|
Post by ponto on Oct 28, 2021 19:51:23 GMT 10
Therefore keep polluting and destroying the planet its perfect destiny..bollocks.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 28, 2021 21:19:39 GMT 10
Therefore keep polluting and destroying the planet its perfect destiny..bollocks. Can you provide a scripture reference for that? Or is that just coming from your cognitive bias? I always thought it was greedy corporations, such as leaky Wuhan labs, that were responsible for industrial pollution...đ¤
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 28, 2021 22:11:09 GMT 10
S'oK....Jesus needed a mother so why not God itself... The first thing Jehovah created was Jesus (it is all in chapter 1 of Colossians). Yehshua is Jesus name in Hebrew. He is now King of Jehovah's Kingdom and in Revelation he is Michael, the Archangel. Archangel means CHIEF ANGEL. There is only one chief angel. He is the ransome sacrifice...remember how ancient Israelites sacrificed their best, cows, or sheep, or doves? That was to remind them that one day Jehovah was going to send his best to be sacrificed for our sins and buy back what Adam lost. You should pay attention. We are on the brink of being restored. Perfect earth, perfect humans... that is the promise. Take it easy Toots. Itâs OK. Relax. Pour yourself a stiff drink if you have to but donât touch that âderangedâ setting.
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Oct 28, 2021 22:29:49 GMT 10
Therefore keep polluting and destroying the planet its perfect destiny..bollocks. Can you provide a scripture reference for that? Or is that just coming from your cognitive bias? I always thought it was greedy corporations, such as leaky Wuhan labs, that were responsible for industrial pollution...đ¤ Revelation says, God will bring to ruin those ruining the earth...
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Oct 28, 2021 22:31:27 GMT 10
The first thing Jehovah created was Jesus (it is all in chapter 1 of Colossians). Yehshua is Jesus name in Hebrew. He is now King of Jehovah's Kingdom and in Revelation he is Michael, the Archangel. Archangel means CHIEF ANGEL. There is only one chief angel. He is the ransome sacrifice...remember how ancient Israelites sacrificed their best, cows, or sheep, or doves? That was to remind them that one day Jehovah was going to send his best to be sacrificed for our sins and buy back what Adam lost. You should pay attention. We are on the brink of being restored. Perfect earth, perfect humans... that is the promise. Take it easy Toots. Itâs OK. Relax. Pour yourself a stiff drink if you have to but donât touch that âderangedâ setting. I don't drink alcohol... I only drink water.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 28, 2021 22:32:19 GMT 10
Proclaiming to be Christian is not necessarily making one a Christian, evangelical Christianity is not Christianity...because God told me so. Revelation 1:13, in the King James Version, says, âAnd I saw in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of Man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdleâ. âPapsâ is the archaic word for a womanâs breasts. In the Greek, the word used is the plural mastos, which the lexicon defines as âthe breast, esp.,of the swelling breast of a womanâ. Rarely, the plural was used to refer to a manâs breasts, but the prevailing sense is female. The fact that the figure in this passage from Revelation wore a âgirdleâ, or cincture, about the breastsâthe modern equivalent would be a brassiereâconfirms that the breasts in question are female. Indeed, the New English Bible translates the plural as though it were a singularââwith a golden girdle round his breastâ. The New Revised Standard Version tried to avoid any embarrassment by wrongly translating it as âchestâ.[6] Implying Jesus was a hermaphrodite....both male and female. In context-the scripture was referencing Christ's role within the seven churches. The word for robe here is the same word for robe of the High Priestly Robe. The golden girdle recalls the robe or sash of the High Priest. Best not to pull references from their contexts, to support your own interpretations.đ
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 28, 2021 22:40:03 GMT 10
I had a glass of wine with dinner. And an excellent drop it was too - a 2015 Coonawarra Shiraz. Just the one glass. Scoutâs honour!
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 29, 2021 3:51:59 GMT 10
...Says it all.
|
|
|
Post by ponto on Oct 29, 2021 7:53:40 GMT 10
The bible has been interpreted by many to conclude their own thoughts as it is a work of fiction.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 29, 2021 10:57:28 GMT 10
So is the myth of Sisyphus and it forms the central theme of the best philosophical argument Iâve ever read in defence of atheism.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 29, 2021 11:08:28 GMT 10
Those who argue for (or against!) the bible on the grounds of its historicity miss the deeper truth about all of humanityâs great faiths. The bible, the qurâan, the torah are all based on a sacred text held by adherents to be the word of god. I canât speak for the Vedas (Hindu) or the belief system of Buddhism. Or the Dreaming of Australian First Nations for that matter. To dismiss them out of hand as works of fiction and therefore not âtrueâ is to invite the question put by Pontius Pilate to the soon-to-be-crucified Jesus: what is truth?
BTW when you find the answer to that one, do me a favour and let me know!
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 29, 2021 14:04:06 GMT 10
The bible has been interpreted by many to conclude their own thoughts as it is a work of fiction. You are right. A lot of people think that. But I can't control what every wrongheaded person thinks. But if you really believed that God didn't exist, then the identity of God's gender shouldn't have been of any significance to you. Thus, your Ad Hoc argument is nothing more than an elaborate attempt at trying to rattle my cage, and skirt the issue. You see, I'm playing your game; three moves ahead.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Oct 29, 2021 14:10:22 GMT 10
Those who argue for (or against!) the bible on the grounds of its historicity miss the deeper truth about all of humanityâs great faiths. The bible, the qurâan, the torah are all based on a sacred text held by adherents to be the word of god. I canât speak for the Vedas (Hindu) or the belief system of Buddhism. Or the Dreaming of Australian First Nations for that matter. To dismiss them out of hand as works of fiction and therefore not âtrueâ is to invite the question put by Pontius Pilate to the soon-to-be-crucified Jesus: what is truth? BTW when you find the answer to that one, do me a favour and let me know! Challenge accepted. Jesus said, John 14:6Â â âI am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me.â
|
|
|
Post by pim on Oct 29, 2021 14:55:03 GMT 10
Speaking of Johnâs gospel on truth, I trust youâve found it liberating!
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 1, 2021 8:08:53 GMT 10
Chinese opinion of the 'woke' left...
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 1, 2021 8:35:56 GMT 10
The Chinese have a point but if itâs all about moral superiority then on a scale of what constitutes the âbiggest threat to societyâ it hardly ranks with assessments made by the security agencies in my country that the greatest domestic security threat comes from militant extremism on the fascist far right. Iâve posted on this before and supplied links to reports by so many intelligence agencies that you could refer to them as the whole alphabet.
I realise that âwoke leftâ is a trope beloved by people like Mad Matt and that nothing anyone posts by way of rebuttal will make any difference. Youâll just go on rolling out the âwoke leftâ trope. So OK, you believe that the murdering fascist nutcase who gunned down in cold blood more than 50 worshippers in two mosques in Christchurch and who has been the inspiration for copycat outrages in other parts of the world constitutes a lesser threat to society than some âwokeâ Green activist in Surry Hills in inner Sydney or an activist for the cause of Reconciliation with this countryâs First Nations.
Mad Matt argues that, but heâs an ignoramus who loves his ignorance. Youâre better than that. Your tropes might find purchase in the North American context but not here.
|
|
|
Post by caskur on Nov 1, 2021 10:46:02 GMT 10
The bible has been interpreted by many to conclude their own thoughts as it is a work of fiction. The ONLY obligation of a Christian is to deliver the message. Who cares if you believe it or not?... not our problem.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 1, 2021 14:05:57 GMT 10
The bible has been interpreted by many to conclude their own thoughts as it is a work of fiction. The ONLY obligation of a Christian is to deliver the message. Who cares if you believe it or not?... not our problem. Yep. Historically problems in Christianity only occurred when the Church tried taking God's role. We need to stick to the script.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 1, 2021 18:01:59 GMT 10
Of course thereâs the inconvenient little factoid that climate change denialism leads to an uninhabitable planet and no society at all. Which means that anti science obscurantism and fossil fuel addiction are the biggest threat to society âŚ
|
|
|
Post by Gort on Nov 1, 2021 18:50:32 GMT 10
How are your Solar panels getting on?
|
|
|
Post by matte on Nov 2, 2021 18:30:02 GMT 10
This black professor thinks that white people should be "taken out" (as in, killed):
But they can't be racist? This is the type of "critical race theory" being taught from kindergarten through to the university level.
|
|
|
Post by pim on Nov 2, 2021 18:40:12 GMT 10
Very Andrew Bolt of you Mad Matt! How threatened should we whitefellas feel? Howâs the Permanent Culture War going?
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 4, 2021 14:08:43 GMT 10
Of course thereâs the inconvenient little factoid that climate change denialism leads to an uninhabitable planet and no society at all. Which means that anti science obscurantism and fossil fuel addiction are the biggest threat to society ⌠Well... I should remind you that 100 corporations are responsible for 71% of greenhouse emissions. Presenting the crisis as a moral failing on the part of individuals without noting this fact, is journalistic malpractice. Ignorance is not what is causing this crisis--they know exactly what they are doing.
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Nov 4, 2021 14:11:03 GMT 10
Very Andrew Bolt of you Mad Matt! How threatened should we whitefellas feel? Howâs the Permanent Culture War going? To judge an individual based entirely on the color of their skin is still racism. It shouldn't matter that it is coming from an oppressed minority. We need to get over our white man guilt. Our deeds are our shame, not our pigment.
|
|
|
Post by ponto on Nov 5, 2021 5:28:33 GMT 10
Government's are subsidising fossil corporation's, Occam is espousing more RW alt truths...just like this RW IPA mob in the guardian article. IPA targets key Coalition seats with net zero Facebook ad campaign described by experts as âfear mongeringâ
Nick Evershed and Christopher Knaus 2 hrs ago The Institute of Public Affairs paid to push targeted Facebook ads based on a âfaulty analysisâ claiming net zero would cause massive job losses in key Liberal and National seats during last monthâs Coalition infighting. Last month, as the Coalition debated a net zero 2050 policy, the IPA paid for a series of Facebook and Instagram ads targeting the electorates of Nationals Barnaby Joyce, David Littleproud, Mark Coulton, Ken OâDowd and Anne Webster, as well as the Liberal trade minister, Dan Tehan. The ads warned the policy âwill destroyâ huge numbers of jobs in each electorate. In Flynn, OâDowdâs electorate, the ads warned ânet zero emissions will destroy one in four jobsâ. Other electorates would lose one in five, one in six or one in seven jobs, the ads claimed. The ads relied on and linked to an IPA analysis described by experts as âbeyond cynicalâ and almost âcomical if the stakes werenât so highâ. The IPAâs research identified 10 industries with higher-than-average emissions â the agriculture and air transport sectors, for example â and tallied the total numbers of jobs in each sector, describing them as âat riskâ from the policy. However the ads went one step further, using figures premised on the assumption that every single job in that sector would be wiped out if a net zero policy was adopted. The underlying report, for example, assumes that all 306,200 agriculture jobs identified in Australia by the Australian Bureau of Statistics would be at-risk from a net zero policy because the sectorâs âemissions per job are above the economy-wide averageâ. Dr Rebecca Colvin, a senior lecturer at the Australian National University with expertise in energy transition and development, described the IPAâs analysis as âfaultyâ and âan exercise in counting without context, a far stretch from a rigorous analysisâ. âSo they have simply counted the number of jobs in those sectors and deemed them âat riskâ. There is no nuance, nor explanation of what âat riskâ means,â she said. âTo then use the report as the basis for a targeted social media campaign that declares these jobs will âbe destroyedâ by a net zero target is beyond cynical It would be comical if the stakes werenât so high.â Facebook estimates suggest the ads would not have cost a huge amount. The expenditure would have been roughly several thousand dollars. But Facebook data also shows most of the ads could have had a maximum audience of 500,000 people. The IPAâs director of research, Daniel Wild, said the thinktank had âled the debate about the economic and humanitarian consequences of a net zero emissions by 2050 targetâ. âIt says everything about the media, big business, universities and the political class that they failed to acknowledge the impact that net zero emissions will have on Australians living in the regions and outer-metropolitan parts of the major cities,â he said. âRegardless of how a net zero emissions target will be pursued, high-emitting jobs in industries such as mining, agriculture and manufacturing are the most likely to be destroyed.â He said the research was disseminated to the public and policymakers to âcommunicate the impact that a net zero emissions target will have on Australiansâ. When asked to respond to Colvinâs criticisms of the research being âcomical if the stakes werenât so highâ, Wild said: âThe stakes are very high for the more than 650,000 Australians who stand to lose their job from net zero, many of whom will never work again.â Colvin said farmers knew Australia would clearly still need food in a decarbonised economy, and the need for travel and the mining of many minerals would not evaporate. âSuggesting otherwise is an insult to the intelligence of the workers in these industries.â The Coalition has since adopted a policy of net zero by 2050. Colvin said the adoption of the policy was an important milestone. But she said there was more work to be done, including implementing credible interim targets to help workers in exposed industries. âFear-mongering based on a faulty analysis does not help Australia achieve a just transition to a net zero future,â she said. Colvin is a member of the Blueprint Institute, which conducted recent polling in coalmining and power generation regions. The polling showed strong support for the net zero target, she said. Colvin also noted Meat and Livestock Australia, the peak body for the red meat and livestock industry, supported net zero emissions in the sector by 2030.
|
|