The MI6 Community Religion and Faith Discussion Space (for members of all faiths - and none!)

15354565859108

Comments

  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2018 Posts: 17,860
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @Risico007 will hopefully be of more use to you.

    I posted this earlier to a response so far of tumbleweed:
    can I at least enquire what it is that led you believe in God?
    I may well be wrong and you had a moment of road to Damascus like clarity at the age of 20 (please set me straight if this is the case) but I assume, as with the vast majority of 'believers', that what actually happened was your parents fed it to you at an early age. If so why do you still not believe in Father Christmas (I'm assuming you don't but there again you believe in talking snakes so who knows?) as they told you that was true too?

    Anyway a few weeks ago we (exceedingly) generously offered to park the evidence* thing and posed the question 'Let's assume God exists, why is he worthy of your love, respect and devotion?'

    If you aren't qualified to say what led you, Dragonpol, to believe in God then I don't know who is?

    I'm not going to go into that now as I can't see how it would benefit this thread when you are looking for hard evidence. What I believe and why is surely irrelevant to you. I believe and you don't and never the twain shall meet. That should be enough without going into some needless religious autobiography on my part.
  • Posts: 14,862
    We don't care about religious autobiography whatever that is. You said there was evidence of the veracity of the Bible. Now you say there's only your faith to back up your claims.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2018 Posts: 17,860
    Ludovico wrote: »
    We don't care about religious autobiography whatever that is. You said there was evidence of the veracity of the Bible. Now you say there's only your faith to back up your claims.

    You don't, but @TheWizardOfIce was interested in hearing about that if you read his post above: why I chose to believe in Christianity. That was what I was in fact referring to.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    patb wrote: »
    Do we have faith that the Earth orbits the Sun or do we know it?
    I have faith in that, but also that the Sun orbits the Earth.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Ludovico wrote: »
    So far the claims from theists on this thread has been backed up by claims of having evidence and then dodging due to whatever excuse they could find.

    This isn't even an excuse just the equivalent of putting your fingers in your ears and shouting 'Lalala I can't hear you':
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @Risico007 will hopefully be of more use to you.

    I don't know what @Dragonpol's CV looks like but are we to presume from now on he won't comment on anything unless he has a degree in it?

    Best cinematography in the series thread: 'I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @RogerDeakins will hopefully be of more use to you.'

    Best music: 'I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @DavidArnold will hopefully be of more use to you.'

    Best stunts: 'I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @BJWorth/RemyJulienne will hopefully be of more use to you.'

    Dullest acting: 'I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @RoryKinnear will hopefully be of more use to you.'

    The stunt one brings up an interesting conundrum; what if BJ Worth can't drive? Yes he knows his onions on aerial stunts but would that mean he is unqualified to offer an opinion on the spiral car jump?

    Guess I'm buggered here from now on as I dropped out of uni so all I've got is A-level English Lit, Geog and French so I can only comment in threads about John Donne's poetry, plate tectonics (this thread not the place for that as we all know God made the earth not the laws of physics) and declining the verb 'avoir'.

    Actually I do have an NRSWA certificate in traffic management and am Silver Command for major incidents trained so if anyone wants to start a 'Roadworks and RTCs' thread I'm your man.
    patb wrote: »
    Simply by calling it "faith" rather than fact, is a clear admission that the evidence is not there. Do we have faith that 2 and 2 is 4 or do we know it? Do we have faith that the Earth orbits the Sun or do we know it? Do we have faith in the ability for a 747 wing to lift the aircraft or do we know it? If God is fact and the evidence is there, then it's something that you know. It's not a mattter of faith.

    definition: faith; "strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof."

    So by calling it faith, QED, an admission of lack of proof.

    Nail hit most squarely on the head and straight through Christ's wrist.

    'Faith' is just a synonym for 'I haven't got a single observable fact about something but I hope it's true.'

    There's no virtue in having 'faith', quite the contrary it often marks you out as an idiot who ignores the actual facts and sticks their head in the sand.

    Got cancer? Just have 'faith' that your immune system is strong enough to fight it off and you'll be fine.

    Just got made redundant and totally skint? Go and buy a lottery ticket and have a bit of 'faith' that you'll beat the 14 million to one odds and win.

    Watching England in a penalty shoot out at the World Cup? Just have 'faith' they won't bottle it and book your hotel for the next round.

    All of the above are far more likely than the existence of God but only a fool would actually believe they would happen. But when someone employs the same stupidity and calls it religion we are told we have to respect them. Sorry but I don't respect fools no matter what the government and, indeed, the law says.
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    You don't, but @TheWizardOfIce was interested in hearing about that if you read his post above: why I chose to believe in Christianity. That was what I was in fact referring to.

    You are absolutely correct I would be fascinated to hear it.
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I don't have the answers to your questions. I'm not well enough qualified to provide them. @Risico007 will hopefully be of more use to you.

    I posted this earlier to a response so far of tumbleweed:
    can I at least enquire what it is that led you believe in God?
    I may well be wrong and you had a moment of road to Damascus like clarity at the age of 20 (please set me straight if this is the case) but I assume, as with the vast majority of 'believers', that what actually happened was your parents fed it to you at an early age. If so why do you still not believe in Father Christmas (I'm assuming you don't but there again you believe in talking snakes so who knows?) as they told you that was true too?

    Anyway a few weeks ago we (exceedingly) generously offered to park the evidence* thing and posed the question 'Let's assume God exists, why is he worthy of your love, respect and devotion?'

    If you aren't qualified to say what led you, Dragonpol, to believe in God then I don't know who is?

    I'm not going to go into that now as I can't see how it would benefit this thread when you are looking for hard evidence. What I believe and why is surely irrelevant to you. I believe and you don't and never the twain shall meet. That should be enough without going into some needless religious autobiography on my part.
    You're correct again. I couldn't give the slightest toss what you choose to believe and it is indeed absolutely irrelevant to me.

    What I am interested in is the process by which you arrived at the point you are at now of believing in talking snakes.

    I presume when you burst kicking and screaming out of the womb that you didn't believe in God (and talking snakes) as you had no concept of anything at that stage. But inbetween having your umbilical cord cut and now you have somehow decided to ignore rationality and logic. What I'm interested in his how you crossed fro one to the other?

    I know you haven't got any hard evidence to back your 'proof' claim from 2 months ago because a) if it was out there it wouldn't be a secret only you knew - I think it might have made the news b) you would have told us by now instead of constantly trying to obfuscate and when that doesn't work say you are going to leave the thread.

    I don't ask you for any evidence (we all know @Risico007 is going to wow us with that soon) I just ask you to explain why an outwardly intelligent and perceptive person chooses to turn his back sanity and reason. Because it is utterly perplexing.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2018 Posts: 17,860
    I just find it dreary discussing it all with athiests. I won't be drawn into it any further and it's just getting exceedingly boring now. It's all just scoffing at religion and I've heard it all before.

    I'm tired and weary of this thread. It's an albatross around my neck and I won't be commenting on it again.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    before-he-slaughters-you-let-me-remind-you-that-he-20009598.png
  • Posts: 14,862
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    We don't care about religious autobiography whatever that is. You said there was evidence of the veracity of the Bible. Now you say there's only your faith to back up your claims.

    You don't, but @TheWizardOfIce was interested in hearing about that if you read his post above: why I chose to believe in Christianity. That was what I was in fact referring to.

    Let me put it this way: even if you claimed you personally, physically met Jesus I would believe your sincerity, but not the actual reality of this alleged event. You could be deluded. What matters is the evidence leading to believe that God exists and he is the Christian god. Personal experience is irrelevant unless it can be backed up externally and verified
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited March 2018 Posts: 9,117
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I just find it dreary discussing it all with athiests. I won't be drawn into it any further and it's just getting exceedingly boring now.

    As far as I can tell you haven't discussed anything. And you are right it is getting exceedingly boring (your increasingly desperate attempts to avoid addressing any question posed at you I mean).
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I'm tired and weary of this thread. It's an albatross around my neck and I won't be commenting on it again.

    More fingers in ears and 'Lalala I can't hear you?'

    This thread might as well be closed if people are unwilling to discuss their point of view. We're all adults here so I'm sorry but 'I'm bored of this now' really is not a tenable debating position.
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Personal experience is irrelevant unless it can be backed up externally and verified

    Come on! You still rely on personal experience for that.
  • RemingtonRemington I'll do anything for a woman with a knife.
    Posts: 1,533
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I just find it dreary discussing it all with athiests. I won't be drawn into it any further and it's just getting exceedingly boring now. It's all just scoffing at religion and I've heard it all before.

    I'm tired and weary of this thread. It's an albatross around my neck and I won't be commenting on it again.

    Seconded, my friend.
  • Posts: 14,862
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Personal experience is irrelevant unless it can be backed up externally and verified

    Come on! You still rely on personal experience for that.

    Not really. You rely on observable evidence.

    @Dragonpol You made the claims that there was evidence demonstrating the veracity of the Bible. And all we got was some debunked hoaxes about the Ark. Now you appeal to faith and special knowledge before running away from the thread you created.
  • Posts: 4,602
    It's a pattern I have seen many times: a reflex/defense mechanism kicking in when it's clear that reason and evidence does/can threaten a faith. "this is boring", " debates going in circles", etc etc. Atheists dont do this, atheists are up for the debate and thirsty for dialogue. But, at the same time, it's atheists who are accused of being blinkered.

    How can a debate about life, the universe and everything be boring?

  • Posts: 12,292
    patb wrote: »
    It's a pattern I have seen many times: a reflex/defense mechanism kicking in when it's clear that reason and evidence does/can threaten a faith. "this is boring", " debates going in circles", etc etc. Atheists dont do this, atheists are up for the debate and thirsty for dialogue. But, at the same time, it's atheists who are accused of being blinkered.

    How can a debate about life, the universe and everything be boring?

    Funny last sentence. It’s true though; it’s the ultimate philosophical topic(s).
  • ThunderfingerThunderfinger Das Boot Hill
    Posts: 45,489
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Personal experience is irrelevant unless it can be backed up externally and verified

    Come on! You still rely on personal experience for that.

    Not really. You rely on observable evidence.

    But you don t need to experience that evidence personally? You can rely on hearsay?

    Even hearsay needs to be experienced personally, how else would you know about it?
  • Posts: 14,862
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Ludovico wrote: »
    Personal experience is irrelevant unless it can be backed up externally and verified

    Come on! You still rely on personal experience for that.

    Not really. You rely on observable evidence.

    But you don t need to experience that evidence personally? You can rely on hearsay?

    Even hearsay needs to be experienced personally, how else would you know about it?

    I'm wondering if you're joking. No you don't rely on hearsay and you don't rely on personal experience. You rely on evidence. The Big Bang happened and no human has ever seen it, so did many volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, etc.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I just find it dreary discussing it all with athiests.

    What did you think was going to happen? We'd all say how great God is, start ranking the saints or have hymn elimination games?

    This isn't the middle ages when religion was the all powerful school bully everyone was in fear of so couldn't risk speaking out.

    Sorry if we're spoiling the relgiosycophancy party you might have envisaged this thread becoming but you did put 'and none' in the thread title. Maybe 30 years ago we'd have been British about it and meekly respected religion but thankfully non-believers are waking up and realising they do not have to sit there silently allowing this cancer to run riot in society.

    Religion is on the terminal decline in this country (not in others alas) and the sooner we are able to relegate it to a cultural vestigial tail at the base of humnanity's spine the better.

    And the fact that you childishly prefer to run away from any debate is greatly encouraging as it shows you have no cards in your hand to play at all.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,572
    When you went to church with your parents as a teenager @TheWizardOfIce how did you eventually overcome any need to comply with that?

    How do your parents react when you give it to them with both barrels these days? I mean in the same way you write about religion on this thread? I assume you do.
  • edited March 2018 Posts: 4,602
    I'm pretty surprised we have got to page 56 on the thread as it was always going to be pretty one sided. I used to spend hours both attending these debates and watching youtube debates with Hitch, Dawkins etc. But, eventually you see a pattern forming with those of faith producing the same stuff over and over again with, obviously, no evidence at all and a desperate, lazy cocktail of cliches, tautology, deflection etc.

    Ultimately, they have nothing to offer but an insight into their own fear, insecurity and legacy of brain washing. I'm trying to come up with an example of a truely original contribution from the faith side and it is hard. Within the encouraging context of fading religion within Western culture, if they don't do something new, then it really will be "time gentleman please" pretty quickly.

    Meanwhile .....

    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/mar/06/study-reveals-fgm-india-female-genital-mutilation

  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    Posts: 9,117
    NicNac wrote: »
    When you went to church with your parents as a teenager @TheWizardOfIce how did you eventually overcome any need to comply with that?

    How do your parents react when you give it to them with both barrels these days? I mean in the same way you write about religion on this thread? I assume you do.

    Looking back, in my teens we just went through the motions out of habit I think, turning up at church every week. There was a sense of only going out of duty for the whole family for many years but I think my sister and I just went along with it because we were well behaved children who did what out parents told us to.

    Obviously the moment I left home I never set foot in church again and strangely they just seemed to stop going too so thankfully there's no schism in the family as we all just laugh at how preposterous it all is now.

    When I've asked them about it they just said they came to realise it was all clearly bullshit. Not in a road to Damascus moment but more just a slow drip drip effect over years.

    My gran was and my disabled uncle is still seriously religious and we never bring up atheism with them as if it gives them comfort fine.

    Didn't stop us chuckling at the whole thing when we bought my uncle some holy water from Fatima but then Ryanair made my mum pour it away as they wouldn't allow liquids on the plane so we filled up the Mary shaped bottle with tap water at Stansted. Obvioulsy we will go to hell for that but he was happy with his holy water so where's the harm? It's no more dishonest than the guy who sold it in the first place claiming it had 'magical' properties because it is 'holy'.
  • Posts: 4,602
    My parents sent me and my brother to Sunday school but, with hindsight, I think it was a good opportunity for my parents to "spend some quality time together" if you get my drift?

    Now I'm married and have two boys, I can see the attraction!!
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,572
    My gran was and my disabled uncle is still seriously religious and we never bring up atheism with them as if it gives them comfort fine.

    Didn't stop us chuckling at the whole thing when we bought my uncle some holy water from Fatima but then Ryanair made my mum pour it away as they wouldn't allow liquids on the plane so we filled up the Mary shaped bottle with tap water at Stansted. Obvioulsy we will go to hell for that but he was happy with his holy water so where's the harm? It's no more dishonest than the guy who sold it in the first place claiming it had 'magical' properties because it is 'holy'.

    There's a TV comedy sketch right in there.

    I was never made to go to church. My dad liked to go occasionally but only for a good sing song. He couldn't care less where he ended up when his time came.

    As a result I have no real beef with anyone who takes comfort from religion because it was never pressed on me (like your uncle and an aunt of my own. She never lost faith even when her husband died relatively young and her grandson ended up a paraplegic after a motorbike accident).

    When my family went to Rome a few years back the one thing that stuck in my mind was the homeless people, and beggars all camped around the walls of Vatican City. There was a strange irony to it that wouldn't go away.
  • TheWizardOfIceTheWizardOfIce 'One of the Internet's more toxic individuals'
    edited March 2018 Posts: 9,117
    patb wrote: »
    I'm pretty surprised we have got to page 56 on the thread as it was always going to be pretty one sided. I used to spend hours both attending these debates and watching youtube debates with Hitch, Dawkins etc. But, eventually you see a pattern forming with those of faith producing the same stuff over and over again with, obviously, no evidence at all and a desperate, lazy cocktail of cliches, tautology, deflection etc.

    Yep. It seems that this thread is basically defunct as a debate as so strong are their arguments all the religionists have run away.
    patb wrote: »
    Ultimately, they have nothing to offer but an insight into their own fear, insecurity and legacy of brain washing. I'm trying to come up with an example of a truely original contribution from the faith side and it is hard. Within the encouraging context of fading religion within Western culture, if they don't do something new, then it really will be "time gentleman please" pretty quickly.
    Quite an encouraging article:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/12095251/Church-of-England-attendance-plunges-to-record-low.html

    765,000 attendees. That's quite pathetic given this is supposed to be something that is by definition the most important thing in people's lives. As a stark comparison if the top 10 premier league clubs are all at home on the same week their combined attendance is 558,000. And that's just the premier league and people actually going to the matches. If you add Sky's viewing figures you are comfortably over the 1 million mark.

    Yet Richard Scudamore doesn't have a seat in the House of Lords and the law making powers that come with it. Jaime Carragher and Gary Nev aren't consulted on their views every time their is a terrorist attack. Premier League season ticket holders would get arrested if they start chopping bits off their children.

    When is religion going to be stripped of it's power and influence and be relegated to a weekend hobby like going to football or IKEA?

    The C of E has become an irrelevance and represents a fraction of the population. Yet it's influence far outweighs it's constituency and as long as you have people like the vicar's daughter in charge we will get nowhere.
    NicNac wrote: »
    She never lost faith even when her husband died relatively young and her grandson ended up a paraplegic after a motorbike accident.
    It's a particular quirk of the religious that they can have a life filled with misery and misfortune yet still be convinced God is all loving and looking out for them.
    NicNac wrote: »
    When my family went to Rome a few years back the one thing that stuck in my mind was the homeless people, and beggars all camped around the walls of Vatican City. There was a strange irony to it that wouldn't go away.
    Careful son - don't start asking why the Vatican doesn't use it's wealth to help the poor. That's not how the whole thing works at all. The poor give their money to the Vatican in return for cast iron guarantees they will go to heaven. The church starting to use it's ill gotten gains for good? Utter madness.
  • Posts: 14,862
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    I just find it dreary discussing it all with athiests.

    What did you think was going to happen? We'd all say how great God is, start ranking the saints or have hymn elimination games?

    This isn't the middle ages when religion was the all powerful school bully everyone was in fear of so couldn't risk speaking out.

    Sorry if we're spoiling the relgiosycophancy party you might have envisaged this thread becoming but you did put 'and none' in the thread title. Maybe 30 years ago we'd have been British about it and meekly respected religion but thankfully non-believers are waking up and realising they do not have to sit there silently allowing this cancer to run riot in society.

    Religion is on the terminal decline in this country (not in others alas) and the sooner we are able to relegate it to a cultural vestigial tail at the base of humnanity's spine the better.

    And the fact that you childishly prefer to run away from any debate is greatly encouraging as it shows you have no cards in your hand to play at all.

    Maybe the debate was supposed to be about transsubstantiation versus consubstantiation.
  • DragonpolDragonpol https://thebondologistblog.blogspot.com
    edited March 2018 Posts: 17,860
    Some people on this thread have an axe to grind with me. I'll say no more than that and return to permanent radio silence on this ragging thread. It's merely a small part of a wider picture on Bond fora. The discussion of religion is merely the context for this axe-grinding .

    That's why I'm walking away, to quote Craig David. I was foolish enough to create a thread like this, but we learn from our mistakes. I don't want it to be closed as that would smack of censorship, but I won't be commenting on it any further.

    Eventually the athiests will be talking to themselves and it seems that they now are. That's fine enough with me. I'll go back to commenting on James Bond.
  • Posts: 14,862
    I have no ax to grind with anyone here. But when someone makes extraordinary claims and says they have been proven then I'll call him on that. Draping yourself in the cloak of a martyr is a cop out and prerty much telling us that you have no evidence to back up your beliefs, which is a complete contradiction to what you asserted.
  • NicNacNicNac Administrator, Moderator
    Posts: 7,572
    Dragonpol wrote: »
    Some people on this thread have an axe to grind with me. I'll say no more than that and return to permanent radio silence on this ragging thread. It's merely a small part of a wider picture on Bond fora. The discussion of religion is merely the context for this axe-grinding .

    That's why I'm walking away, to quote Craig David. I was foolish enough to create a thread like this, but we learn from our mistakes. I don't want it to be closed as that would smack of censorship, but I won't be commenting on it any further.
    Eventually the athiests will be talking to themselves and it seems that they now are. That's fine enough with me. I'll go back to commenting on James Bond.

    Well I think the non believers have made their points many times over, dressing them up in various shades of metaphor and analogy, and believers are generally steering clear of any further brow beating.

    Therefore we may be moved to close the thread for a while anyway. If we do I will state here and now it has nothing to do with any individual's request.

    Thanks @Dragonpol .
  • Posts: 14,862
    BEFORE the theists bring their proof @NicNac ? That would be a shame. Especially since our immortal souls depend on it.
  • j_w_pepperj_w_pepper Born on the bayou. I can still hear my old hound dog barkin'.
    Posts: 8,727
    Well, as so many times before, maybe the people getting all worked up should take a few hints from Gandhi:
    https://huffingtonpost.com/entry/letter-gandhi-christianity-sold-50000_us_5a9d64f6e4b089ec353d4e26
  • Posts: 14,862
    I wouldn't call Jesus the greatest teacher of mankind. A philosopher maybe, a cult leader certainly, a legendary figure too. But some of the things he said were at best morally dubious.
This discussion has been closed.