|
Post by KTJ on Sept 25, 2016 13:02:18 GMT 10
Well....I'm looking at the two dozen or so bottles of crushed-pear cider in my fridge and thinking the sun is well over the yard-arm (well it would be if there was any sun here today....the first day of daylight saving in NZ is crap weather all over the country), so I might just indulge in a bottle or two of said cider.
I don't have to go to work tomorrow, nor on Tuesday, so why not?
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 25, 2016 13:44:32 GMT 10
I'm about to sit down to a splendid lunch of roast pork, gravy, stewed apple, crackling, steamed greens and roast potatoes. Washed down with glasses of bubbly from the Adelaide Hills
|
|
|
Post by KTJ on Sept 25, 2016 13:57:55 GMT 10
Is that the “ after church” Sunday roast? (sorry....I just couldn't resist that....)
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 25, 2016 18:18:21 GMT 10
So the argument is about the validity of fantasy. Fantasy is brilliant! As long as you understand it is fantasy and don't pretend it is reality. CS Lewis = great fantasy Bible = crap fantasy See, it's not that hard to understand.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 25, 2016 18:38:57 GMT 10
Why is it crap fantasy? Because you say so?
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 25, 2016 18:42:21 GMT 10
Is that the “ after church” Sunday roast? (sorry....I just couldn't resist that....)Resist what? Oh I see! That was your little attempt at sarcasm! Pathetic.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 25, 2016 20:19:10 GMT 10
Why is it crap fantasy? Because you say so? Yes! But not just me. The bible is full of lies which take it away from the realms of fantasy: Talking snakes and donkeys Woman made from a Man's Rib The whole history of mankind based on one man, one woman, their two sons one of whom kills the other (incest anyone???) Noah's Ark The whale in which you can live Birth without sex Resurrection after death Do I really need to go on? It is a collection of badly told stories. And yet, they keep getting told as if real.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 25, 2016 23:56:06 GMT 10
No obligation on any of us to believe a word of it. Personally I'm of the view that those who insist that it should be read literally as factual are missing the point. But I won't labour the point. When they get up my nose is when they insist that everyone should do as they do - and so we get "creationism" in schools. I'll happily man the barricades against that one in the name firstly of objective science and secondly of freedom from religion. It'd probably mean I'd fall foul of the ayatollahs in Iran and the imams in Saudi Arabia but do OK in a country such as ours.
But freedom from religion also should imply freedom of religion - which means that while you get to enjoy your secular universe free from having to take god botherers into account, people of faith also get to post on a dedicated Religion Board while refraining to post their godly stuff on other boards, without hostile trolling from angry secularists who have never got over whatever it is they're angry about and who want to take over the Religion Board to use as their toilet.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 26, 2016 1:27:08 GMT 10
To quote Richard Dawkins: If children are taught they don't need to defend their beliefs with evidence, that paves the way for extremism¦ the biggest damage religion does is indoctrinating and brainwashing children. Richard Dawkins has no authority in the realms of religion or religious studies.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Sept 26, 2016 1:32:26 GMT 10
Hmmmm, why does that quote sound like it should belong in the Bible? Is it because its followers are used to being kept in the dark and blindly believing the uninformed twaddle written by men long ago? Time to escape the dark ages, Sporky. I'm baffled that you think your Epicurean mindset is a new idea. Atheism predates Christianity by several millenia. Perhaps, it is you who should get with the times.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 6:27:53 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 6:54:26 GMT 10
To quote Richard Dawkins: If children are taught they don't need to defend their beliefs with evidence, that paves the way for extremism¦ the biggest damage religion does is indoctrinating and brainwashing children. Richard Dawkins has no authority in the realms of religion or religious studies. I'd agree with you there. I read his Selfish Gene and admire his scholarship. But when it comes to religion there's an anger about the man and he does himself no favours. Occam we have a Monday night forum on our ABC public TV called Q & A or "questions and answers". The presenter is a guy called Tony Jones who's quite an accomplished and well-known current affairs interviewer. Where I disagree with Jones is that he'll deliberately set up a conflict by putting together people with irreconcilable differences such as Australia's top Catholic Cardinal George Pell and Richard Dawkins to "debate" atheism v religious belief. In effect it was Dawkins'brand of cranky atheism and his surly resentment of religious faith v Pell's pompous and ponderous pontificating. Here's the video. You might find it interesting ... I hope it shows the whole program. It should run for an hour. I don’t carry any brief for Pell. In fact for me the man represents everything that's wrong with Australian Catholicism. His record on child sexual abuse is appalling and currently he's joined that Boston prelate featured in the movie "Spotlight" in the Vatican as a fugitive from Australia's courts who want him to come home and front up for some questioning. But I had to admit that Pell gave a good account of himself in the Q & A program, mainly because when it comes to debating these questions Dawkins is his own worst enemy.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 26, 2016 7:06:09 GMT 10
To quote Richard Dawkins: If children are taught they don't need to defend their beliefs with evidence, that paves the way for extremism¦ the biggest damage religion does is indoctrinating and brainwashing children. Richard Dawkins has no authority in the realms of religion or religious studies. So? Shooting the messenger again? Do tell us which parts of his quote are wrong.
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 26, 2016 7:09:13 GMT 10
Hmmmm, why does that quote sound like it should belong in the Bible? Is it because its followers are used to being kept in the dark and blindly believing the uninformed twaddle written by men long ago? Time to escape the dark ages, Sporky. I'm baffled that you think your Epicurean mindset is a new idea. Atheism predates Christianity by several millenia. Perhaps, it is you who should get with the times. Yes, before Man invented the Bible, we had no idea that we were being watched by some mythical creature who controlled our destinies and could call on a flood to wipe us all out if we were misbehaving. And the world was no doubt a better place before it was polluted with religious babble. And, yes I do enjoy fine food and drink, but what does that have to do with this discussion?
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 7:20:14 GMT 10
That’s not all there is to Epicureanism.
As for the rest of your post, why do you have to be so cranky? Besides, while there were certainly atheists before there were Christians that doesn't mean that atheism predates paganism or animism. I dunno, slarti, d'you think that there were atheist Aborigines a-huntin' and a-gatherin' at the time of Mungo Man?
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Sept 26, 2016 7:40:10 GMT 10
I am not cranky, I am a realist. All I know about the Aborigines is that they were happier and safer before white man and the stupid book that was enforced on them came along
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 7:52:30 GMT 10
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 9:43:14 GMT 10
<sigh>
|
|
|
Post by KTJ on Sept 26, 2016 10:16:31 GMT 10
<snḯgger>
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 10:46:41 GMT 10
The three trolls - déjà vu, actually. It's the old NTB again except that instead of Racist Central we have Cranky Atheist Troll Central. In this scenario slarti takes the role of Premier - on second thoughts maybe he's more Dana/Rhedyn in this role than Premier, Yorick is Jockstrap and KTJ has decided he's an Apache/Geronimo court jester figure. It's all in the s n i g g e r. It's interesting that the software edits the "s n i g g e r" in my post but not in KTJs.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 10:52:39 GMT 10
snĂŻgger - I see how he did it.
I guess some sort of congratulations are in order. You three modelled yourselves on Premier, Dana, Jockstrap and Apache and just as they set out to turn Matt's NTB into Racist Central you've hijacked the Religion Board and turned it into the Cranky Atheist Troll Central.
May you sit on your dungheap and flap your (bat)wings.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 11:00:14 GMT 10
And KTJ?? Is he gonna "like" it? Pant pant, wags tail, wuff wuff me too!! Tummy tickle while I roll over please? Pant pant ...
|
|
|
Post by KTJ on Sept 26, 2016 11:05:08 GMT 10
And KTJ?? Is he gonna "like" it? Pant pant, wags tail, wuff wuff me too!! Tummy tickle while I roll over please? Pant pant ... Did you used to carry on like that in the classroom? Did the kids snḯgger at you behind your back?
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 11:07:48 GMT 10
Premier used to get personal too, as well as Jockstrap and Apache. This is right out of their playbook.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Sept 26, 2016 11:08:44 GMT 10
In conjunction with the pack behaviour
|
|