Snake_Baker
The one true King of the North
- Apr 24, 2013
- 81,024
- 153,169
- AFL Club
- North Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Essendon Lawn Bowls Club
- Banned
- #701
Religion Religions and rudeness.
- Thread starter Colonial
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Banned
- #702
Well it would seem many are happy to see a bloke thrown in prison for the rest of his life on less.
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,858
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
I'm not a Nietzsche fan at all
he doesn't understand Christianity nor Hellenic philosophy and it's profound influence on Christianity
to understand Christianity in its apostolic purity you must go to the sources
Which of Nietzsche's books have you read which gave you the astonishing impression that he was deficient in his understanding of the psychology underlying christianity? His voluminous and groundbreaking philological excursions in Hellenic thought, literature and drama seem to have impressed you not at all?
you have your own belief systems and they're defined as objective
Having struggled personably to make sense of this seemingly random phrase, all I can ask is - if any belief system may, indeed, be defined as 'objective', which disembodied being is doing the believing?
"when one of retired it leaves a vacuum for another to fill it!
what do you mean you ?"
This is incomprehensible gibberish.
and everybody has a belief system
Of course they do. However, the question is the significance they attribute to its existence and its contents. By definition, beliefs have no claims to truth or certainty.
You lied. You invited questions on philosophical matters and undertook to answer them. So far, not a sausage.
" don't give a toss" means I couldn't give a ****. It seems to be a sentiment which is fervently embraced by you.
Last edited:
- Mar 24, 2018
- 3,859
- 8,601
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Simply not true. Nobody gets sent to prison on the evidence of someone feeling like he committed a crime.
I find it staggering that people make such flimsy arguments and don’t understand the differences between western and eastern Christian religion and the way they thought about Christianity and philosophy..
Christianity did inspire a massive spike in European learning and culture as well as science..
But it evolved differently and philosophy began east not west.. there were no great ancient Gaul philosophers or goth etc..
What happened is Christianity and philosophy began east and spread west.. after the great schism..the west put its own slant on both Christianity and philosophy..
The west began the renaissance from the eastern philosophers fleeing from places like Constantinople and moving to Italy..
All of the great works of Plato and everybody else was brought with them.. but it was never totally taught in eastern fashion and it grew into a western paradigm..
Nobody knows anything about the byzantines.. because the west set up not only the Catholic Church after the schism but also the franks via Charlemagne who couldn’t even write his own name created a rival to Constantinople Rome.. the Holy Roman Empire.. the two had broken away from every way body and soul.. forever
But the inspiration was both Hellenic and Christianity which shaped Europe and the great spike in everything Europe projected.. everything that makes people wishing to go,work and visit, experience..
You doubt this?
Christianity did inspire a massive spike in European learning and culture as well as science..
But it evolved differently and philosophy began east not west.. there were no great ancient Gaul philosophers or goth etc..
What happened is Christianity and philosophy began east and spread west.. after the great schism..the west put its own slant on both Christianity and philosophy..
The west began the renaissance from the eastern philosophers fleeing from places like Constantinople and moving to Italy..
All of the great works of Plato and everybody else was brought with them.. but it was never totally taught in eastern fashion and it grew into a western paradigm..
Nobody knows anything about the byzantines.. because the west set up not only the Catholic Church after the schism but also the franks via Charlemagne who couldn’t even write his own name created a rival to Constantinople Rome.. the Holy Roman Empire.. the two had broken away from every way body and soul.. forever
But the inspiration was both Hellenic and Christianity which shaped Europe and the great spike in everything Europe projected.. everything that makes people wishing to go,work and visit, experience..
You doubt this?
I just gave you background to everything I said.. he’s influenced by western thought of Christianity and religion..
How is vacuums being filled incomprehensible? Everything is filled..
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,858
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
And which of his many books gave you this impression?
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,858
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
I'll bite.
- Mar 24, 2018
- 3,859
- 8,601
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Vacuums aren’t.
ok let me put it this way
which of his books make any references to the apostolic theology of the church
if he was into that he wouldn't have been a Protestant would he?
to begin debating this topic with you, you must of course understand all forms of Christianity and the differences
take Russian orthodox philosophers for example who address him
solivyiv and berstagi
or dostoyevsky replying to Nietzsche urbemensch with the character elder zosima in the brothers karamazov!
The thing is.. we rarely come across eastern thinkers in the West!
so you would be excused to think the way you do
but nice to get a balance
and even nicer to understand what is being discussed in its entirety!
we can continue the discussion but again please understand the fullness of all this
- Mar 24, 2018
- 3,859
- 8,601
- AFL Club
- Western Bulldogs
Sorry if I’ve missed it, but what exactly is your religion?
- Banned
- #713
I think he’s orthodox but he left me behind long ago.
I just want atheists to exhibit the same tolerance they demand of the religious, especially Catholics.
But they seem to think they are somehow too superior to warrant that.
yeah I'm eastern orthodox
it's totally different and
it's a continuation of Hellenic philosophy as we know that Christ was a Hellenized Palestinian Hebrew from Galilee
he and his followers draw deeply from Hellenic culture and philosophy
Greek being the language too that the New testament was written in
and you cannot understand it properly through translation alone and without philosophical and cultural context of that time
which is one of the main problems with the western interpretations of much of this stuff
I'm not meaning to have a go
just as an example this is really interesting
so when you learn the Bible and read it you must also understand the words used in their original and historical context
The West moved away and through Latin
later the whole philosophical concept was changed
much had less to do with the original intention
and of course the rivalry between East and West forced changes between them
for instance in orthodox we don't have a heaven and hell in the way you might think of it
it's more an inner heaven or inner hell of the eternal soul
- Moderator
- #715
People are free to believe what they like.
However when claims are made on a public forum about the truth of such phenomena such as miracles (including the physical resurrection of Jesus from the dead), the existance of a supernatural being called "God", or other 'lesser' supernatural beings such as angels, demons and the like, as well as the inerrancy of the Bible, I don't think it is too much for others to ask for the proposers of such claims to justify their opinions. Preferably by providing sound reasoning backed up with robust evidence.
Otherwise why make the claims at all on a public forum? Proselytizing?
Last edited:
- Banned
- #716
Thanks. This thread was started by an atheist who shoves his views down other peoples’ throats complaining about religious people shoving their views down other people’s throats.
Life is a miracle
everything you see around you is a miracle from my point of view
you can think otherwise
you might think it's all out of random chaos
I prefer to see it as organised order and designed
we do get all kinds of science that's wrong also
people can believe what they want to believe
and it's not up to someone who can't prove their theory to tell someone else they're wrong!
nobody can prove what happened before the big bang
out of Africa has been debunked even though it was big a while ago
there's holes in evolution theory
The climate change one is debated vigorously
whatever rocks your boat mate!
The other thing that's important is that many prominent scientists are also religious and therefore it's silly to say it's science or God!
and that religious people are intellectual pygmies!
some of the most outstanding people in history, literature and arts have been religious
and many people who offered very little to culture, humanity etc are atheist
and that religious people are intellectual pygmies!
some of the most outstanding people in history, literature and arts have been religious
and many people who offered very little to culture, humanity etc are atheist
- Moderator
- #720
A miracle is an event not explicable by natural or scientific laws. Life on earth can (and has) been explained by science and the evidence for that science is overwhelming.
I do think otherwise.
You can prefer it anyway you like. However the evidence doesn't appear to support your premise. There is no evidence for intelligent design.
- Moderator
- #721
That is only the opinion of those who do not understand or have very limited knowledge of science. Like yourself.
Usually scientists tend to support a scientific hypothesis or scientific theory on the basis of the amount of robust empirical evidence. Do I need to explain you again what "robust empirical evidence" is?
Including all religions.
No it hasn't.
The Out of Africa hypothesis (also called the "recent African origin of modern humans" or sometimes "Out of Africa II", "recent single-origin hypothesis (RSOH)", "replacement hypothesis", or "recent African origin model (RAO)" ) remains the dominant model of the geographic origin and early migration of anatomically modern humans about 300,000 to 200,000 years ago, in a number of waves.
I hope you're not going to suggest that all humans are descended solely from one male and female human. DNA studies have comprehensively disproven that.
All piece of evidence across a wide variety of scientific fields supports the theory of evolution. This has already been explained to you repeatedly.
I don't think there's any question that climate change is occurring. Just like it has in the past.
What's debated amongst scientists is:
- the type, amount and speed of change
- the contribution of humans to that change
Although the vast majoriy of climate scientists agree human activity is contributing. As such given the evidence presented I see no evidence to doubt that broad conclusion.
Last edited:
- Feb 14, 2002
- 17,797
- 6,858
- AFL Club
- Brisbane Lions
- Other Teams
- Lexton, Northcote Park
Penis plus vagina begets birth. No miracle.
really
that's very simple lol
why don't you put penis in mud and get a baby
or a stick in finger in vaginA?
lol
you're not even making sense
that's very simple lol
why don't you put penis in mud and get a baby
or a stick in finger in vaginA?
lol
you're not even making sense
lots of scientists don't run with the theories proposed in the name of science
you're making things up mate!
we've discussed how theories with a bunch of holes can't be proof
you're telling me stuff that flies against scientific law is proof
but you can't show it as proof except to tell us to accept it as truth
I don't!
I don't mind what you believe in
if you want to believe you used to be non organic matter that turned organic and climbed out of the swamp as a fish and turned into a monkey and then became you it's ok
I won't argue with your belief system of randomness
lol
but don't tell me what I can put in here
I think that's what I'm trying to say
- Banned
- #725
[QUOTE="Roylion, post: 61401025, member:
Usually scientists tend to support a scientific hypothesis or scientific theory on the basis of the amount of robust empirical evidence.
I don't think there's any question that climate change is occurring. Just like it has in the past.
What's debated amongst scientists is:
- the type, amount and speed of change
- the contribution of humans to that change
.[/QUOTE]
I’m note sure that “science” has exactly covered itself in glory on the whole AGW thing to be frank.
Usually scientists tend to support a scientific hypothesis or scientific theory on the basis of the amount of robust empirical evidence.
I don't think there's any question that climate change is occurring. Just like it has in the past.
What's debated amongst scientists is:
- the type, amount and speed of change
- the contribution of humans to that change
.[/QUOTE]
I’m note sure that “science” has exactly covered itself in glory on the whole AGW thing to be frank.
