dispelled?
I'm sure that most Catholics are sincere in their beliefs however it is historical fact that many of their beliefs are not based in the Bible but introduced by man either due to politics, convenience or even greed. The corruptions are very human in origin and thankfully there are many denominations out there who take their beliefs from the Bible instead of from tradition.
John getting back to the article (you are an equal master in diverting from the original point) dont you agree that it is important that people investigate things for themselves, that many like to believe things like the myth Islam is a blood thirsty death to all non believers faith without having taken any steps to find out for themselves and that a meeting such as the one taking place on the 15th would be a wonderful opportunity for those myths to be dispelled?
LSC
says...
3:27pm Mon 9 May 11
Tony, you ask for facts and I gave you them. Yam Suph means Sea of Reeds. That CANNOT be argued. And the original text says they crossed the Yam Suph. It was mis-translated or mis-spelled and therefore was turned into a miracle. Just as misguided as you say the catholics are. Even if I accept your evidence (which I don't) you say yourself that finds have been made in a part of the Red Sea that is particularly shallow. Perhaps so shallow that a few thousand years ago a drought would have made it passable? And a few weeks later impassable? So where was the miracle?
Do you remember the terrible morning of Sept 11th? It was being reported that 10,000 people had died. The true toll wasn't accurately reported for days or weeks, and that is using modern communications and tecniques, live cameras and witnesses who could be questioned. So when you tell me as fact that a few dozen Egyptians were drowned by god's hand 4000 years ago, with the only witness with something to gain from it, forgive my sceptism.
And before you point out my sources may be flawed, don't forget I read them in a book. Think about it.
Do you remember the terrible morning of Sept 11th? It was being reported that 10,000 people had died. The true toll wasn't accurately reported for days or weeks, and that is using modern communications and tecniques, live cameras and witnesses who could be questioned. So when you tell me as fact that a few dozen Egyptians were drowned by god's hand 4000 years ago, with the only witness with something to gain from it, forgive my sceptism.
And before you point out my sources may be flawed, don't forget I read them in a book. Think about it.
garston tony
says...
5:03pm Mon 9 May 11
LSC i try not to use the internet as the only source of information but I seriously had never heard of this reed sea theory and did a google search. The reality is the number of sites actually supporting the theory you are upholding was rare as to be non existent. What did come up more often was the aparrent fact, which i didnt bring up as to not 'muddy the water' if you could excuse the pun, that the Red Sea was apparently also called the Reed Sea at some point. Again something that I wasnt aware of but whichever way you look at it LSC the weight of evidence is for the Bible being an accurate record of events and for the Red Sea being the point of crossing. Oh and by relatively shallow you are still talking about a hundred metres as opposed to a couple of thousand, so to support your theory of a drought it would have to be some considerable drought affecting a huge area which would have been mentioned in contemporary records if not the Bible itself. Oh and it was several tens of thousands of witnesses to the parting as well as several thousand Egyptian dead (and quite a number of artifacts/evidence in the sea)
John Dowdle
says...
5:25pm Mon 9 May 11
I cannot claim any specific expertise on the alleged parting of the Red Sea but I do recall reading an account of the event that suggested that the area involved was a swampish area, rather like the area around Glastonbury at the time of Alfred the Great.
The Romans also encountered military difficulties when trying to move large groups of heavily armed soldiers in such terrain, particularly if they had heavy machines, chariots and carts to manouevre around.
The victory of Henry V at Agincourt can also be attributed to natural conditions on the day, as the French forces clearly outnumbered the English at the time.
We now know that the area of the North Sea at one time was a low-lying valley between the Britain Isles and the European continent. This is why there is gas and oil underneath the bottom of the sea.
This indicates that land levels have risen and fallen over historic time, which makes it difficult to attribute any contemporary accuracy to reported events from the past.
Indeed, I believe the place where the all-important Council of Nicea took place in 325 is completely under water today.
On balance, I believe the concept of a Sea of Reeds is perfectly possible from our vantage point today.
The destruction of Sodom and Gomorhhah can also be put down today to land liquefaction caused by volcanic activity.
In all of these events, there are perfectly natural explanations available, which means that supernatural explanations are unnecessary.
The Romans also encountered military difficulties when trying to move large groups of heavily armed soldiers in such terrain, particularly if they had heavy machines, chariots and carts to manouevre around.
The victory of Henry V at Agincourt can also be attributed to natural conditions on the day, as the French forces clearly outnumbered the English at the time.
We now know that the area of the North Sea at one time was a low-lying valley between the Britain Isles and the European continent. This is why there is gas and oil underneath the bottom of the sea.
This indicates that land levels have risen and fallen over historic time, which makes it difficult to attribute any contemporary accuracy to reported events from the past.
Indeed, I believe the place where the all-important Council of Nicea took place in 325 is completely under water today.
On balance, I believe the concept of a Sea of Reeds is perfectly possible from our vantage point today.
The destruction of Sodom and Gomorhhah can also be put down today to land liquefaction caused by volcanic activity.
In all of these events, there are perfectly natural explanations available, which means that supernatural explanations are unnecessary.
Enoch Powell
says...
6:26pm Mon 9 May 11
dont you agree that it is important that people investigate things for themselves, that many like to believe things like the myth Islam is a blood thirsty death to all non believers faith without having taken any steps to find out for themselves and that a meeting such as the one taking place on the 15th would be a wonderful opportunity for those myths to be dispelled?”
Yes, I think it is a good opportunity to find out confirmation of Islam's inextricable link with Shariah Law. With accelerating under reported Islamic birth rates there will shortly be a critical mass of Muslims. Will they want Shariah Law to subsume English Law. Will they adopt liberlised tolerant western values. Is the idea to create the west's first Islamic state. What happens to those that don't believe. What is the REAL views on women, gays and apostates. What country outside the UK exemplifies gentle tolerant Islamic culture that can be replicated in Britain. These are legitimate questions that need answering and if they are answered satisfactorily, then I am sure it is the religion of Peace. However, once again, it is the practices, and not the principles if Islam that should be scrutinised.
Yes, I think it is a good opportunity to find out confirmation of Islam's inextricable link with Shariah Law. With accelerating under reported Islamic birth rates there will shortly be a critical mass of Muslims. Will they want Shariah Law to subsume English Law. Will they adopt liberlised tolerant western values. Is the idea to create the west's first Islamic state. What happens to those that don't believe. What is the REAL views on women, gays and apostates. What country outside the UK exemplifies gentle tolerant Islamic culture that can be replicated in Britain. These are legitimate questions that need answering and if they are answered satisfactorily, then I am sure it is the religion of Peace. However, once again, it is the practices, and not the principles if Islam that should be scrutinised.
LSC
says...
12:33am Tue 10 May 11
I just Googled it again. "Reed Sea", (in quotations so those words have to be together), gave nearly 35 million results. I'll admit, 34 million of them might be sites claiming my point of view is wrong; but even then it is hardly an unknown point of view is it?
You mention contempory records as some sort of proof. Wouldn't they mention a sea parting? They don't. Only biased religous texts do. And as for all the archealogical remains you refer to; all that proves is people were in the Middle East at the time. I've never denied people existed 4,000 years ago. It proves nothing biblical.
As for the water levels; you are the one who claims the whole world got flooded. To a depth of 29,000 feet above sea level if Everest was covered. In 40 days, if i recall correctly.
Where did all that water come from, and where did it go Tony? Matter is finite. That water must still be around somewhere. Enough water to cover the entire world in 30,000 ft, or, doing the maths, 5.6 miles. Seeing as the Earth has a circumference of 25,000 miles, to add and extra 5 miles in radius is significant. The extra mass alone would have caused greater gravitational pull (you don't deny gravity i hope) which means the moon could have crashed into the earth, and the Earth would now be orbiting the sun further away. And we'd be dead. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
You mention contempory records as some sort of proof. Wouldn't they mention a sea parting? They don't. Only biased religous texts do. And as for all the archealogical remains you refer to; all that proves is people were in the Middle East at the time. I've never denied people existed 4,000 years ago. It proves nothing biblical.
As for the water levels; you are the one who claims the whole world got flooded. To a depth of 29,000 feet above sea level if Everest was covered. In 40 days, if i recall correctly.
Where did all that water come from, and where did it go Tony? Matter is finite. That water must still be around somewhere. Enough water to cover the entire world in 30,000 ft, or, doing the maths, 5.6 miles. Seeing as the Earth has a circumference of 25,000 miles, to add and extra 5 miles in radius is significant. The extra mass alone would have caused greater gravitational pull (you don't deny gravity i hope) which means the moon could have crashed into the earth, and the Earth would now be orbiting the sun further away. And we'd be dead. IT DIDN'T HAPPEN.
LSC
says...
12:46am Tue 10 May 11
Oh; and you refer to several thousands of witnesses. Source please, apart from the religous texts.
John Dowdle
says...
3:45am Tue 10 May 11
There was a most interesting Timewatch programme on BBC yesterday evening - which I have seen before.
It was considering whether or not the present day island of Santorini (previously called Thera) could have been the locations for Plato's legendary Atlantis.
The evidence seemed fairly conclusive but the most important thing to come out of the programme was the undoubted knowledge that a catastrophic volcanic event occured on Thera some 3,600 years ago, which caused waves of tsunamis to wash across the Aegan Sea to Crete and many points beyond.
The event affected weather across Europe as far as Ireland and into parts of Asia. Food production would have plummeted due to the effect of volcanic ash and dust blocking out the sun for months on end.
This event and/or the earlier Gilgameth Epic are probably the sources for the later Noah flood myth.
When the tsunami waves reached Crete, they would have achieved a height of 60 feet and moved solidly inland for up to 5 miles, at least.
To simple bronze age people, such an event must have been construed as being involved with some sort of literally supernatural force.
It is hard to blame them for arriving at such an erroneous conclusion.
People today know better, don't they?
It was considering whether or not the present day island of Santorini (previously called Thera) could have been the locations for Plato's legendary Atlantis.
The evidence seemed fairly conclusive but the most important thing to come out of the programme was the undoubted knowledge that a catastrophic volcanic event occured on Thera some 3,600 years ago, which caused waves of tsunamis to wash across the Aegan Sea to Crete and many points beyond.
The event affected weather across Europe as far as Ireland and into parts of Asia. Food production would have plummeted due to the effect of volcanic ash and dust blocking out the sun for months on end.
This event and/or the earlier Gilgameth Epic are probably the sources for the later Noah flood myth.
When the tsunami waves reached Crete, they would have achieved a height of 60 feet and moved solidly inland for up to 5 miles, at least.
To simple bronze age people, such an event must have been construed as being involved with some sort of literally supernatural force.
It is hard to blame them for arriving at such an erroneous conclusion.
People today know better, don't they?
garston tony
says...
9:44am Tue 10 May 11
Enoch you make a good point, it is the man made practises that are the issue when it comes to Islam and many other 'religious' activities. These practises are more often than not in place for very human reasons despite them often being bundled in and overshadowing actual religious belief, so the desire for Sharia law is a man made desire despite it being linked to Islam. As to population surely the apparent fact that Muslims have large families is just a continuation of customs of the countries of origin/parental/gran
d parent origin. In many countries having lots of children is normal partly due to sadly high infant mortality rates and the parents desire to have enough children to look after them in old age. Not sure it’s a sign of any conscientious attempt at world domination.
d parent origin. In many countries having lots of children is normal partly due to sadly high infant mortality rates and the parents desire to have enough children to look after them in old age. Not sure it’s a sign of any conscientious attempt at world domination.
garston tony
says...
9:56am Tue 10 May 11
LSC I tried a variety of different searches using various key words and yes it did come up with a huge amount of results however after trawling through pages and pages of search results (I admit just looking at the summary given not actually going into every site) I only came across one single site that supported the idea of the reed sea as you told it and even that admitted that it was just a hypothesis. Its not scientific at all but your estimate of one million pages supporting it is probably far too optimistic, maybe a thousand which is still a lot but not exactly a sign of a well founded or regarded theory. Especially not when placed against actual archaeological discovery.
The Bible tells us that the flood water came from underground and from the 'heavens' ie rain. Neither of which are particularly difficult to comprehend, after all 70% of what comes out of a volcano is water in the form of steam and the water that came from the ground certainly didn’t come up quietly according to the account. Where did it go afterwards, the Bible tells us that God made the 'mountains rise and the valleys sink down' meaning that He changed the topography of the world so the flood water settled into newly created basins which we call the seas and oceans of today.
But let me ask you a question in return LSC and maybe John can help you, if we are to believe big bang etc. I would ask you in turn where DID all the water come from? It couldn’t be there at big bang according to that theory so was there this huge blob of water floating through space which despite the huge expanse of the universe(s) managed to hit the only planet in this universe that was perfectly placed to support life and at such a time just after its creation as to apparently fit nicely with the timelines given for evolution of life on this earth? And where did such a blob of water come from, what made it in the first place? After all apparently according to big bang there was nothing in the universe before big bang, so what banged exactly?
I can understand your sceptism but really I can only say again there is plenty of evidence to support the Bible and no actual evidence to support big bang which makes some absolutely massive assumptions to even keep it vaguely coherent. And yet people are sceptic about the Bible despite the ACTUAL evidence supporting it but happy to believe in big bang in spite of NO evidence for that.
The Bible tells us that the flood water came from underground and from the 'heavens' ie rain. Neither of which are particularly difficult to comprehend, after all 70% of what comes out of a volcano is water in the form of steam and the water that came from the ground certainly didn’t come up quietly according to the account. Where did it go afterwards, the Bible tells us that God made the 'mountains rise and the valleys sink down' meaning that He changed the topography of the world so the flood water settled into newly created basins which we call the seas and oceans of today.
But let me ask you a question in return LSC and maybe John can help you, if we are to believe big bang etc. I would ask you in turn where DID all the water come from? It couldn’t be there at big bang according to that theory so was there this huge blob of water floating through space which despite the huge expanse of the universe(s) managed to hit the only planet in this universe that was perfectly placed to support life and at such a time just after its creation as to apparently fit nicely with the timelines given for evolution of life on this earth? And where did such a blob of water come from, what made it in the first place? After all apparently according to big bang there was nothing in the universe before big bang, so what banged exactly?
I can understand your sceptism but really I can only say again there is plenty of evidence to support the Bible and no actual evidence to support big bang which makes some absolutely massive assumptions to even keep it vaguely coherent. And yet people are sceptic about the Bible despite the ACTUAL evidence supporting it but happy to believe in big bang in spite of NO evidence for that.
garston tony
says...
10:00am Tue 10 May 11
John as mentioned in the previous post the Bible supports the idea that part of the source of flood water, or its 'entry' point for want of a better way of putting it was via volcanic activity and yes that would indeed have had tsunamis etc. but the evidence contained in the program the other night does not rule out the account of a flood. There is also plenty of evidence all over the world to support the account of the flood from amongst other things polystrate fossils, strate and pancake layering, turbidity currents, the discovery of fossils of animals known and around us today in places where they should not be (on mountain tops for instance) if you have an evolutionary take on things. And John why shouldn’t God use already existing naturally possible events to do His work? When performing miracles of one sort or another why shouldn’t He call forth natural events to do it, seems perfectly reasonable.
garston tony
says...
10:12am Tue 10 May 11
Any chance on you answering my question about how great it would be for all concerned if people actually attended this peace meeting to find out that Islam is not a blood thirsty religion John? Rather than continue to believe the myth which only serves to drive a wedge through our communities.
I'm more than happy to respond to all queries and points but it would be nice also if we stuck to the article in hand once in a while instead of things being diverted onto the religion v evolution debate almost every time there is even a hint of religion mentioned in a story! Its not like you guys are bringing up any new points really against religion that havent already been discussed by us in the past and your points have all been defeated by scientific/historic/
archeological fact.
I'm more than happy to respond to all queries and points but it would be nice also if we stuck to the article in hand once in a while instead of things being diverted onto the religion v evolution debate almost every time there is even a hint of religion mentioned in a story! Its not like you guys are bringing up any new points really against religion that havent already been discussed by us in the past and your points have all been defeated by scientific/historic/
archeological fact.
LSC
says...
11:06pm Tue 10 May 11
This thread is hard to find now the WO removed it from the 'most comments' list. Tony, I will answer your direct question directly, although I think I have before; I'd not be suprised if it was lost amoung the many things we discuss. I don't believe in the Big Bang. I don't understand it. However, it is a serious theory put forward by serious minds, so I don't discount it either. I do not believe it should be taught in schools as anything but a theory. The bible, however, which I do discount as complete poppycock based on the evidence I DO understand, is taught as fact in many schools. Call me a wishy-washy liberal but I believe poisoning childrens minds with lies is morally wrong. OK; you claim YOUR version of religion is correct so it is right to tell children. But that must mean you are aware that catholics and muslims are telling their children lies. Therefore, we have established that in YOUR opinion, let alone mine, about 85% of religous people are liars or sadly misguided and are willing to let their children suffer because of it. I put the figure at 100%.
So why should I buy into your 15%? What do you have to offer that they don't? Of course, my figures are made up but can't be far wrong. I go back to the flood. Please explain how the mass of the Earth changed dramatically without affecting our orbit. You know, the science that IS proven but they didn't know about when they made up the story. And you never did explain the freshwater fish. Either they evolved after the flood; or there was no flood. You can't have it both ways.
So why should I buy into your 15%? What do you have to offer that they don't? Of course, my figures are made up but can't be far wrong. I go back to the flood. Please explain how the mass of the Earth changed dramatically without affecting our orbit. You know, the science that IS proven but they didn't know about when they made up the story. And you never did explain the freshwater fish. Either they evolved after the flood; or there was no flood. You can't have it both ways.
John Dowdle
says...
12:30am Wed 11 May 11
If you look at my original posting above, you will see it began with the words' I believe the Ahmadiyyans are peacable.'
My reason for stating this is because I have previously met and spoken with members of this religious sect.
Hardline Islamists do not consider Ahmadiyyans are "proper" Muslims.
In Lahore on 28 May 2010, hardline Islamists murdered 84 Ahmadiyyans.
Pakistan has declared Ahmadiyyans to non-Muslim in their 1974 Constitution, which opened them up to attacks by extremist Pakistani religious elements.
Religion truly is despicable in situations like this, don't you agree?
I will not be attending their peace conference as I am aware of their beliefs and see no point in going along just to hear what I already know.
As far as evidence of floods around the planet is concerned, all that proves is that there have been historic periods of flooding during the history of the planet Earth - nothing else.
Even in our own lifetimes, due to enhanced media capacity to report on events on a fully global basis today, we have become much more aware of events such as the 2004 Boxing Day earthquake and tsunami; a similar event in Japan recently; earthquakes in Haiti, Italy, Iran and Pakistan in recent years. None of these events have been accompanied by claims of supernatural involvement.
Such claims for past events are no more credible than they are today.
My reason for stating this is because I have previously met and spoken with members of this religious sect.
Hardline Islamists do not consider Ahmadiyyans are "proper" Muslims.
In Lahore on 28 May 2010, hardline Islamists murdered 84 Ahmadiyyans.
Pakistan has declared Ahmadiyyans to non-Muslim in their 1974 Constitution, which opened them up to attacks by extremist Pakistani religious elements.
Religion truly is despicable in situations like this, don't you agree?
I will not be attending their peace conference as I am aware of their beliefs and see no point in going along just to hear what I already know.
As far as evidence of floods around the planet is concerned, all that proves is that there have been historic periods of flooding during the history of the planet Earth - nothing else.
Even in our own lifetimes, due to enhanced media capacity to report on events on a fully global basis today, we have become much more aware of events such as the 2004 Boxing Day earthquake and tsunami; a similar event in Japan recently; earthquakes in Haiti, Italy, Iran and Pakistan in recent years. None of these events have been accompanied by claims of supernatural involvement.
Such claims for past events are no more credible than they are today.
garston tony
says...
10:36am Wed 11 May 11
LSC you've been making points and I have been answering them using readily available concrete evidence but ultimately as you have said you have your opinions and I have mine and everyone else has theirs also. You choose to believe the Bible to be poppycock, your decision your opinion. I happen to also believe that all major religions and beliefs should be taught in schools be it Christianity, Islam, Buddhism or Big bang. None of them taught as if they were 'the truth' or in an attempt to convert but taught so that children can have a basic understanding of the different beliefs.
Whilst I do believe I am right I am not arrogant enough to think I myself have things 100% correct and again that is why I think it is important to challenge and investigate your own beliefs constantly and every now and then I do come across something that puts a particular point or whatever in new light and I gain better understanding. But yes by definition I suppose I do believe that I am more right than the majority of other people just as you think I am in the group that have it wrong.
The crucial point, one I have been trying to make time and time again is that whilst you may not believe someone else's beliefs it is sometimes important to understand it. This bring me back again to this peace conference, Islam is not a bloodthirsty religion in fact the opposite is true. However events in recent years have seen it portrayed as something it isn't due to the actions of a small minority and many people now fear Islam and this is helping to create a wedge in communities around this country let alone around the world which actually only helps give credence to the small minority who are causing the atrocities. So my point again is that it would be great if people did take the a little time to find out the truth about the religion, not asking anyone to convert but just understand. Is that really that bad a thing?
Whilst I do believe I am right I am not arrogant enough to think I myself have things 100% correct and again that is why I think it is important to challenge and investigate your own beliefs constantly and every now and then I do come across something that puts a particular point or whatever in new light and I gain better understanding. But yes by definition I suppose I do believe that I am more right than the majority of other people just as you think I am in the group that have it wrong.
The crucial point, one I have been trying to make time and time again is that whilst you may not believe someone else's beliefs it is sometimes important to understand it. This bring me back again to this peace conference, Islam is not a bloodthirsty religion in fact the opposite is true. However events in recent years have seen it portrayed as something it isn't due to the actions of a small minority and many people now fear Islam and this is helping to create a wedge in communities around this country let alone around the world which actually only helps give credence to the small minority who are causing the atrocities. So my point again is that it would be great if people did take the a little time to find out the truth about the religion, not asking anyone to convert but just understand. Is that really that bad a thing?
garston tony
says...
10:40am Wed 11 May 11
LSC just to pick up on a point you made, you say that Big Bang has credence for you as some serious minds have put forward the theories. I would point out that quite often these serious minds and their theories do not actually agree with each other and quite often these serious minds are honest enough to also admit that they have no evidence for what they believe. Not only is it a very confused theory but for all intents and purposes they are making it up as they go along.
I would also point out again that there are also some seriously serious minds that believe in God and the Bible. I'm talking Nobel prize winners and I'm talking leaders and pioneers in many scientific fields amongst others. Not only are many scientists great and small Christians but science itself whilst it can not prove one theory of big bang does support the Bible.
Just a point to ponder really.
I would also point out again that there are also some seriously serious minds that believe in God and the Bible. I'm talking Nobel prize winners and I'm talking leaders and pioneers in many scientific fields amongst others. Not only are many scientists great and small Christians but science itself whilst it can not prove one theory of big bang does support the Bible.
Just a point to ponder really.
John Dowdle
says...
11:04am Wed 11 May 11
Big Bang fits the facts of our observable expanding Universe.
The observable Universe is only a small part of the overall Universe so new ideas and theories will inevitably develop. That is why science - as opposed to religion - develops.
I suppose the religious fraternity will then claim that "their" book predicted it.
While it is true that there are some scientists who also consume religion, it is equally trrue that they are a tiny fraction of the total numbers of scientists.
Anyone who describes themselves as being religious and scientific is afflicted by a personality disorder of some sort.
The observable Universe is only a small part of the overall Universe so new ideas and theories will inevitably develop. That is why science - as opposed to religion - develops.
I suppose the religious fraternity will then claim that "their" book predicted it.
While it is true that there are some scientists who also consume religion, it is equally trrue that they are a tiny fraction of the total numbers of scientists.
Anyone who describes themselves as being religious and scientific is afflicted by a personality disorder of some sort.
garston tony
says...
11:10am Wed 11 May 11
To answer the question again, the mass of the earth did not change. The water came from earth itself be it in the form of rain or from under the ground. During/after the flood God changed the topography of the earth (not adding or taking away any mass just moving it around) and the flood water receded for a large part into the newly created oceans and seas.
And I think you'll find if you can actually find the articles and postings anymore that I did answer way back when your question about fresh water fish but as usual I'll answer again the already answered. A) it is an assumption that the sea water at the time of the flood was as salty as it is now. The flood itself could have caused the oceans to become salty with the receding waters taking salt deposits and other minerals with them or as is still happening today fresh water rivers could have salinated the oceans in the intervening thousands of years with all the miniral they deposit into the oceans every second of every day. B) experiments using large volumes of water show that it can take some time for sea and fresh water to mix, creating layers with freshwater sitting on top. The same experiments show that fish were able to survive in such environments for more than 40 days. C) if you gradually increase or decrease salinity it is possible for fish to adapt and survive in water of increased/decreased salinity than they are used to. Therefore when the layers in point B did eventually start gradually mixing the fish would have had time to adapt. There are actually fish keepers who in their homes have tanks with both fresh and salt water fish in the same water. D) really evidence for point B but I think it was the Blue Planet BBC series about 15 years ago that had an episode where they were showing shots from the bottom of the pacific ocean and they showed this area where for a few feet deep and maybe several hundred feet in diameter there was this lake of fresh water sitting on the bottom with its own little eco system. Fascinating.
Is this a comprehensive enough answer for you?
And I think you'll find if you can actually find the articles and postings anymore that I did answer way back when your question about fresh water fish but as usual I'll answer again the already answered. A) it is an assumption that the sea water at the time of the flood was as salty as it is now. The flood itself could have caused the oceans to become salty with the receding waters taking salt deposits and other minerals with them or as is still happening today fresh water rivers could have salinated the oceans in the intervening thousands of years with all the miniral they deposit into the oceans every second of every day. B) experiments using large volumes of water show that it can take some time for sea and fresh water to mix, creating layers with freshwater sitting on top. The same experiments show that fish were able to survive in such environments for more than 40 days. C) if you gradually increase or decrease salinity it is possible for fish to adapt and survive in water of increased/decreased salinity than they are used to. Therefore when the layers in point B did eventually start gradually mixing the fish would have had time to adapt. There are actually fish keepers who in their homes have tanks with both fresh and salt water fish in the same water. D) really evidence for point B but I think it was the Blue Planet BBC series about 15 years ago that had an episode where they were showing shots from the bottom of the pacific ocean and they showed this area where for a few feet deep and maybe several hundred feet in diameter there was this lake of fresh water sitting on the bottom with its own little eco system. Fascinating.
Is this a comprehensive enough answer for you?
garston tony
says...
11:22am Wed 11 May 11
Big bang fits the facts of our observable universe. Hmm, but big bang has no factsand is not factual itself. Basically people have gone this is what we can see now what can we make up to explain it. And yes new theories are being developed when more is observed but its interesting that a) they are still made up and b) none of the previous theories have every been proven. Forget Arthur C Clarke or Iain M Banks, big bang is quite literally the ultimate in science fiction!
What is FACT is that a lot of science backs up the Bible. A lot about our world, this universe is told to us in the Bible. Facts in the Bible which 'science' has only just discovered for itself relatively recently. And who are you to write off Nobel prize winners and pionering scientists and doctors as having personalilty disorders? You really are a muppet with that comment.
What is FACT is that a lot of science backs up the Bible. A lot about our world, this universe is told to us in the Bible. Facts in the Bible which 'science' has only just discovered for itself relatively recently. And who are you to write off Nobel prize winners and pionering scientists and doctors as having personalilty disorders? You really are a muppet with that comment.
garston tony
says...
11:23am Wed 11 May 11
John D I totally agree what some people (some I stress) do in the name of religion is awful. But it all comes back to the fact that the atrocities and awful behaviour have no actual basis in the religion but are entirely of man made origin. I appreciate your own knowledge of this group but I asked a general question, don’t you think it is a good idea for people who (quite understandably but incorrectly) have this impression that Islam is a blood thirsty religion to find out that in reality Islam is a peaceful faith? I ask this because it is my view that if you fear something then obviously the way you react to or with that thing changes so if people fear Muslims it creates a barrier and if in that fear people make judgements and act on those judgments which might include hostility that that hostility is not only unfounded but actually could bread hostility in return i.e. the more people react in a hostile manner to all Muslims and not just those who are actually on the extremes causing the problems the more credence is given to those extremes within the Muslim community? In effect peoples ignorance and fear and reaction to that ignorance and fear is helping to create a self fulfilling prophesy.
garston tony
says...
11:24am Wed 11 May 11
I note with no surprise that neither of you have answered my question about if we are to believe in Big Bang where all the water came from. Nothing new, this is usually the way I answer all the questions about my belief but no one answers the questions about their own beliefs. You bullies you. But don’t worry, I know the answer which is that big bang theory doesn’t have an answer to that question. Just one of the many misteries of big bang which they try to fudge or try to get us to overlook as it exposes the universally sized problems with the theory (ies).
Another one being seeing as we are on the subject fish. According to big bang theory evolution took place due to small changes taking place over time giving whatever organism/creature an advantage and therefore those small changes becoming prevelant through survival of the fittest etc. and then the next small evolutionary change taking place etc. So how did water living, non air breathing creatures exactly evolve to live on land? Even under big bang theory a creature with no air breathing lungs would not suddenly give birth to one with said lungs, and surely any small incremental changes towards an air breathing lung would not have proven advantageous and would therefore not have been fit enough to survive? A creature born with 0.01% of a lung trying to get out of the water would have died a) losing that change in the first place and b) telling the other creatures what they probably already new which was that outside of the water is death so lets not try moving in that direction.
I'll say it for the third or fourth time, whilst people may not believe in the Bible there is plenty of evidence to support it despite the detractors saying it is made up. Yet many of those very same detractors believe in big bang claiming intellectually it is the best truth despite there being no evidence for it. Seriously can no one see the problem with this reasoning? Surely it is you John who has the personality disorder!
Whilst I do agree many people follow a religion without thinking too much about it the same can be said for those that believe in big bang. That’s the only explanation why people are happy to say they believe in it despite the flaws which permeate every single theory. The classic example is Roy who does normally use every opportunity to attack faiths putting forward his belief in big bang having to admit recently that he actually knew NOTHING about big bang/evolutionary theory. Yet he would call me the ignorant one! Absolutely brilliant, lol.
Another one being seeing as we are on the subject fish. According to big bang theory evolution took place due to small changes taking place over time giving whatever organism/creature an advantage and therefore those small changes becoming prevelant through survival of the fittest etc. and then the next small evolutionary change taking place etc. So how did water living, non air breathing creatures exactly evolve to live on land? Even under big bang theory a creature with no air breathing lungs would not suddenly give birth to one with said lungs, and surely any small incremental changes towards an air breathing lung would not have proven advantageous and would therefore not have been fit enough to survive? A creature born with 0.01% of a lung trying to get out of the water would have died a) losing that change in the first place and b) telling the other creatures what they probably already new which was that outside of the water is death so lets not try moving in that direction.
I'll say it for the third or fourth time, whilst people may not believe in the Bible there is plenty of evidence to support it despite the detractors saying it is made up. Yet many of those very same detractors believe in big bang claiming intellectually it is the best truth despite there being no evidence for it. Seriously can no one see the problem with this reasoning? Surely it is you John who has the personality disorder!
Whilst I do agree many people follow a religion without thinking too much about it the same can be said for those that believe in big bang. That’s the only explanation why people are happy to say they believe in it despite the flaws which permeate every single theory. The classic example is Roy who does normally use every opportunity to attack faiths putting forward his belief in big bang having to admit recently that he actually knew NOTHING about big bang/evolutionary theory. Yet he would call me the ignorant one! Absolutely brilliant, lol.
John Dowdle
says...
11:26am Wed 11 May 11
I think Tony is to be congratulated. Charles Darwin could not have put his point B) any better himself in support of his theory of species adaptation.
It looks like Tony is making a steady move along the evolutionary wave.
According to his book 'Voyage of the Beagle', Darwin witnessed a violent earthquake in South America, where - in a single day - he witnessed the rise and fall of land mass.
Nothing supernatural about land movements, as Darwin saw for himself.
It looks like Tony is making a steady move along the evolutionary wave.
According to his book 'Voyage of the Beagle', Darwin witnessed a violent earthquake in South America, where - in a single day - he witnessed the rise and fall of land mass.
Nothing supernatural about land movements, as Darwin saw for himself.
garston tony
says...
11:37am Wed 11 May 11
John D, species adaptation is nowhere near the same as species evolution as per big bang. You're showing signs of that confusion brought on by personality disorder again John.
John Dowdle
says...
11:44am Wed 11 May 11
As explained before, water - or H2O - was formed among the early stars of our Universe.
It floated around in the form of ice and became deposited on rocks and other bodies floating around in space.
When Earth formed out of the debris surrounding the early Sun it would have been too volcanic and too hot to retain any water deposited on the surface of the planetoid Earth.
As Earth cooled, it was bombarded by - among others - water-bearing rocks which gradually formed into pools, lakes and seas as the Earth's surface continued to cool down.
If you doubt this, take a close look at the surface of the Moon sometime.
The outer atmosphere has kept the water within the ecological cycle that operates between the sea level and the upper atmosphere.
The Sun's energy contributes towards a warming effect which raises moisture from the sea and deposits it again in the form of fresh water, thereby reducing - to some extent - the salinity of sea water.
None of this is rocket science, as the saying goes; which is why so-called "biblical" explanations are irrelevant and unnecessary.
At least with theories such as Big Bang and evolution there is some objective evidence on which to base it.
Biblical accounts are mere opinion - at best - and cheap propaganda at worst.
God does not exist; therefore, the Bible is fundamentally wrong.
Is that simple enough for everyone?
It floated around in the form of ice and became deposited on rocks and other bodies floating around in space.
When Earth formed out of the debris surrounding the early Sun it would have been too volcanic and too hot to retain any water deposited on the surface of the planetoid Earth.
As Earth cooled, it was bombarded by - among others - water-bearing rocks which gradually formed into pools, lakes and seas as the Earth's surface continued to cool down.
If you doubt this, take a close look at the surface of the Moon sometime.
The outer atmosphere has kept the water within the ecological cycle that operates between the sea level and the upper atmosphere.
The Sun's energy contributes towards a warming effect which raises moisture from the sea and deposits it again in the form of fresh water, thereby reducing - to some extent - the salinity of sea water.
None of this is rocket science, as the saying goes; which is why so-called "biblical" explanations are irrelevant and unnecessary.
At least with theories such as Big Bang and evolution there is some objective evidence on which to base it.
Biblical accounts are mere opinion - at best - and cheap propaganda at worst.
God does not exist; therefore, the Bible is fundamentally wrong.
Is that simple enough for everyone?
John Dowdle
says...
11:48am Wed 11 May 11
I think poor Tony is getting confused.
As far as I am aware, no one has ever claimed that species evolution has been based on the Big Bang.
Or is this a brand new theory that Tony is developing for the first time?
As far as I am aware, no one has ever claimed that species evolution has been based on the Big Bang.
Or is this a brand new theory that Tony is developing for the first time?
garston tony
says...
12:19pm Wed 11 May 11
The theory of evolution and the theory of big bang are linked arent they JD? One follows from the other. You're grasping if you're being so pedantic.
And on that note JD, how did life begin on this earth then? I know i've asked before and to be honest I cant remember if you answered that one or not but either way for me its a rethorical question as I know the theory behind that is equally as grasping of straws as you are but it would be great to see you try and explain that one to anyone else who is bothering to read all this gumph which I doubt anyone is!
And on that note JD, how did life begin on this earth then? I know i've asked before and to be honest I cant remember if you answered that one or not but either way for me its a rethorical question as I know the theory behind that is equally as grasping of straws as you are but it would be great to see you try and explain that one to anyone else who is bothering to read all this gumph which I doubt anyone is!
garston tony
says...
12:23pm Wed 11 May 11
Oh and JD, your opinion is that God does not exist. Please do not mistake your opinion as fact. Is that simple enough for you?
As you love scientific fact so much lets look at the two opposing beliefs scientifically. Science (and a mass of other evidence), backs up the Bible, the Bible says there is a God therefore there is a God. Science has not been able to prove big bang. Therefore big bang never happened.
As you love scientific fact so much lets look at the two opposing beliefs scientifically. Science (and a mass of other evidence), backs up the Bible, the Bible says there is a God therefore there is a God. Science has not been able to prove big bang. Therefore big bang never happened.
John Dowdle
says...
12:36pm Wed 11 May 11
Tony,
As far as I am aware, no one - except you - has ever sought any direct link between Big Bang and evolution.
As a reasonable person, I accept that everything - including evolution - follows on time-wise from the Big Bang.
The question is not "How did life begin on this planet?" but "How did life begin in this Universe?" - a much larger question in view of our greater knowledge and understanding of our Universe, compared to the lesser informed people who lived thousands of years ago.
As yet, there is no clearcut answer to this question but scientific enquiry has discovered incredible new facts over time - despite ferocious religious opposition on occasions - and it will certainly continue the process until such time as we do possess the facts to know how life began in our Universe.
As an ignostic, I simply ask for any objective evidence that supernatural beings or entities exist.
There is no objective evidence at all. Therefore these entities do not exist.
Simple, really - extremely young children can understand that.
As far as I am aware, no one - except you - has ever sought any direct link between Big Bang and evolution.
As a reasonable person, I accept that everything - including evolution - follows on time-wise from the Big Bang.
The question is not "How did life begin on this planet?" but "How did life begin in this Universe?" - a much larger question in view of our greater knowledge and understanding of our Universe, compared to the lesser informed people who lived thousands of years ago.
As yet, there is no clearcut answer to this question but scientific enquiry has discovered incredible new facts over time - despite ferocious religious opposition on occasions - and it will certainly continue the process until such time as we do possess the facts to know how life began in our Universe.
As an ignostic, I simply ask for any objective evidence that supernatural beings or entities exist.
There is no objective evidence at all. Therefore these entities do not exist.
Simple, really - extremely young children can understand that.
garston tony
says...
3:41pm Wed 11 May 11
JD still being pedantic, it does become you. As I said one follows the other, apparently there was a big bang and later on some evolution the link being the latter couldn’t have happened without the former. And cutting to the chase of your 'answer' basically you admit that big bang or evolution has no answer to the question how did life begin on earth let alone the universe.
And thank you, goodnight. Do we really need to say more?
And thank you, goodnight. Do we really need to say more?
garston tony
says...
3:48pm Wed 11 May 11
Yeah, go non then.
What about the fish JD, what about the fish? How did some creature o fthe primeval sloop suddenly become capable of breathing oxygen? Go on explain how that leap from sloop creature to land creature happened without tearing apart the other theory of selection of the fittest, natural selection or whatever you want to call it.
No answer to that either is there? The reality is that all these theories fall apart under any moderate even light scrutiny, they are literally rubbish.
What about the fish JD, what about the fish? How did some creature o fthe primeval sloop suddenly become capable of breathing oxygen? Go on explain how that leap from sloop creature to land creature happened without tearing apart the other theory of selection of the fittest, natural selection or whatever you want to call it.
No answer to that either is there? The reality is that all these theories fall apart under any moderate even light scrutiny, they are literally rubbish.
garston tony
says...
3:59pm Wed 11 May 11
You DO seem rather muddled JD, no objective evidence for a God so you don’t believe in one. Fine, your opinion. But there is no evidence objective or otherwise for big bang yet you cling to that belief like a half drowned sailor to a buoyancy aid. Why does the rule of evidence only apply to one and not the other JD? But you are rather selective with your facts and beliefs arent you.
As to no proof of the existence of God many people have felt His presence or that of a 'supernatural being' that is working on His behalf, to have seen miracles happen or have had miracles minor or major happen in their lives. Now bearing in mind what you called Nobel prize winners and emminent scientists earlier I can just imagine you typing some derogatory word or other to describe these people too. I may be putting words in your mouth but I don’t think I'd be wrong.
The point then is who are you to dismiss the experiences of tens of millions of people? You are a nobody is the answer, you have no right, authority, evidence or proof to say those experiences are not true and the reality is that there is plenty of evidence to blow a hole in your entire belief system but you are so closed a mind you just run away from it as quickly as you can. Why JD? God isnt going to hurt you he's going to save you if you let him.
As to no proof of the existence of God many people have felt His presence or that of a 'supernatural being' that is working on His behalf, to have seen miracles happen or have had miracles minor or major happen in their lives. Now bearing in mind what you called Nobel prize winners and emminent scientists earlier I can just imagine you typing some derogatory word or other to describe these people too. I may be putting words in your mouth but I don’t think I'd be wrong.
The point then is who are you to dismiss the experiences of tens of millions of people? You are a nobody is the answer, you have no right, authority, evidence or proof to say those experiences are not true and the reality is that there is plenty of evidence to blow a hole in your entire belief system but you are so closed a mind you just run away from it as quickly as you can. Why JD? God isnt going to hurt you he's going to save you if you let him.
John Dowdle
says...
7:06pm Wed 11 May 11
How can something that simple minded people call "God" save anyone or anything when it does not exist?
You might just as well cross all your fingers and toes, while whistling "Dixie" for all the difference it will make.
I have not seen it but I believe there was a recent Channel 4 TV programme called 'Miracles for Sale', in which Derren Brown exposed the charlatanry of so-called "faith" "miracles".
I believe he was an evangelical preacher earlier in his life so it is clear he knows the 'tricks of the trade' from the inside.
It is time people stopped swallowing religious nonsense and started to live their lives standing up, rather than continuously bowing down to things that do not exist.
It is sometimes depressing to think that so many people have been fooled and taken in by religion.
But, at times like these, I remind myself that it was much worse in times gone by and that we are presently on a knowledge trajectory which will render simplistic beliefs in things like religion and other irrational nonsense obsolete eventually.
Tony: does Panderichthys, Tiktaalik and Ichthyostega ring any bells?
You might just as well cross all your fingers and toes, while whistling "Dixie" for all the difference it will make.
I have not seen it but I believe there was a recent Channel 4 TV programme called 'Miracles for Sale', in which Derren Brown exposed the charlatanry of so-called "faith" "miracles".
I believe he was an evangelical preacher earlier in his life so it is clear he knows the 'tricks of the trade' from the inside.
It is time people stopped swallowing religious nonsense and started to live their lives standing up, rather than continuously bowing down to things that do not exist.
It is sometimes depressing to think that so many people have been fooled and taken in by religion.
But, at times like these, I remind myself that it was much worse in times gone by and that we are presently on a knowledge trajectory which will render simplistic beliefs in things like religion and other irrational nonsense obsolete eventually.
Tony: does Panderichthys, Tiktaalik and Ichthyostega ring any bells?
LSC
says...
12:55am Thu 12 May 11
garston tony wrote:Um... i think I can answer that Tony, although I am no expert. In order to escape natural predators, the ocean creatures used defence mechanisms, such as the 'flying fish' we see today. The strongest, the ones that flew highest, survived to breed longer than the slowest. So these strong genes were passed down. Similarly, at the waters edge, the ones who could live the longest when the tides washed them up had no natural predators while they were on land. So providing they were washed back in again, they lived longer. Over millions of years, this trait of being washed up but surviving out the water slowly became the norm. This led to amphibians. Some of them went on to be reptiles. Some of those to be mammals. You can see the cross over points; the duck-billed platypus, alligators, even today.
Yeah, go non then. What about the fish JD, what about the fish? How did some creature o fthe primeval sloop suddenly become capable of breathing oxygen? Go on explain how that leap from sloop creature to land creature happened without tearing apart the other theory of selection of the fittest, natural selection or whatever you want to call it. No answer to that either is there? The reality is that all these theories fall apart under any moderate even light scrutiny, they are literally rubbish.
As for the water; it is just chemicals. The whole universe is just chemicals. Why not have a mix of them that adds up to what we call water? We have a mix that is what we call sand, or granite, or gold, or chalk. That mix just happens to be water; I have no problem there.
LSC
says...
1:01am Thu 12 May 11
Oh, and fish DO breathe oxygen. Water is a 3rd oxygen, which is actually a higher proportion than the air we breathe (Clue is H2O) which is mostly nitrogen and about 15% oxygen. So we land creatures actually need half the oxygen fish do.
John Dowdle
says...
1:56am Thu 12 May 11
I have just finished watching Derren Brown's “Miracles for Sale” Channel 4 OD. Absolutely fascinating in its expose of fraudulent miracle healers.
You can still see it now on http://www.channel4.
com/programmes/derre
n-brown-the-specials
/4od#3182173.
I believe it is the case that very young babies can actually "breathe" under water. I assume that while they are still small in size that they can receive sufficient oxygen through their lung linings for their needs but as they grow older - and bigger - they are no longer able to receive sufficient oxygen for their needs.
So, if this is correct, young babies provide a case of human evolution in action, which has continued from our earliest form of existence to our present day species existence.
You can still see it now on http://www.channel4.
com/programmes/derre
n-brown-the-specials
/4od#3182173.
I believe it is the case that very young babies can actually "breathe" under water. I assume that while they are still small in size that they can receive sufficient oxygen through their lung linings for their needs but as they grow older - and bigger - they are no longer able to receive sufficient oxygen for their needs.
So, if this is correct, young babies provide a case of human evolution in action, which has continued from our earliest form of existence to our present day species existence.
garston tony
says...
9:15am Thu 12 May 11
I think it says everything about YOU JD that you call people who believe in God names like simple minded or accuse them of having personality disorders. Your opinion is that there is no God, you have no proof of that and you do not know the experiences of those that do believe in Him and walk with Him everyday. I've accused you of major arrogance in the past and have really tried not to do so recently but a spade is a spade as they say in Roy's native Yorkshire and your attitude says much about your own negative personality trait than it does about anything else.
You are quite literally a man with no proof for his own beliefs hurling verbal stones at people whose beliefs have been proven tens of billions of times throughout history and even today.
You are quite literally a man with no proof for his own beliefs hurling verbal stones at people whose beliefs have been proven tens of billions of times throughout history and even today.
garston tony
says...
9:15am Thu 12 May 11
And as for Derren Browns program you'll note that he teamed up with Christians who had, were and continue to expose fake faith healers. Derren Brown was not a preacher but he did grow up in a Christian family. What was interesting, and JD you need to take note here, was that despite being a sceptic himself about faiths he was not attacking the Christian faith and was not making judgements on their beliefs. Much like your favourite astro physicist Dr Cox both their positions are quite rightly that they may not believe in a God but that does not mean there may not be one and they do not attack other peoples beliefs in one.
The one thing it highlighted above all else was the importance, and this is my broken record, of people finding things out for themselves. The people duped by the fake faith healers were duped because they did not remember or know their Bible well enough. That combined with the quite natural desire to be cured of an illness led them to be duped. If you know your stuff then you cant be led astray.
The one thing it highlighted above all else was the importance, and this is my broken record, of people finding things out for themselves. The people duped by the fake faith healers were duped because they did not remember or know their Bible well enough. That combined with the quite natural desire to be cured of an illness led them to be duped. If you know your stuff then you cant be led astray.
garston tony
says...
9:20am Thu 12 May 11
Pandericthys, a fish with limbs. And? There are fish with limbs around today. Tiktaalik has no known 'ancestors' so actually supports my point that any move towards an air breathing creature was doomed as it had no survival of the fittest advantage. Ichthyostegalia as well as Panderichthys have not had any complete skeletons found for them and there are a lot of bits missing. So the idea that they are intermediate evidence is just that, an idea, a theory not proof.
JD maybe I could throw in Coelacanth a fish thought to be evidence of the transition and thought to have been extinct for 400 million years by evolutionarist. Part of the 'evidence' for evolution. Only its been discovered alive and well off the coast of south Africa. This is a lovely example of some of the nonsense and guess work being potrayed as fact by the evolutionarist.
At least LSC has put forward a reasonable answer to the question, thanks. However the reality still is that there is no proof for macro evolution and with odds of a mutation occuring in the DNA being put at 1 in 100 million and with mutation being 70% damaging with the remainder either being neutral or only very weakly beneficial this exposes another flaw which is that (ignoring yet another flaw of how life began in the first place) that first 'life' even in the alleged time frame of billions of years would not have been able to mutate into all that is around us today let alone all that has dissapeared.
Evolution either states the time line of big bang is wrong or if the time line of big bang is not wrong then big bang says that evolution to what we have today could not have happened. They cancel each other out, brilliant.
JD maybe I could throw in Coelacanth a fish thought to be evidence of the transition and thought to have been extinct for 400 million years by evolutionarist. Part of the 'evidence' for evolution. Only its been discovered alive and well off the coast of south Africa. This is a lovely example of some of the nonsense and guess work being potrayed as fact by the evolutionarist.
At least LSC has put forward a reasonable answer to the question, thanks. However the reality still is that there is no proof for macro evolution and with odds of a mutation occuring in the DNA being put at 1 in 100 million and with mutation being 70% damaging with the remainder either being neutral or only very weakly beneficial this exposes another flaw which is that (ignoring yet another flaw of how life began in the first place) that first 'life' even in the alleged time frame of billions of years would not have been able to mutate into all that is around us today let alone all that has dissapeared.
Evolution either states the time line of big bang is wrong or if the time line of big bang is not wrong then big bang says that evolution to what we have today could not have happened. They cancel each other out, brilliant.
garston tony
says...
9:23am Thu 12 May 11
And babies newborn or otherwise can not breathe underwater. In fact up to a certain age their natural reflex is to hold their breath. If they were to try to breath under water they would take in water and drown.
Using your own line of argument then surely this is an amazing bit of evidence that we did NOT evolve from some water borne creature.
Really, if this is the kind of sloppy stuff you believe no wonder you’re an ignostic.
Using your own line of argument then surely this is an amazing bit of evidence that we did NOT evolve from some water borne creature.
Really, if this is the kind of sloppy stuff you believe no wonder you’re an ignostic.
John Dowdle
says...
12:01pm Thu 12 May 11
Well, Tony, if you are one of those who 'walk with Him every day' there is a very easy way for you to be able to prove to all - even the most sceptic - that your so-called "God" exists.
Just let us all know the next time the pair of you are walking along Watford High Street - the time and date - and we can all come and see the two of you together.
When will this be taking place next?
Just let us all know the next time the pair of you are walking along Watford High Street - the time and date - and we can all come and see the two of you together.
When will this be taking place next?
garston tony
says...
2:06pm Thu 12 May 11
You really are an intellectually repressed donught arent you JD. How anyone with such a closed mind can claim to have a superior belief is amazing, your claim is based purely on ignoring all the facts around you. Many genuine scholars, leaders and believers in big bang and evolution admit that whilst that is what they believe they can equally not disprove the existence of a God its just that that is not for them. However ladies and gentleman in Watford we seem to have the worlds ultimate genius in JD who knows better than thousands of emminent scientists and who without being able to provide any evidence knows that there is no God. A round of aplause, someone organise an open top bus parade through town for this man.
Per leeese JD, get over yourself as much as you'd love to you cant disprove the existance of God and just name calling those that have had genuine experiences of Him in their lives isnt good enough. Especially from someone whose own beliefs now appear to be based on rather dubious research, babies breathing under water anyone? You do know that Piltdown man was a hoax don’t you JD?
You're actually no better than your mate Roy who had to admit despite his often vocal, nasty opinions for big bang and evolution and against religion that he knew NOTHING about the subject. Oh how I laughed when he admitted that and oh how I laughed with your newborn baby statement. The two of you are just a joke and are no better than peddlers of quackery.
Per leeese JD, get over yourself as much as you'd love to you cant disprove the existance of God and just name calling those that have had genuine experiences of Him in their lives isnt good enough. Especially from someone whose own beliefs now appear to be based on rather dubious research, babies breathing under water anyone? You do know that Piltdown man was a hoax don’t you JD?
You're actually no better than your mate Roy who had to admit despite his often vocal, nasty opinions for big bang and evolution and against religion that he knew NOTHING about the subject. Oh how I laughed when he admitted that and oh how I laughed with your newborn baby statement. The two of you are just a joke and are no better than peddlers of quackery.
John Dowdle
says...
2:20pm Thu 12 May 11
I don't need an open top bus to be able to see you and Him strolling together along Watford High Street.
I notice you are unable to provide us with a time and date when you and your phony god will be taking a stroll.
The only conclusion anyone can come to is that you are unable to deliver on your statement and your invisible friend is as big a phony as you are.
You cannot prove the existence of something that does not exist.
I understand you have invested most of your life in this idiotic nonsense and clap trap, and if you choose to carry on believing in religious rubbish that is your choice.
However, stop trying to infect the minds of impressionable young children with this evil rubbish.
You and your sort in Africa are leading to the persecution and deaths of countless young people, who ought to be the hope of future generations.
When you can produce your non-existent supernatural entity for all to see on Watford High Street, then get back to us and let us know.
Until you can provide proof positive of your mythical being - and not the outdated ramblings of some long dead people who may or may not have actually lived thousands of years ago - then I suggest you keep your stupid ideas to yourself.
I notice you are unable to provide us with a time and date when you and your phony god will be taking a stroll.
The only conclusion anyone can come to is that you are unable to deliver on your statement and your invisible friend is as big a phony as you are.
You cannot prove the existence of something that does not exist.
I understand you have invested most of your life in this idiotic nonsense and clap trap, and if you choose to carry on believing in religious rubbish that is your choice.
However, stop trying to infect the minds of impressionable young children with this evil rubbish.
You and your sort in Africa are leading to the persecution and deaths of countless young people, who ought to be the hope of future generations.
When you can produce your non-existent supernatural entity for all to see on Watford High Street, then get back to us and let us know.
Until you can provide proof positive of your mythical being - and not the outdated ramblings of some long dead people who may or may not have actually lived thousands of years ago - then I suggest you keep your stupid ideas to yourself.
garston tony
says...
3:10pm Thu 12 May 11
JD even in your denial you know that the term walking with God does not mean He would be actually physically visible himself. Why are you insisting on being such an idiot, it really does not become someone of your age and only actually serves to cast you further in bad light. Instead of telling me what to do why don’t you look at the way REAL experts in big bang and evolution behave, they don’t denounce God and accept that He might actually exist. It is only someone with a mind as immature and closed as yours that refuses to concede that point, more fool you to be honest. The REAL experts know that they have no real evidence for what they believe and its only amateurs like you who refuse to acknowledge that too. When you yourself have proof positive for what you believe in then you might be in a position to critise, until then keep quiet as everything you say just makes you sound dim.
garston tony
says...
3:16pm Thu 12 May 11
As to me and my sort next time I write to or visit next all the people I have met in Africa over many years on various projects helping to build medical centres, schools and orphanages amongst other things I'll let them know that in your genius opinion those things are actually there to do them harm. Next time I help fund raise to buy medical or school equipment I'll think twice will I about how I and many of my fellow believers by sending those precious parcels are persecuting the very people we are trying to help. Next time I go to a camp for displaced people to help set up a water bladder to provide clean i'll think how that pure water is going to kill them.
You really havent a clue do you JD, every time you try to be funny or to make a point you just make yourself look more ridiculous. Just go talk to you Humanist mate Roy about what he'd like to do in Africa and then give yourself a good talking too to.
You really havent a clue do you JD, every time you try to be funny or to make a point you just make yourself look more ridiculous. Just go talk to you Humanist mate Roy about what he'd like to do in Africa and then give yourself a good talking too to.
John Dowdle
says...
8:09pm Thu 12 May 11
Will you and your friends in places like Uganda be supporting the calls for capital punishment for homosexuals and support driving six inch nails into the heads of young girls in order to drive the devil out of them?
That is what christian ministers in that country have been calling for.
You would never and will never see humanists behave like that.
That is what christian ministers in that country have been calling for.
You would never and will never see humanists behave like that.
garston tony
says...
9:26pm Thu 12 May 11
Of course I wont and dont JD, but I seem to recall that you mentioned you've spent some time on that continent and you know for yourself that much of the customs and beliefs that existed prior to colonial days still permeate that continents cultures even today so dont go pointing the 'blame' at Christianity.
As to never finding a humanist behaving like that i refer you again to your mate Stockdill and his oft repeated wish that all aid be stopped for Africa and that he'd be happy for tens of millions of people to die as a consequence. So no, the humanist way is genocide on a grand scale through painful and lingering death by hunger and disease.
As to never finding a humanist behaving like that i refer you again to your mate Stockdill and his oft repeated wish that all aid be stopped for Africa and that he'd be happy for tens of millions of people to die as a consequence. So no, the humanist way is genocide on a grand scale through painful and lingering death by hunger and disease.
John Dowdle
says...
9:39pm Thu 12 May 11
Roy Stockdill is a secularist - not a humanist. There is a difference.
It is now more than 50 years since former European powers left Africa - yet still many of those countries have their hands outstretched for aid.
They have become trapped into a form of aid-dependency culture.
Just how has religion helped them to become truly independent? It hasn't.
It is now more than 50 years since former European powers left Africa - yet still many of those countries have their hands outstretched for aid.
They have become trapped into a form of aid-dependency culture.
Just how has religion helped them to become truly independent? It hasn't.
garston tony
says...
11:29pm Thu 12 May 11
You should really have words with old Roy then JD as he seems to think he's a humanist. So you'vee kicked him out of your club the, poor guy doesnt seem to have any friends left. And when did I say religion had helped Africa become independent? I didnt so what are you on about? Ah, making things up as usual hey JD.
And as to 50 years since former powers left, tell that to the many countries where France still has military presence for instance, or Angola where its only about 30 years since the Portugese gave independance, or practically every country on that continent which has been meddled in by the US, former Soviet Union, big western corporations and now China. Also why are we comparing Africa to Europe, the circumstances, the culture, the geography, the history, the opportunities, the people are totally different and its not as if when gaining independence many of the countries where left well equiped or prepared for it. Yet in one life time you expect them to have progressed to a point that has taken us hundreds of years to reach. Regardless of the reasons however yes there are tens of millions of people on that continent who would die without aid so lets give it where it is needed along with support to help them become self sufficient
And as to 50 years since former powers left, tell that to the many countries where France still has military presence for instance, or Angola where its only about 30 years since the Portugese gave independance, or practically every country on that continent which has been meddled in by the US, former Soviet Union, big western corporations and now China. Also why are we comparing Africa to Europe, the circumstances, the culture, the geography, the history, the opportunities, the people are totally different and its not as if when gaining independence many of the countries where left well equiped or prepared for it. Yet in one life time you expect them to have progressed to a point that has taken us hundreds of years to reach. Regardless of the reasons however yes there are tens of millions of people on that continent who would die without aid so lets give it where it is needed along with support to help them become self sufficient
LSC
says...
12:35am Fri 13 May 11
But surely Tony, if the Africans have embraced god as our missionaries taught/told them to do, he will be helping them any time soon? Why would they, as god's people, be dying by the million? Why is he punishing these uneducated people, while leaving me alone as I deny he even exists? Why doesn't he send a pox onto my house, and spare a poor child? Why doesn't he send a pox onto the pope and spare millions?
There are 3 possible explanations. 1: There is a god but it isn't the one from the bible; either in loving or vengeful form. 2: there is a god but he is kinda busy and will be right back. Or 3: there is no god.
Pick one of the above.
There are 3 possible explanations. 1: There is a god but it isn't the one from the bible; either in loving or vengeful form. 2: there is a god but he is kinda busy and will be right back. Or 3: there is no god.
Pick one of the above.
garston tony
says...
8:59am Fri 13 May 11
LSC all of your 3 choices are wrong. Firstly God does not cause bad things to happen, there is evil in this world just as there is good and this evil will do everything it can to turn people away from God. We each have freedom of choice, to believe God or not, to do right or wrong and often 'bad' things happen as a consequence of wrong decisions. The Bible does not promise that all will be well and happy and continually smelling of roses and indeed there are many incidents where people, even His 'chosen' people, went through very difficult times. We need to remember that we do not know the bigger picture and God allows things to happen for His own reasons, again many of the people who went through hard times in the Bible ended up stronger afterwards or even in position to help others (for instance Joseph being sold into slavery by his brothers but ultimately becoming Pharoes right hand man and ensuring the survival of not just the Egyptians but his own people).
On a personal level many Christians, including myself in the past, have questioned God when going through hardship or hard times. But looking back you are able to see that you are now in a better, stronger place and you can see the places where God has worked to your benefit. Similarly many non believers have needed to go through hardship to be able to see God, God does not bring that hardship onto them but the situation has allowed those people to hear His voice speaking to them.
As to you as a non believer God does not meet out summary punishments either, He loves each and every one of us regardless of our sins and will continually try to get our attention in the hope that we turn onto a right path. However there will come a point when Jesus will return again and at that point all our fates will be sealed, those that have turned to Him will be saved and have eternal life and those that havent will cease to exist.
On a personal level many Christians, including myself in the past, have questioned God when going through hardship or hard times. But looking back you are able to see that you are now in a better, stronger place and you can see the places where God has worked to your benefit. Similarly many non believers have needed to go through hardship to be able to see God, God does not bring that hardship onto them but the situation has allowed those people to hear His voice speaking to them.
As to you as a non believer God does not meet out summary punishments either, He loves each and every one of us regardless of our sins and will continually try to get our attention in the hope that we turn onto a right path. However there will come a point when Jesus will return again and at that point all our fates will be sealed, those that have turned to Him will be saved and have eternal life and those that havent will cease to exist.
garston tony
says...
9:25am Fri 13 May 11
I do appreciate why some people do not believe in a God because whilst there is so much evidence to support the Bible there does come a point where you do have to take a step in faith and this is where it becomes so difficult for many especially those who do not wish to believe. However do not discount the very real experiences of the several hundreds of millions of people who today could give personal testimony about God and how He has worked in their lives. You could go down the route of JD and just name call, trying to write those people off but that’s flying in the face of reality.
Unfortunately the likes of JD are too intellectually immature to realise that, too stupid to realise that science despite all its advances knows so little about us and the world around us, so unwilling to accept that they just name call or ignore all that doesn’t fit into their neat little view of the world. There is just too much out there to do that and it’s a shame that people like JD metaphorically put their hands over their ears whilst shouting la la la la trying to drown out what they do not understand.
The reality is that even if you do not believe in the existence of God you can not disprove it either and the only people you are hurting by denying God is yourself.
Unfortunately the likes of JD are too intellectually immature to realise that, too stupid to realise that science despite all its advances knows so little about us and the world around us, so unwilling to accept that they just name call or ignore all that doesn’t fit into their neat little view of the world. There is just too much out there to do that and it’s a shame that people like JD metaphorically put their hands over their ears whilst shouting la la la la trying to drown out what they do not understand.
The reality is that even if you do not believe in the existence of God you can not disprove it either and the only people you are hurting by denying God is yourself.
John Dowdle
says...
2:33pm Fri 13 May 11
More fairy tales from Tony.
Just what verifiable contemporary historical evidence is there for:-
A) The historical existence of Joseph?
B) His sale into slavery by his brothers?
C) His elevation by any Pharaoh?
I suspect Tony will draw the same blank as when he tries to find historically verifiable evidence for the claimed existences of Moses and Jesus.
So: no reliable evidence to support the existences of God, Moses, Joseph and Jesus. Pretty thin gruel for a belief.
Don't cite the bible. You might just as well cite "Alice in Wonderland" as evidence for the existence of any of the characters in that work of fiction.
Tony is right in one respect: there are many millions of duped individuals on our planet who believe entirely in various forms of religious nonsense.
In the past, the proportion of the Earth's population believing in supernatural beings was even greater.
I read recently that there have been something like 2,700 different gods in the course of recorded human history.
The vast majority, who many people truly believed in, are no longer worshipped or accorded god-like powers.
Where, now, are Zeus, Mars, Jupiter, Odin, Thor and the countless many other ancient European gods?
All turned to dust; as will become Yahweh, "God" and Allah in due course.
Hopefully, they will be the last ones.
That is the great hope for humankind. As people become better educated and more knowledgeable, they will put this religious nonsense behind them and exercise their own true free will.
Just what verifiable contemporary historical evidence is there for:-
A) The historical existence of Joseph?
B) His sale into slavery by his brothers?
C) His elevation by any Pharaoh?
I suspect Tony will draw the same blank as when he tries to find historically verifiable evidence for the claimed existences of Moses and Jesus.
So: no reliable evidence to support the existences of God, Moses, Joseph and Jesus. Pretty thin gruel for a belief.
Don't cite the bible. You might just as well cite "Alice in Wonderland" as evidence for the existence of any of the characters in that work of fiction.
Tony is right in one respect: there are many millions of duped individuals on our planet who believe entirely in various forms of religious nonsense.
In the past, the proportion of the Earth's population believing in supernatural beings was even greater.
I read recently that there have been something like 2,700 different gods in the course of recorded human history.
The vast majority, who many people truly believed in, are no longer worshipped or accorded god-like powers.
Where, now, are Zeus, Mars, Jupiter, Odin, Thor and the countless many other ancient European gods?
All turned to dust; as will become Yahweh, "God" and Allah in due course.
Hopefully, they will be the last ones.
That is the great hope for humankind. As people become better educated and more knowledgeable, they will put this religious nonsense behind them and exercise their own true free will.
garston tony
says...
8:01pm Fri 13 May 11
You keep on using this term as people get better educated, I assume you actually mean as science makes further discoveries. Well listen up chump all the scientific discoveries actually strengthens the message in the Bible and I can guarantee you that all future discoveries will continue to do so. What you would call 'proof' that the Bible is wrong is actually man made suposition and therefore nothing.
And what a suprise but you couldnt resist having a go at those that believe in God. Isnt it at least about 6 decades since you left the playground JD? Grow up. And yes the billion plus Christians are all being forced to believein God, arms locked in a half nelson are they? What planet are you on exactly? They follow Christianity out of free will and they follow it because they know it is right. If they dont believe that they can walk away anytime.
Just because you dont get it doesnt make it wrong numpty, but hey you are the ultimate arrogant plonker and actually do believe what you say goes dont you.
What you will find JD is that people now are far better educated than they were say 100 years ago, 200 years ago, 1000 years ago yet strangely your prediction that better education means the rejection of Christianity is wrong as it is still here, still going strong over 2000 years since the birth of Jesus.
Like i've said you believe your science fiction JD its your choice but dont make the mistake that just because some people have literally made up an alternative hugely flawed even by their own admission fabrication to 'explain' the world around us that that is any way proof that God does not exist.
And what a suprise but you couldnt resist having a go at those that believe in God. Isnt it at least about 6 decades since you left the playground JD? Grow up. And yes the billion plus Christians are all being forced to believein God, arms locked in a half nelson are they? What planet are you on exactly? They follow Christianity out of free will and they follow it because they know it is right. If they dont believe that they can walk away anytime.
Just because you dont get it doesnt make it wrong numpty, but hey you are the ultimate arrogant plonker and actually do believe what you say goes dont you.
What you will find JD is that people now are far better educated than they were say 100 years ago, 200 years ago, 1000 years ago yet strangely your prediction that better education means the rejection of Christianity is wrong as it is still here, still going strong over 2000 years since the birth of Jesus.
Like i've said you believe your science fiction JD its your choice but dont make the mistake that just because some people have literally made up an alternative hugely flawed even by their own admission fabrication to 'explain' the world around us that that is any way proof that God does not exist.
John Dowdle
says...
1:54am Sat 14 May 11
Leaving aside the hysterical outburst above, I am pleased to be able to confirm that the anti-gay Bill before the Ugandan Parliament has been dropped.
In part, this was due to the efforts of Bishop Christopher Senyonjo - at no small personal cost to himself. Needless to say, he is no longer accepted by the official Church of Uganda.
It is unfortunate to have also to report the murder of 80 people in Pakistan and the grievous woundings of hundreds of others by religious murderers yesterday.
How well educated were the murderers involved in this action? What religious programming were they subjected to to end up by throwing away their own lives for no good or moral purpose?
In part, this was due to the efforts of Bishop Christopher Senyonjo - at no small personal cost to himself. Needless to say, he is no longer accepted by the official Church of Uganda.
It is unfortunate to have also to report the murder of 80 people in Pakistan and the grievous woundings of hundreds of others by religious murderers yesterday.
How well educated were the murderers involved in this action? What religious programming were they subjected to to end up by throwing away their own lives for no good or moral purpose?
LSC
says...
1:56am Sat 14 May 11
"And yes the billion plus Christians are all being forced to believein God, arms locked in a half nelson are they? What planet are you on exactly? They follow Christianity out of free will and they follow it because they know it is right. If they dont believe that they can walk away anytime."
Got to call you again there Tony. Children are 'christened' before they can talk. As fast as they are taught the ABC they are taught that not believing in god means they go to hell for eternity. They are bullied and frightened into religion. Monsters under the bed stuff if they don't tow the line. Missing mass is a sin.) More like missing the collection plate is a sin!). Hell was invented to scare children, and starts at such an early time in life that it scars them for life. I know of huge guys who are afraid of dogs because they were scared by one as a small child; despite the fact they could punch out a doberman, if the trauma hits at the right time, it stays. The church is not stupid, i'll give it that. They get them young. A large amount of adults who 'find god' suddenly seem to do so from a prison cell, or after a trauma. In other words: Religion plays on the vulnerable. The young, the afraid, the weak and those in despair. Add to that the uneducated of Africa and South America, and there is your world religion in its finery.
Got to call you again there Tony. Children are 'christened' before they can talk. As fast as they are taught the ABC they are taught that not believing in god means they go to hell for eternity. They are bullied and frightened into religion. Monsters under the bed stuff if they don't tow the line. Missing mass is a sin.) More like missing the collection plate is a sin!). Hell was invented to scare children, and starts at such an early time in life that it scars them for life. I know of huge guys who are afraid of dogs because they were scared by one as a small child; despite the fact they could punch out a doberman, if the trauma hits at the right time, it stays. The church is not stupid, i'll give it that. They get them young. A large amount of adults who 'find god' suddenly seem to do so from a prison cell, or after a trauma. In other words: Religion plays on the vulnerable. The young, the afraid, the weak and those in despair. Add to that the uneducated of Africa and South America, and there is your world religion in its finery.
garston tony
says...
4:44pm Sat 14 May 11
JD, you cant have it both ways. It was a Ugandan minister who opposed the anti gay rights bill in Uganda, a minister who obviously really understands what God is about unlike his fellow believers. This is not proof that there is no God nor that His word is not right, just further proof that people throughout the ages have mis interpreted it or brought their own agenda to the table. Ditto the attacks in Pakistan, its interesting to note that Pakistan has suffered horrendously in terror attacks with around 30,000 people killed almost all of whom are Muslims. These attacks whilst carried out by so called Muslims are political rather than religious in nature and are being done in an attempt to get the government to stop supporting the war against the taliban etc.
LSC your point just highlights what I have said time and time again, which is the importance of individuals to do their own thinking. If they dont then yes it is possible to get laid astray again not any evidence against religion or God just against ignorance. By the way whilst in comparison the people of Africa and South America may not have the same level of education as us your comments imply that they are also stupid which they are not by any stretch of the imagination.
God is not there for the healthy but for the 'sick' LSC, those that think they lead the perfect life are often far away from God whilst it is those that have a hard time of it or fall on hard times that without all the frippery around them are able to hear Him better. I have mentioned in the past the fact that many Christians, including myself, lose or have difficulty connecting with God because they become too involved or obsessed with wordly things. For me when I was younger and first started my business it was doing well and whilst initially I praised God for that I eventually started to forget to be thankful, took things for granted and began to be too engrossed in possessions, cars etc. It took nearly losing my business to make me realise that even in the good times I needed to make sure I stayed connected. Hence similarly why people who find themselves in jail, or hitting some sort of rock bottom or who have actually never had the 'good times' find it easier to connect the God.
Like i said neither of you can provide any evidence that God does not exist, just evidence of human nature and its ability to corrupt things or become too complacent. Your also showing immence arrogance writing off the real experiences of hundreds of millions of people especially when your own beliefs are acknowledged as being entirely man made with the real known scientific facts actually supporting the bible
LSC your point just highlights what I have said time and time again, which is the importance of individuals to do their own thinking. If they dont then yes it is possible to get laid astray again not any evidence against religion or God just against ignorance. By the way whilst in comparison the people of Africa and South America may not have the same level of education as us your comments imply that they are also stupid which they are not by any stretch of the imagination.
God is not there for the healthy but for the 'sick' LSC, those that think they lead the perfect life are often far away from God whilst it is those that have a hard time of it or fall on hard times that without all the frippery around them are able to hear Him better. I have mentioned in the past the fact that many Christians, including myself, lose or have difficulty connecting with God because they become too involved or obsessed with wordly things. For me when I was younger and first started my business it was doing well and whilst initially I praised God for that I eventually started to forget to be thankful, took things for granted and began to be too engrossed in possessions, cars etc. It took nearly losing my business to make me realise that even in the good times I needed to make sure I stayed connected. Hence similarly why people who find themselves in jail, or hitting some sort of rock bottom or who have actually never had the 'good times' find it easier to connect the God.
Like i said neither of you can provide any evidence that God does not exist, just evidence of human nature and its ability to corrupt things or become too complacent. Your also showing immence arrogance writing off the real experiences of hundreds of millions of people especially when your own beliefs are acknowledged as being entirely man made with the real known scientific facts actually supporting the bible
John Dowdle
says...
5:37pm Sat 14 May 11
Tony is late getting up today !!
What you must grasp is that religiously motivated people in the Taliban do not differentiate between religion and politics.
They favour the creation of a world-wide theocracy, based upon the application of Sharia "law".
Anyone who opposes them can "legitimately" (in their twisted minds) be eliminated.
That is what religious extremisim eventually leads to.
There have been recent "cash for fatwas" scandals in India. Hopefully, they may provide a similar motivating force to that of Martin Luther and his objections to the selling of papal indulgences, i.e. we can all hope for a wave of muslim reformation in future, which could lead - through a form of muslim enlightenment - to a more liberal philosophy emerging.
The present "Arab Spring" might just be some sort of harbinger for this development.
Hopefully, it will lead them to accept a secular form of society is infinitely superior to that of a theocracy.
In their case, at least, it is possible that their self-delusional chains will be cast off at some future stage; yet, even here in the more advanced West, we still see examples - such as Tony - who sets himself against every rational basis for leading an enlightened and informed life. Amazing, really !!!
What you must grasp is that religiously motivated people in the Taliban do not differentiate between religion and politics.
They favour the creation of a world-wide theocracy, based upon the application of Sharia "law".
Anyone who opposes them can "legitimately" (in their twisted minds) be eliminated.
That is what religious extremisim eventually leads to.
There have been recent "cash for fatwas" scandals in India. Hopefully, they may provide a similar motivating force to that of Martin Luther and his objections to the selling of papal indulgences, i.e. we can all hope for a wave of muslim reformation in future, which could lead - through a form of muslim enlightenment - to a more liberal philosophy emerging.
The present "Arab Spring" might just be some sort of harbinger for this development.
Hopefully, it will lead them to accept a secular form of society is infinitely superior to that of a theocracy.
In their case, at least, it is possible that their self-delusional chains will be cast off at some future stage; yet, even here in the more advanced West, we still see examples - such as Tony - who sets himself against every rational basis for leading an enlightened and informed life. Amazing, really !!!
LSC
says...
1:22am Sun 15 May 11
"LSC your point just highlights what I have said time and time again, which is the importance of individuals to do their own thinking"
That is the point Tony!! Religion actively opposes what you are saying. The idea of people thinking for themselves fills them with horror! The church didn't allow bibles written in English for many years; owning one was a capital offence. Explain that? Sharia law doesn't allow free thinking. The pope can make rulings and laws on a whim. 'Priest holes' exist in many big houses etc because you know what you did to people who thought for themselves? You killed them. What you are really saying is like some twisted groucho marx statement. People can think what they like, as long as i agree with it. *waves cigar*
That is the point Tony!! Religion actively opposes what you are saying. The idea of people thinking for themselves fills them with horror! The church didn't allow bibles written in English for many years; owning one was a capital offence. Explain that? Sharia law doesn't allow free thinking. The pope can make rulings and laws on a whim. 'Priest holes' exist in many big houses etc because you know what you did to people who thought for themselves? You killed them. What you are really saying is like some twisted groucho marx statement. People can think what they like, as long as i agree with it. *waves cigar*
garston tony
says...
9:49am Mon 16 May 11
JD I do grasp what is the motivation for people like the Taliban, I also grasp that they are wrong as do most Muslims and non Muslims in the world. Yes they are twisted, yes they commit horrendous crimes. Why are you telling me something that everyone except the Taliban know?
As to the Arab Spring this is not a revolt against Islam JD, it’s a revolt against despotic/dictatorial
/incompetent leadership and we should fully support those fighting the oppression. However lets not forget that our own government over many years has supported the said oppressive regimes if not indeed helped put them and keep them in power.
LSC religion does not actively discourage individual investigation, some people might oppose it these days but the religions themselves don’t. If you go to your average protestant church you'll find it full of people who study the Bible for themselves and who are more than happy, able and willing to debate its meaning and validity. The reason the church in the past did discourage it was indeed for a reason of control, but that was not Biblical but entirely the human failings of those in charge as were 1001 other things they did which were wrong and mostly motivate by greed not Biblical principles.
What both JD and LSC continually fail to grasp is the difference between what the religion actually says and what humans do - in the past especially these two points were sometimes miles apart. Its not a matter of me agreeing or not with your views it’s a matter of your views actually being factually incorrect LSC.
As to the Arab Spring this is not a revolt against Islam JD, it’s a revolt against despotic/dictatorial
/incompetent leadership and we should fully support those fighting the oppression. However lets not forget that our own government over many years has supported the said oppressive regimes if not indeed helped put them and keep them in power.
LSC religion does not actively discourage individual investigation, some people might oppose it these days but the religions themselves don’t. If you go to your average protestant church you'll find it full of people who study the Bible for themselves and who are more than happy, able and willing to debate its meaning and validity. The reason the church in the past did discourage it was indeed for a reason of control, but that was not Biblical but entirely the human failings of those in charge as were 1001 other things they did which were wrong and mostly motivate by greed not Biblical principles.
What both JD and LSC continually fail to grasp is the difference between what the religion actually says and what humans do - in the past especially these two points were sometimes miles apart. Its not a matter of me agreeing or not with your views it’s a matter of your views actually being factually incorrect LSC.
garston tony
says...
9:51am Mon 16 May 11
Oh, and I like your comment said with no hint of irony LSC, condemning what happened in the past to those who thought for themselves yet you yourself continually attack people who of their own free will believe something different to you! Oh the hilarious hypocrisy.
I would point both you and JD again to the many 'qualified experts' in the field of evolutionary and big ban theory who whilst putting their belief in those man made theories are intelligent enough to admit that they can not disprove the existence of a God and who quite rightly do not attack the beliefs of others. I think it is those with little grasp of the reality of the evolutionary theory, or who lack overall intelligence or who have an axe to grind who choose to do otherwise.
I would point both you and JD again to the many 'qualified experts' in the field of evolutionary and big ban theory who whilst putting their belief in those man made theories are intelligent enough to admit that they can not disprove the existence of a God and who quite rightly do not attack the beliefs of others. I think it is those with little grasp of the reality of the evolutionary theory, or who lack overall intelligence or who have an axe to grind who choose to do otherwise.
John Dowdle
says...
8:51pm Mon 16 May 11
Tony is still wrongly claiming that absence of positive evidence for the existence of something means that it must exist.
Bertrand Russell dealt with this when he said that he could claim to believe in the existence of a tea pot, floating in space on the opposite side of the Sun to the Earth.
You could not see it from E£arth but that did not prove it did not exist so he could claim - genuinely or tongue-in-cheek - that the tea pot did exist.
A more recent example is to claim that a four-sided trinagle exists, which is coloured pink and hates blue sphere.
Again, it exists in another dimension so it cannot be seen but, of course, this does not mean it does not exist, does it? Therefore, it must exist.
Finally, of course, the most recent example which is linked to religion is the Holy Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which provides a history of the Earth's creation and a history of the original inhabitants of the planet Earth - pirates and saucy wenches, who were sustained by holy gushing beer fountains, emanating from holy volcanoes.
It is just as likely an explanation of the origins of the Universe as anything written in Tony's old dusty books and it has the decided advantage of being much more entertaining - and much shorter in content.
So, come on Tony; come over to belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster - you know you will feel immensely better if you do.
Bertrand Russell dealt with this when he said that he could claim to believe in the existence of a tea pot, floating in space on the opposite side of the Sun to the Earth.
You could not see it from E£arth but that did not prove it did not exist so he could claim - genuinely or tongue-in-cheek - that the tea pot did exist.
A more recent example is to claim that a four-sided trinagle exists, which is coloured pink and hates blue sphere.
Again, it exists in another dimension so it cannot be seen but, of course, this does not mean it does not exist, does it? Therefore, it must exist.
Finally, of course, the most recent example which is linked to religion is the Holy Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, which provides a history of the Earth's creation and a history of the original inhabitants of the planet Earth - pirates and saucy wenches, who were sustained by holy gushing beer fountains, emanating from holy volcanoes.
It is just as likely an explanation of the origins of the Universe as anything written in Tony's old dusty books and it has the decided advantage of being much more entertaining - and much shorter in content.
So, come on Tony; come over to belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster - you know you will feel immensely better if you do.
garston tony
says...
10:35pm Mon 16 May 11
JD you are the kettle calling the pot black now. There is NO evidence for big bang/evolution despite all these years of trying to find it but you believe in those theories and use its fiction as a basis to attack my own belief for which there is plenty of evidence. Did you take lessons in outstanding stupidity and hypocrasy or does it really come naturally to you?
I'm not asking you not to believe in your man made theories JD just pointing out that you cant use them to attack my own beliefs. Its quite simple, shame you are too simple yourself to get it!
The Bible and God backed up by historical facts and the experiences of billions of people v. big bang and evolution which despite the huge amounts of money and time spent by so called experts has not come up with one shred of evidence to support it.
I'm not asking you not to believe in your man made theories JD just pointing out that you cant use them to attack my own beliefs. Its quite simple, shame you are too simple yourself to get it!
The Bible and God backed up by historical facts and the experiences of billions of people v. big bang and evolution which despite the huge amounts of money and time spent by so called experts has not come up with one shred of evidence to support it.
John Dowdle
says...
12:01am Tue 17 May 11
At least I can point towards the real existence of the Universe and the fact that its rate of expansion and the red shift of light from the farthest observable points of the Universe support the idea of a big bang.
Tony can only point towards the non-existence of things, suchg as space teapots and non-existent aliens.
It is interesting to note that Stephen Hawking has concluded 'There is no heaven; it's a fairy story'. Hawking supports the concept of big bang and evolution. He has also stated that the Universe was not created by God.
Who should anyone believe: Tony - whoever he is - or internationally renowned scientist Stephen Hawking?
There is substantial evidence to support the idea of evolution, which even Tony has accepted in the past.
Tony thinks he is uniquely qualified to make pronouncements regarding evolution so I expect he will want, instead, to advocate other ideas.
Before he does, he would do well to remember that in 2008 a Church of England cleric apologised for attacks on Darwin and the Vatican stated that Darwin's theories are compatible with the bible.
Of course, I am sure Sarah Palin would be happy to line up alongside Tony any time he needs an "expert" witness of his own - but does he really need a crackpot on his side?
Tony can only point towards the non-existence of things, suchg as space teapots and non-existent aliens.
It is interesting to note that Stephen Hawking has concluded 'There is no heaven; it's a fairy story'. Hawking supports the concept of big bang and evolution. He has also stated that the Universe was not created by God.
Who should anyone believe: Tony - whoever he is - or internationally renowned scientist Stephen Hawking?
There is substantial evidence to support the idea of evolution, which even Tony has accepted in the past.
Tony thinks he is uniquely qualified to make pronouncements regarding evolution so I expect he will want, instead, to advocate other ideas.
Before he does, he would do well to remember that in 2008 a Church of England cleric apologised for attacks on Darwin and the Vatican stated that Darwin's theories are compatible with the bible.
Of course, I am sure Sarah Palin would be happy to line up alongside Tony any time he needs an "expert" witness of his own - but does he really need a crackpot on his side?
LSC
says...
12:55am Tue 17 May 11
Did you see this story on the BBC Tony?
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-northern-ir
eland-13390951
These are the people who think for themselves, right? And stop using Big Bang arguments against me. i have said time and again I don't know if it is true. I've just said it is a theory that makes some sense.
I'm also offended that you said I implied Africans were stupid. I said un-educated, which is a fact. If you need to twist my words to make a point, you really are on the defensive. Which is a shame, you were doing rather well. To go back to an earlier point i made. There is an old army saying: 'There are no atheists on a battlefield'. Or in other words, when you are frightened and confused, you will take any life line that is thrown. Doesn't make it true though.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-northern-ir
eland-13390951
These are the people who think for themselves, right? And stop using Big Bang arguments against me. i have said time and again I don't know if it is true. I've just said it is a theory that makes some sense.
I'm also offended that you said I implied Africans were stupid. I said un-educated, which is a fact. If you need to twist my words to make a point, you really are on the defensive. Which is a shame, you were doing rather well. To go back to an earlier point i made. There is an old army saying: 'There are no atheists on a battlefield'. Or in other words, when you are frightened and confused, you will take any life line that is thrown. Doesn't make it true though.
LSC
says...
1:05am Tue 17 May 11
Oh and Tony; According to your completely rational and sane chums, the Rapture starts on the 21st of this month, and the world ends. If you float past my window on the way to salvation, give me a wave. I promise to admit I was wrong and take it on the chin.
John Dowdle
says...
1:49am Tue 17 May 11
LSC: there is a United Kingdom Armed Forces Humanist Association (UKAFHA) and they have a web site at http://www.armedforc
eshumanists.org.uk/. They would take issue with the claim that 'There are no atheists on a battlefield'. They would, I believe, argue that the non-religious are in the majority in most armed services.
If you go to http://www.ebiblefel
lowship.com/outreach
/tracts/may21/ you will see it shows May 21st as Judgment Day, with the end of the world on October 21st, 2011.
Like you, I will be happy to wave “Goodbye” to Tony when he is raptured skyward.
I just hope Tony has no pets.
In the USA, a publicly minded group of atheists is offering a post-Rapture pet-minding service at http://eternal-earth
bound-pets.com.
I am not sure if there is a similar UK organisation.
Do you think we should start one?
eshumanists.org.uk/. They would take issue with the claim that 'There are no atheists on a battlefield'. They would, I believe, argue that the non-religious are in the majority in most armed services.
If you go to http://www.ebiblefel
lowship.com/outreach
/tracts/may21/ you will see it shows May 21st as Judgment Day, with the end of the world on October 21st, 2011.
Like you, I will be happy to wave “Goodbye” to Tony when he is raptured skyward.
I just hope Tony has no pets.
In the USA, a publicly minded group of atheists is offering a post-Rapture pet-minding service at http://eternal-earth
bound-pets.com.
I am not sure if there is a similar UK organisation.
Do you think we should start one?
John Dowdle
says...
1:52am Tue 17 May 11
I have just realised that the peace conference, which was the basis of the original article, has already taken place.
Perhaps we ought now to show some respect to the Amadayya Muslim Association and cease using their news item for our own purposes?
I am sure there will be plenty of other opportunities to set Tony straight.
Perhaps we ought now to show some respect to the Amadayya Muslim Association and cease using their news item for our own purposes?
I am sure there will be plenty of other opportunities to set Tony straight.
garston tony
says...
8:55am Tue 17 May 11
And I can point to the Bible JD where it states (thousands of years before its 'discovery' by science) that the universe is expanding. That fact is not evidence of big bang, just an expanding universe and far from refuting the Bible science once again supports it. JD you obviously have poor memory, brought on by your dottage no doubt, otherwise you would recall that I have already pointed out that many theories of evolution and big bang support the Bible as well as the fact that much of known science also supports the Bible. Thank you for admitting that but why you think that is a negative I don’t know? And I don’t claim to be an expert on evolution, but seeing as it is totally made up who can really call themselves an expert?
JD you're the one mentioning tea pots and space aliens, you're the one whose entire belief has not one shred of concrete evidence. You are the man pointing out the splinter in someone elses eye whilst ignoring the massive plank in your own. Hawkins has no proof for his theories, they are just that theories so why you are trying to use his words as evidence that God does not exist who knows? This is the whole problem with your position JD, your taking peoples opinions and believing them to be statements of fact and that is so unscientific.
JD you're the one mentioning tea pots and space aliens, you're the one whose entire belief has not one shred of concrete evidence. You are the man pointing out the splinter in someone elses eye whilst ignoring the massive plank in your own. Hawkins has no proof for his theories, they are just that theories so why you are trying to use his words as evidence that God does not exist who knows? This is the whole problem with your position JD, your taking peoples opinions and believing them to be statements of fact and that is so unscientific.
garston tony
says...
9:03am Tue 17 May 11
Ok LSC, you said un-educated but the implication was easy to make. I would say again however not being educated does not make what you believe to be wrong either. And in terms of how the universe began educated in what exactly. Shall we tell them about the large hydron collider and the higgs bosun, oh no because that theory has been proven wrong. What other theory that has been proven wrong shall we teach the un educated Africans then or shall we just stick to the theories for which there is no evidence but that havent been proven wrong? Yet.
As to twisting words hows about not putting words in other peoples mouths LSC? When have I claimed that the 2nd coming is on the 21st? You'll find it is a minority group spreading that around, they are not representative of the Christian faith no less because the Bible is quite clear that we can not predict when Jesus will come again and it is pointless to try and do so.
Oh, and turning to God in times of trouble doesn’t make it untrue either LSC and I would again point to the testimonies of billions of people who would testify to what God has done for them in their lives. Or are you just going to ignore that too, or name call? There is so much that science can not explain and its stupid of people like JD to ignore that.
By the way the armed forces to a survey every year apparently and one of the questions asked is about faith, despite what JD and his pals would claim 88% of the armed forces stated they had a religion.
As to twisting words hows about not putting words in other peoples mouths LSC? When have I claimed that the 2nd coming is on the 21st? You'll find it is a minority group spreading that around, they are not representative of the Christian faith no less because the Bible is quite clear that we can not predict when Jesus will come again and it is pointless to try and do so.
Oh, and turning to God in times of trouble doesn’t make it untrue either LSC and I would again point to the testimonies of billions of people who would testify to what God has done for them in their lives. Or are you just going to ignore that too, or name call? There is so much that science can not explain and its stupid of people like JD to ignore that.
By the way the armed forces to a survey every year apparently and one of the questions asked is about faith, despite what JD and his pals would claim 88% of the armed forces stated they had a religion.
garston tony
says...
9:05am Tue 17 May 11
More delussion from JD, where exactly have you set me straight? All you've done is use other peoples opinions stating them as fact, where is the science in that JD? You might as well have quoted me lines from Star Trek to try and disprove religion for the validity of your arguments! But yes seeing as you took us off track lets call it a day if you want. I'm sure it wont be long before another story is posted that either JD or Roy will be happy to jump on to attack people of belief.
John Dowdle
says...
9:19am Tue 17 May 11
Tony: Tut, tut, tut !!
Is this how you show respect for your Muslim brothers - really?
Tut, tut, tut !!!!
Is this how you show respect for your Muslim brothers - really?
Tut, tut, tut !!!!
garston tony
says...
12:50pm Tue 17 May 11
You are such an immature child JD. Go play with your imaginary theories now, theres a good boy
John Dowdle
says...
12:47am Wed 18 May 11
Believing in things that do not exist cannot even be dignified by the description 'imaginary theories'.
We humanists have never launched an Inquisition, Albigensian Crusade - or any other crusade for that matter - and we have not murdered other people in the name of some idiotic religion ideology or another.
That has always been the role of religionist and other extremist lunatics.
Before commenting on others' immaturity, you would do well to remember the appallingly bloody history you always seek to defend.
You don't need to be immature; you need to be apologetic for every second of every minute of every hour of every year that remains of your life.
You should be craving forgiveness not from non-existent beings but from all of humankind for promoting your vulgar bloodthirsty beliefs.
We humanists have never launched an Inquisition, Albigensian Crusade - or any other crusade for that matter - and we have not murdered other people in the name of some idiotic religion ideology or another.
That has always been the role of religionist and other extremist lunatics.
Before commenting on others' immaturity, you would do well to remember the appallingly bloody history you always seek to defend.
You don't need to be immature; you need to be apologetic for every second of every minute of every hour of every year that remains of your life.
You should be craving forgiveness not from non-existent beings but from all of humankind for promoting your vulgar bloodthirsty beliefs.
LSC
says...
1:51am Wed 18 May 11
Let me first apologise for the late night posts; work is work. But Tony, you have to stop trying to pigeon-hole me. I'm not a Humanist. I don't have a label at all. I'm me. I don't need to belong to any club or nail my colours to any mast. I'm a 'floating voter'. I listen to all sides, and make my mind up. This makes christians cross, naturally. Probably humanists too. But there it is. I'm willing to debate you all. What you might notice what I don't do is name-calling. Unless you count me calling the indoctrination of children as evil, name calling.
Tony; my guess is your parents were relegious. I'm guessing they were christian. I'm guessing you learned about jesus as you learned the ABC. I'm guessing you went to church as a youngster. But perhaps i'm wrong. Perhaps they were a Muslim/Hindu mix, but you found your own path, and they were happy for you to do so. I'm not sure how often this happens though. It SHOULD do, in your world. A muslim dad, a hindu mum and a christian child. And yet it seems rare. surely the Truth will overcome parental and peer pressure? Nope. it doesn't. Muslim parents have muslim kids, catholics breed catholics. That isn't enlightenment. That is tribal. Nothing more, nothing less.
Tony; my guess is your parents were relegious. I'm guessing they were christian. I'm guessing you learned about jesus as you learned the ABC. I'm guessing you went to church as a youngster. But perhaps i'm wrong. Perhaps they were a Muslim/Hindu mix, but you found your own path, and they were happy for you to do so. I'm not sure how often this happens though. It SHOULD do, in your world. A muslim dad, a hindu mum and a christian child. And yet it seems rare. surely the Truth will overcome parental and peer pressure? Nope. it doesn't. Muslim parents have muslim kids, catholics breed catholics. That isn't enlightenment. That is tribal. Nothing more, nothing less.
LSC
says...
2:03am Wed 18 May 11
And i'd enjoy a comment on my link, where a good community project is destroyed because teenage girls listen to music; therefore they are cast out from the church! Don't tell me; that is some people getting the bible wrong. If they all did it your way and couldn't interpertate it for themselves, it would all be ok. That is about what the pope says. QED.
garston tony
says...
11:03am Wed 18 May 11
LSC I appreciate that you were only able to respond late but JD tut tut yourself for breaking your own self impossed silence.
garston tony
says...
11:15am Wed 18 May 11
The thing about Humanist I am finding out from you JD is that they are so unwilling to look away from the path they are on, that they are so entrenched with their beliefs they are scared of looking at reality in case it shatters them and refuse to admit the massive inconsistencies in their own beliefs. Yes probably the same thing you would throw back at me however I am not saying that you shouldnt believe what you want to believe am I, just the inconsistencies.
Maybe if this was put up in 100 foot lettering you might get it JD, YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST. The fact that you use man made theory to form your OPINION puts your stead fast assertion somewhere between pathetic and laughable.
Onto the historical FACTS then JD. Most if not all 'bloodthirsty' deeds done in the name of religion have been totally motivate by human desires either for power, greed, politics, revenge or a mixture. Religion may have been used as an excuse for the actions but the actions had no basis in the actual religion. FACT, the Inquisition was motivated by the Spanish kings desire to gain land and power. FACT the Albigensian Crusade was the French wishing to gain land and power. See the theme JD. My religion is not bloodthirsty, PEOPLE are. Get your facts right JD, I know you believe in something man made but if having a pop at religion you can actually look up the historical facts you know. But you're deliberately mis representing things arent you, I may not believe in evolution/big bang but at least I am not lying to try and disprove it.
Maybe if this was put up in 100 foot lettering you might get it JD, YOU HAVE NO PROOF THAT GOD DOES NOT EXIST. The fact that you use man made theory to form your OPINION puts your stead fast assertion somewhere between pathetic and laughable.
Onto the historical FACTS then JD. Most if not all 'bloodthirsty' deeds done in the name of religion have been totally motivate by human desires either for power, greed, politics, revenge or a mixture. Religion may have been used as an excuse for the actions but the actions had no basis in the actual religion. FACT, the Inquisition was motivated by the Spanish kings desire to gain land and power. FACT the Albigensian Crusade was the French wishing to gain land and power. See the theme JD. My religion is not bloodthirsty, PEOPLE are. Get your facts right JD, I know you believe in something man made but if having a pop at religion you can actually look up the historical facts you know. But you're deliberately mis representing things arent you, I may not believe in evolution/big bang but at least I am not lying to try and disprove it.
garston tony
says...
11:32am Wed 18 May 11
LSC I'm glad that you are a free thinking, my comments were just responding to yours however as 'free thinking' as you are you have taken a quite aggressive position against religion with my points being a) that whilst unfortunately you had a bad experience of it when you were younger that that experience is not representative of the true faith b) there is plenty of evidence to support the Bible and God c) people should be open minded and investigate for themselves and not just take the easy option of going along with the stereotypes etc d) you can't use an unproven theory of evolution or big bang to disprove God e) science can not explain everything which is why people like JD like to lie and name call instead of actually taking into account what can not be explained such as the personal testimony of hundreds of millions of people f) what science does know for a fact actually supports the idea of intelligent design g) the actions of a minority should not be taken as representing the whole.
My name calling is also reserved for JD seeing as he's happy to start that descent as well as to lie and ignore reality so my apologies if I have at any point included you in any of that. I doubt there are any real Christians who would object to you having your own mind, all the ones I know would encourage investigation and indeed would be happy to discuss their own and other peoples beliefs all day long. Whilst not putting words in their mouths I hope I do think they would also point out the problem with taking the lowest common denominator and applying it to the whole. Even JD cant disagree seeing the speed which he dropped Roy Stockdill from the humanist club after it was point out that Roy's beliefs are less that humane in nature.
As to me yes I was brought up a Christian but I left the church, as did a number of my friends, before I was 20 and lived quite a few years without faith before returning to God. I am not a member of the same denomination as I was as a youth but having kept in touch with many of my friends from my younger days it is interesting that almost all of them have also returned to the faith with all having the same experience as me, that life was going well but something was just not right and it wasn’t until we came back to God that things were complete. I find it interesting to see that even in the church I go to know that around 40-50% of the youth leave but invariably within 10, 15 years 95% of them will be back and all for basically the same reason, basically sometimes you have to step away for a while to actually realise what is right and what is important.
My name calling is also reserved for JD seeing as he's happy to start that descent as well as to lie and ignore reality so my apologies if I have at any point included you in any of that. I doubt there are any real Christians who would object to you having your own mind, all the ones I know would encourage investigation and indeed would be happy to discuss their own and other peoples beliefs all day long. Whilst not putting words in their mouths I hope I do think they would also point out the problem with taking the lowest common denominator and applying it to the whole. Even JD cant disagree seeing the speed which he dropped Roy Stockdill from the humanist club after it was point out that Roy's beliefs are less that humane in nature.
As to me yes I was brought up a Christian but I left the church, as did a number of my friends, before I was 20 and lived quite a few years without faith before returning to God. I am not a member of the same denomination as I was as a youth but having kept in touch with many of my friends from my younger days it is interesting that almost all of them have also returned to the faith with all having the same experience as me, that life was going well but something was just not right and it wasn’t until we came back to God that things were complete. I find it interesting to see that even in the church I go to know that around 40-50% of the youth leave but invariably within 10, 15 years 95% of them will be back and all for basically the same reason, basically sometimes you have to step away for a while to actually realise what is right and what is important.
garston tony
says...
12:21pm Wed 18 May 11
A churches style of worship is a personal/group choice LSC. If they choose to be ultra conservative that is their choice and right to do so. Yes it is a huge shame for the girls brigade and yes this could lead to that church alienating the youth but whilst the brigade itself can not be transferred there is nothing to stop its former members joining another brigade which is allowed to use music, dancing etc or joining a church which includes those things in its services.
The Bible does mention on a number of occassions God being worshiped and praised through music and dance, the idea that it is not acceptable to do so is actually a cultural one not Bibical. All this story highlights is that every one is different. Some want to be ultra conservative, some understand the need for the younger generation to have an outlet to express themselves in worship, some are happy to just cater for the younger generation.
I would point you in the direction of a church like Soul Survivor which started in Watford and is one of many churches that incorporates in its servives much contemporary music/instruments and where the membership is encouraged to worship through dance and indeed it is a church mostly led by youth.
Its horses for courses and people usually find a church that suits their own idea of how we should worship. There are churches where convention says you wear your sunday best, other churches where shorts and hawain shirts are the norm. Churches where the worship is slick, other churches where its all over the place. Churches where the services run by clockwork and finish at 12 on the dot, other churches that are laid back and go on all day. Churches in church style buildings, churches in pubs. Churches catering for Afro Carribean culture, churches for Eastern Europeans. Churches where you'll only sing the old standards, churches where Hillsongs and Chris Tomlinson are the songs of choice.
Again LSC no offense you are taking a story and trying to claim something bad which doesnt exist. Its a shame what that church has done might alienate their youth but by the same token who are we to critisise if the church majority want to worship in an ultra conservative style? Its often a generational or cultural thing but nothing to shout about. Its like someone who likes x-factor complaining about someone who likes Strictly come dancing. There is nothing wrong with liking or not either program, it’s a non argument.
The Bible does mention on a number of occassions God being worshiped and praised through music and dance, the idea that it is not acceptable to do so is actually a cultural one not Bibical. All this story highlights is that every one is different. Some want to be ultra conservative, some understand the need for the younger generation to have an outlet to express themselves in worship, some are happy to just cater for the younger generation.
I would point you in the direction of a church like Soul Survivor which started in Watford and is one of many churches that incorporates in its servives much contemporary music/instruments and where the membership is encouraged to worship through dance and indeed it is a church mostly led by youth.
Its horses for courses and people usually find a church that suits their own idea of how we should worship. There are churches where convention says you wear your sunday best, other churches where shorts and hawain shirts are the norm. Churches where the worship is slick, other churches where its all over the place. Churches where the services run by clockwork and finish at 12 on the dot, other churches that are laid back and go on all day. Churches in church style buildings, churches in pubs. Churches catering for Afro Carribean culture, churches for Eastern Europeans. Churches where you'll only sing the old standards, churches where Hillsongs and Chris Tomlinson are the songs of choice.
Again LSC no offense you are taking a story and trying to claim something bad which doesnt exist. Its a shame what that church has done might alienate their youth but by the same token who are we to critisise if the church majority want to worship in an ultra conservative style? Its often a generational or cultural thing but nothing to shout about. Its like someone who likes x-factor complaining about someone who likes Strictly come dancing. There is nothing wrong with liking or not either program, it’s a non argument.
John Dowdle
says...
9:43pm Wed 18 May 11
As a good humanist, I do not lie, cheat or steal. I leave that sort of behaviour to criminals and religionists, particularly those who are biblical literalists, creationists or advocates of so-called intelligent design.
As a rationalist, I support the view that I proportion my belief to the evidence available to support it, which is why I reject the concepts of Gods and prophets.
It is the responsibility of the claimant to produce real evidence for what they claim exists. No one has ever produced any real evidence for the existence of supernatural beings, “souls”, or an after-life. It is all patent nonsense.
When I was Vice-Chair of Watford Council’s Development Control Committee, I supported – against strong reservations on the part of some other Councillors – the application from Soul Survivor to use premises on the Greycaine Industrial Estate for their youth-related activities.
I did so on the grounds that it would provide alternative activities for young people without disrupting local residential areas – something along the unconnected lines of brothels operating in Germany and Holland.
I still think it was the right decision to make, though I am now aware that such organisations mislead young people (thinking it is for their own good) when it comes to offering them choices around birth control and abortion.
They – and similar, usually christian, organisations – invariably mislead and waste time in order to create a situation where it will become too late for the young woman involved to be able to exercise any real choice in the matter.
In doing this, these organisations are not generally acting in the better interests of the young people involved but are acting in their own narrow organisational interests.
Nick Clegg has announced a Bill for Second Chamber Reform today. I shall be terminating this blog so that I can focus on this far more important area of concern.
I will campaign, with others, to ensure that the Second Chamber is fully elected and that the current situation, where clerics have automatic right of place, is finally brought to an end.
Compared to Tony’s delusional ramblings, that is a far more important matter.
If anyone would like to know more about the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association, they will be participating in the Celebration 2011 Event at the Multi Racial Community Centre on Durban Road from 11.00 a.m. on Bank Holiday Monday, 31th May.
As a rationalist, I support the view that I proportion my belief to the evidence available to support it, which is why I reject the concepts of Gods and prophets.
It is the responsibility of the claimant to produce real evidence for what they claim exists. No one has ever produced any real evidence for the existence of supernatural beings, “souls”, or an after-life. It is all patent nonsense.
When I was Vice-Chair of Watford Council’s Development Control Committee, I supported – against strong reservations on the part of some other Councillors – the application from Soul Survivor to use premises on the Greycaine Industrial Estate for their youth-related activities.
I did so on the grounds that it would provide alternative activities for young people without disrupting local residential areas – something along the unconnected lines of brothels operating in Germany and Holland.
I still think it was the right decision to make, though I am now aware that such organisations mislead young people (thinking it is for their own good) when it comes to offering them choices around birth control and abortion.
They – and similar, usually christian, organisations – invariably mislead and waste time in order to create a situation where it will become too late for the young woman involved to be able to exercise any real choice in the matter.
In doing this, these organisations are not generally acting in the better interests of the young people involved but are acting in their own narrow organisational interests.
Nick Clegg has announced a Bill for Second Chamber Reform today. I shall be terminating this blog so that I can focus on this far more important area of concern.
I will campaign, with others, to ensure that the Second Chamber is fully elected and that the current situation, where clerics have automatic right of place, is finally brought to an end.
Compared to Tony’s delusional ramblings, that is a far more important matter.
If anyone would like to know more about the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association, they will be participating in the Celebration 2011 Event at the Multi Racial Community Centre on Durban Road from 11.00 a.m. on Bank Holiday Monday, 31th May.
LSC
says...
12:33am Fri 20 May 11
Fair comments Tony, and well put. Although I don't really follow the logic!
i will try to answer (counter?) your ABC points, but have to keep scrolling up to see them so forgive the possible disjointed reply.
a/ How could i know that? They ALL claim as passionetly as you do to be the true faith. Why should I believe you and not them, just because you are more liberal? Doesn't make you right.
b/ Not convinced at all; there is evidence of people in the region; there is perhaps evidence of people who believed. But no proof. If there was proof, this discussion wouldn't be happening.
c/ Agreed. This applies to religous people too who simply believe because because their parents do, or sadly, told them to.
d/ I never have. My opinion is based on the lack of proof of god, not some other theory over-riding it.
e/ I never said it could, and nor does science. Indeed most scientists admit we are but scratching the surface of knowledge. Remember, scientists used to be killed in cold blood as blasphemers, but without them hospitals would be a bit rubbish. And as stated before; the numbers game is meaningless. Unless you admit that Ra the Sun God exists; about 50% of the civilised world of the time believed he rowed across the sky daily in a boat.
f/ No it doesn't. It suggests evolution.
g/ Schoolboy error Tony. YOU are a minority, so I should by you own words, discount your argument. If I do anything, I should become a catholic or a muslim. Possibly a maoist. You said above that millions can't be wrong, so you must be right. And yet billions disagree with you, so they must be right: by your own words. This is the kind of double talk that makes me feel I'M right, no matter what anyone says.
Enough for now, that scrolling wore my eyes out!
i will try to answer (counter?) your ABC points, but have to keep scrolling up to see them so forgive the possible disjointed reply.
a/ How could i know that? They ALL claim as passionetly as you do to be the true faith. Why should I believe you and not them, just because you are more liberal? Doesn't make you right.
b/ Not convinced at all; there is evidence of people in the region; there is perhaps evidence of people who believed. But no proof. If there was proof, this discussion wouldn't be happening.
c/ Agreed. This applies to religous people too who simply believe because because their parents do, or sadly, told them to.
d/ I never have. My opinion is based on the lack of proof of god, not some other theory over-riding it.
e/ I never said it could, and nor does science. Indeed most scientists admit we are but scratching the surface of knowledge. Remember, scientists used to be killed in cold blood as blasphemers, but without them hospitals would be a bit rubbish. And as stated before; the numbers game is meaningless. Unless you admit that Ra the Sun God exists; about 50% of the civilised world of the time believed he rowed across the sky daily in a boat.
f/ No it doesn't. It suggests evolution.
g/ Schoolboy error Tony. YOU are a minority, so I should by you own words, discount your argument. If I do anything, I should become a catholic or a muslim. Possibly a maoist. You said above that millions can't be wrong, so you must be right. And yet billions disagree with you, so they must be right: by your own words. This is the kind of double talk that makes me feel I'M right, no matter what anyone says.
Enough for now, that scrolling wore my eyes out!
garston tony
says...
7:21am Mon 23 May 11
Just come back from a lovely weekend in Prague, if anyone is still bothering to read this just a relatively quick response. John does not lie, steal or cheat and yet in his second sentence does a mixture of all three. Oh well, to be expected.
It is the responsibility of the claimant to provide real evidence is it JD. So where is the REAL evidence for big bang/evolution? There isnt any, just theory JD and this is one of my central points you cant use theory to 'denounce' another belief so get over yourself.
Once again you've taken a minority viewpoint and generalised it when it comes to abortion JD. Thought you didnt lie or cheat?
Sincerely all the best with your campaign for an elected 2nd chamber.
LSC, just look at the evidence objectively for yourself and then make your own mind up thats all the advise I can give you really. But f) not science has no proof for either evolution or big bang and all that it can actually prove does support intelligent design. Fact LSC. g) i'm in the minority? Nearly 70% of people in this country identified themselves as Christians and there are an estimatd 2.1 billion around the world so not really a minority are we? I was talking of the minority within the Christian or Muslim beliefs anyway, the extremists who always get the headlines but who dont actually represent their faiths.
Finally I bought on my way home at the airport the latest issue of New Scientist. Only quickly scanned it so far but really looking forward to reading its front page advertised article on 'When science gets it wrong', an article highlighting 9 fundamentals of scientific belief/theory on which so much other theory of big bang/evolution for instance have been based on which have been proven wrong.
It is the responsibility of the claimant to provide real evidence is it JD. So where is the REAL evidence for big bang/evolution? There isnt any, just theory JD and this is one of my central points you cant use theory to 'denounce' another belief so get over yourself.
Once again you've taken a minority viewpoint and generalised it when it comes to abortion JD. Thought you didnt lie or cheat?
Sincerely all the best with your campaign for an elected 2nd chamber.
LSC, just look at the evidence objectively for yourself and then make your own mind up thats all the advise I can give you really. But f) not science has no proof for either evolution or big bang and all that it can actually prove does support intelligent design. Fact LSC. g) i'm in the minority? Nearly 70% of people in this country identified themselves as Christians and there are an estimatd 2.1 billion around the world so not really a minority are we? I was talking of the minority within the Christian or Muslim beliefs anyway, the extremists who always get the headlines but who dont actually represent their faiths.
Finally I bought on my way home at the airport the latest issue of New Scientist. Only quickly scanned it so far but really looking forward to reading its front page advertised article on 'When science gets it wrong', an article highlighting 9 fundamentals of scientific belief/theory on which so much other theory of big bang/evolution for instance have been based on which have been proven wrong.
LSC
says...
2:49pm Mon 23 May 11
Tony, you are very much in a minority. Firstly there are those who are religious, and those who are not. Then there are the types of religion; moaists, toaists, bhuddists, muslims, hindus, jews, christians and innumerable Japanese, Innuit, Moari, Aborigional, Native American, Voodoo, rastafarian etc etc. Then we break down christianity. Protestants, catholics, methodists, baptists, mormons, jehovas witnesses, scientologists, pentacostals, brethren (various sects), amish, unitarian, quakers, presbetarian, lutheron, orthodox (Russian, Serbian and Greek to name but 3 but all different), anglican, restorationists, sedevacantists, coptics, christadelphians, charismatics, anabaptists and adventists. To name but a few, and there are many, many more. Assuming you are one of the above, even with your own 'sect' you will find disagreement; some people who attend your church might say the flood wasn't literal, but a metaphor; some will say that a day for god was actually a thousand years, some might believe cutting Samsons hair was symbolic, not literally draining his strength and that Goliath might not have been as big as suggested (if he was, he would have broken his pelvis every time he took a step). So if you look at the above facts, I think you will find you are actually in a tiny, tiny minority in what you actually believe to be true. I would even guess that the largest group of people that think EXACTLY the same thing, are actually atheists. So if we are playing the 'most must be right game', I win.
garston tony
says...
8:22am Tue 24 May 11
I think the name of the game is investigate and make your own mind up (rather than believe stereotype/follow the crowd/take the easiest path). Sure there are many different beliefs and differences within beliefs (hence unfortunately extremists who kill others or fools like the one that predicted the rapture/those that believe him or people who put you off when you were younger) but I would say that 95% of all people regardless of beliefs are basically decent. It is the 5% or so who have their own agenda who cause the trouble for the rest.
Fine religion is not for you but I cant stress enough that for all the experts, all the programs etc. in the media potraying it as fact there is no real, actual evidence for either big bang or evolution. It is 100% hypothesis, theory and suposition and as much as it may sound right and reasonable to you and many others the lack of any real evidence for it is a massive question mark over its validity.
Fine religion is not for you but I cant stress enough that for all the experts, all the programs etc. in the media potraying it as fact there is no real, actual evidence for either big bang or evolution. It is 100% hypothesis, theory and suposition and as much as it may sound right and reasonable to you and many others the lack of any real evidence for it is a massive question mark over its validity.
garston tony says...
11:22am Tue 3 May 11
Seriously though, to all those who complain about Muslims etc. here is a group who promote the true Islamic message of peace to all. Hell will freeze over i'm sure before this happens but it would do Roy a world of good to attend this meeting