Israel Folau - HIGHEST PAID PLAYER in the AFL. What a joke.

[Crankitup]

got a link, I'd have thought it'd be the international TV rights.

No link unfortunately but I can have a look. I heard Rita Panahi say something along those lines on Andrew Bolt's program.

 

[Kwality]

Hey Issy, are all the peodophile priests going to hell????
Hey Issy, are all the church’s officials who protected those peodophiles going to hell???

yeh, nah .... repent?

 

[catscratchfever]

Reading yes, understanding no. Where does it talk about a sky god? You are right when you say that too many so called “christians” haven’t read much of it though

By "sky-god" I mean a "being" of some kind who resides up above us and wields a big stick with which he/she/it occasionally smites the unworthy, ungrateful cretins (i.e. us) below on the ground. This includes "God", "Allah", "Yahweh", "The Great Pumpkin" and other assorted dieties. So I'm not just referring to the Christian "God".

 

[Slartibartfast]

So you know what happens after we die then? Perhaps you'd like to fill us in?

Compost , what else could happen????

 

[MarkT2]

This is right, 2000 years ago humans searched for reasons to who what how and why and supplanted this story to help deal with what they did not understand.

2000 years down the track we know and understand so much that i find incredible that anyone gives any credence at all to this fractured fairy tale. There are so many holes in the story for it to be credible and then for so called people looking to help others to take a literal interpretation and then impose this on others.

Yes we know a lot more about the universe than the Pagans, Jews, Christians....

If you can explain to me how all the matter in the universe could possibly have once been in an infinately small place and how that is any more or less faniciful than creationism than I'd appreciate it. Are the theories mutually exclusive?

I'm not a beliver but there are huige gaps in all the theories.

Hey Issy, are all the peodophile priests going to hell????
Hey Issy, are all the church’s officials who protected those peodophiles going to hell???

Why do you ignore these crimes yet vilify homosexuals who did not choose to be the the way they are, pathetic.

On the extremely remote chance that there is such a place then of course they would. The bible says so doesn't it? Folau said so didn't he?Why do you assume Folau wouldn't think they would?

 

[The Falcon Strike]

Compost , what else could happen????

So definitely not Hell then ...

A position I wholeheartedly agree with

 

[Bostonian]

Hey Issy, are all the peodophile priests going to hell????
Hey Issy, are all the church’s officials who protected those peodophiles going to hell???

Why do you ignore these crimes yet vilify homosexuals who did not choose to be the the way they are, pathetic.

It's very compassionate of you not to vilify paedophiles.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

If you can explain to me how all the matter in the universe could possibly have once been in an infinately small place and how that is any more or less faniciful than creationism than I'd appreciate it. Are the theories mutually exclusive?

I'm not a beliver but there are huige gaps in all the theories.

Not the place but what the heck. Creationism isn't a theory as it doesn't have any scientific evidence supporting it. The Big Bang Theory does have scientific evidence supporting it (eg the discovery of cosmic background radiation (https://www.space.com/33892-cosmic-microwave-background.html) , the Hubble constant (https://www.space.com/25179-hubble-constant.html), the red shift of stars, etc).

The difference between the two approaches is science (the Big Bang) constantly looks to refine and change the model (eg the recent finding that the Hubble constant may change over time). Creationists insist their view is correct even in the face of conflicting evidence. Sure there are holes (black ones) in the Big Bang Theory but this is why research in cosmology continues.

The concept of an initial singularity is one aspect of the Big Bang Theory but there are other theories involving black holes, etc. What is known is the universe was more dense and hotter 13.8 million years ago (just as it was more dense and hotter yesterday) and mathematically you can arrive at the singularity at which point the laws of physics no longer apply. What is interesting about the Big Bang Theory is it predicts certain things to happen (such as the abundance of particular elements in the Universe) and research generally supports those predictions. It does provide a working model of how the Universe was created - creationism offers a folk story.

 

[Chief]

Yes we know a lot more about the universe than the Pagans, Jews, Christians....

If you can explain to me how all the matter in the universe could possibly have once been in an infinately small place and how that is any more or less faniciful than creationism than I'd appreciate it. Are the theories mutually exclusive?

I'm not a beliver but there are huige gaps in all the theories.
On the extremely remote chance that there is such a place then of course they would. The bible says so doesn't it? Folau said so didn't he?Why do you assume Folau wouldn't think they would?

Before we thought we knew. Now we know we don't know.

Our knowledge has grown.

 

[Slartibartfast]

Yes we know a lot more about the universe than the Pagans, Jews, Christians....

If you can explain to me how all the matter in the universe could possibly have once been in an infinately small place and how that is any more or less faniciful than creationism than I'd appreciate it. Are the theories mutually exclusive?

I'm not a beliver but there are huige gaps in all the theories.
On the extremely remote chance that there is such a place then of course they would. The bible says so doesn't it? Folau said so didn't he?Why do you assume Folau wouldn't think they would?

The difference between evolutionist and creationist is that evolutionists know when there is a gap in the knowledge. They dont make things up to fit a story that cant work under an reasonable circumstance.

 

[Slartibartfast]

It's very compassionate of you not to vilify paedophiles.

Go check the GEORGE PELL thread.

 

[MarkT2]

Before we thought we knew. Now we know we don't know.

Our knowledge has grown.

We? There are a lot of people who have never been part of any culture that follows any relgion from the middel eastern origons. We don't actually know what we do or don't know. I guess that makes us more enlightened. It doesn't seem to make us any less judgemental though.

 

[MarkT2]

Not the place but what the heck. Creationism isn't a theory as it doesn't have any scientific evidence supporting it.

Other than existance itself. As I said I'm not a believer but it isn't impossible in some form.

Creationists insist their view is correct even in the face of conflicting evidence.

The Pope (not this one) gave Steven Hawking a medal for his work on The Big Bang and beleved that was the creation moment. That's probably as explainable as any theroy for all the matter in the universe being in an instantly small space and ending with Collingwood losing another GF.

 

[Crankitup]

... 2000 years ago humans searched for reasons to who what how and why and supplanted this story to help deal with what they did not understand.

2000 years down the track we know and understand so much that i find incredible that anyone gives any credence at all to this fractured fairy tale.

Just trying to get a handle on what you're saying here. Are you referring to Genesis/Old Testament or the New Testament? Genesis was written hundreds of years before Christ.

 

[Monkey King]

The difference between the two approaches is science (the Big Bang) constantly looks to refine and change the model ...

An “evidence supports” model of inquiry is superior to a “no evidence but I’m definitely right anyway” model.

There’s a reason one gave us electricity, internet and the ability to fly, and the other, well not very much.

 

[Charlie Bucket]

Just trying to get a handle on what you're saying here. Are you referring to Genesis/Old Testament or the New Testament? Genesis was written hundreds of years before Christ.

Is Phil Collins that old ?

 

[Monkey King]

Is Phil Collins that old ?

Boom-Tish!

 

[Slartibartfast]

Just trying to get a handle on what you're saying here. Are you referring to Genesis/Old Testament or the New Testament? Genesis was written hundreds of years before Christ.

We now have a great understanding how the world works and dont need to come up with a story to give world reason.

 

[Ron The Bear]

Did Chris Scott refer to Folau as a "black swan"? Treading some dangerous ground there.

 

[MarkT2]

There’s a reason one gave us electricity, internet and the ability to fly, and the other, well not very much.

Except maybe existance and hundres of thousands of years of meaning in the darkness of the unknown. That's a bit more than nothing and quite likely enough to get us to the point where electricity etc were possible. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive or even neccessarily contradictory. Religion isn't confined to Christianity.

As I keep saying, I am not a believer but the fact that some things are, or at least seem to be, explained, does not discount the greater volumn of unexplained as being the result of one or another theory including diviinty. I highly doubt God in any sort of human interpretation is real but it as good an explainantion for the big bang and an expanding universe into something that isn't part of the universe notwithstanding the universe by definaition is everything.

There is more unexplained by science than tehre is explained. Steven Hawkin believed the grand united theory would answer the God question. WE are a long way from resolving that theory. Maybe it isn't resolvable.

Not being a believer, I still get a bit annoyed at people pointing the finger of idiocy of people just for being believers. If you can explain how everything was in an infinitely small space and how and why that exploded and how the 4 forces are united the youare entitled to do just that but at this point no one is. It's no more or less fathomable than some form of being intervention.

Meanwhile a bit less opinion arrogance wouldn't go astray on here in these type of discussions. Save that for Collingwood v Carton shitfights where they belong.

 

[Crankitup]

We now have a great understanding how the world works and dont need to come up with a story to give world reason.

But can't you see? I wanted to see which story you were referring to. The story of Genesis of the one about Christ. Or do you believe BOTH are complete fairytales, e.g. Jesus didn't exist?

 

[Monkey King]

Science and religion are not mutually exclusive or even neccessarily contradictory.

As I keep saying, I am not a believer but the fact that some things are, or at least seem to be, explained, does not discount the greater volumn of unexplained as being the result of one or another theory including diviinty.

There is more unexplained by science than tehre is explained.

Yeah don’t really agree with this. Religion isn’t just a question about the existence of a God; it’s a system of belief without evidence, plenty of which has been, and is being, chipped away at by actual human knowledge acquired through scientific method. This issue with Folau is born out of such contradiction, with science providing evidence that fornication and homosexuality have the same biological basis as marital coitus, and religion claiming that not only are these different, but some lead to hell - for which there is ZERO evidence.

One can wax lyrical about religion and how it might be true. Ignorance always hides in the shadows like this. It’s when we put the light on these systems and ask them to show what they know, that religion has proven pretty useless in helping humans understanding how sh*t really works, while science has taken humanity to places religion couldn’t even imagine.

 

[catscratchfever]

Are you showing basic respect for Israel Folau and the untold numbers of people around the world who share his opinions?

You can respect someone as a human being without respecting their opinions. For example, do you respect the opinions of neo-Nazis "and the untold numbers of people around the world who share those opinions"? I would hope not.

 

[mouncey2franklin]

You can respect someone as a human being without respecting their opinions.

Is Israel Folau being shown respect by people like yourself at the moment?

 

[catscratchfever]

Is Israel Folau being shown respect by people like yourself at the moment?

By saying what he says in the way he says it - in public, where he gets huge media attention - is he disrespecting the majority of Australians (who voted in favour of the plebiscite for gay marriage)?

See? Respect works both ways.

I don't get my face splattered across the mainstream media expressing my opinion that people like Folau are misguided fools, and I don't want to. I try to keep most of my opinions to myself.

I have no problem with him holding his opinions. But I don't respect those opinions. Why should I respect opinions that I believe are stupid and ignorant?

I have no wish that any harm comes to Folau. That's because I respect him as a human being.

See the difference?

In the world such as it is, for him (or anyone) to speechify in public that a particular group of people are going to hell (in this case all based on Folau's belief in someone's interpretation of someone else's translation of a book written in ancient Greek by yet someone else, supposedly an invisible being) can only help to create an atmosphere of negativity and even hatred toward that group - whether he intends it or not. It doesn't matter if he's quoting the Christian Bible or the Koran or something else.

This applies to Israel Folau as much as it does to the likes of Fraser Anning.

Ignorance is contagious! Keep it to yourself and whoever chooses to share your company and I'll do the same.

And as a side thought:

What was the point of saying it in public? And why didn't he choose something a little more positive to say in the first place? There are plenty of "nice" things to quote from the Bible, if Folau cares to look. But like, I suspect, most so-called Christians, he's probably never read the Book right through. It gets to be pretty hard going by the time you get to page 5, so I guess I can't really blame him

I look forward to hearing Folau quote the Old Testament verses where it says that slavery is okie dokie and that women should always obey men. That'll go down a treat.