It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
^ Back to Top
The MI6 Community is unofficial and in no way associated or linked with EON Productions, MGM, Sony Pictures, Activision or Ian Fleming Publications. Any views expressed on this website are of the individual members and do not necessarily reflect those of the Community owners. Any video or images displayed in topics on MI6 Community are embedded by users from third party sites and as such MI6 Community and its owners take no responsibility for this material.
James Bond News • James Bond Articles • James Bond Magazine
Comments
Quoting Holmes now? That doesn't make it true. That's an argument from ignorance for one. And by definition a supernatural explanation is impossible. Unlike rational explanations that are not only possible but far more plausible.
Well then spontaneous growth and Darwin’s theory goes out the window as that is a miracle as well (one that goes against the second law of thermodynamics but I digress)
Then explain to me how a religion that should of never become popular and was against everything the Jewish and Gentle leaders liked or wanted became to this day the dominant religion (even surpassing atheism)
Seems weird right
Islam will surpass Christianity this century. How do you square that?
Oh, and, just to get it into that impregnable skull of yours. Atheism isn’t a religion.
Here's one- grab any ten Christians off the street and ask them where Gethsemane is. Most won't be able to tell you. Calling one's self a member of a faith is all too easy.
BTW, I know where it is because I own Jesus Christ Superstar on DVD.
And to top up your rambling you put one appeal to popularity. That Christianity became popular does not make it true. I've explained some reasons for its appeal a couple of pages ago in any case: good PR, promises of eternal bliss, giving a sense of belonging and common identity in an Empire that was heavily fragmented in ethnic groups and social classes, etc.
By the same criteria Islam must be true also, as it's the fastest growing religion now, in spite of the very bad press it has received (and deservedly so).
And by the way: 1)atheism is not a religion, and 2)unless you count Buddhism that can be technically considered atheistic, in what civilization atheism was the majority?
Why’s that? Apple, for example, has hundreds of millions of acolytes, some who would camp on the street for days just to get a piece of them. You don’t need divinity to engage, exploit and even inspire vast swathes of people.
You really don’t get who Paul was before he became a Christian do you
Were Hitler, Farage and Trump sent by God?
Just because something appears strange doesn’t automatically mean divine intervention.
He was fiercely against Christianity. What’s your point? Politicians often ‘cross the floor’. What you have to understand is that you’re talking bollocks, mate.
Regarding Paul, we don't even know how much if any of his story pre conversion is true and even if he truly killed Christians... so what? He was a religious fanatics that switched brand of fanaticism, that's all.
You see these white, middle class girls converting to Islam and then heading straight off to Syria. Converts are the most rabid. Perhaps @Risico007 used to be a Muslim who turned to Christianity?
Quite.
I forgot to ask @Risico007, it’s been a question burning away in my mind, was it always God’s intention to have the resurrection mascot be a rabbit? I believe the idea of a Rabbit delivering eggs was a tradition established pre-Christianity (A Pagan concept if memory serves me). Seems a bit thrifty piggy-backing on the traditions of others to celebrate what should be a truly monumental and miraculous moment.
Ah that’s right we know nothing we don’t know what happened in the first century nor do we know what happened in 1812 was there a war who knows
I see that (while commenting on the morality of others) you're not above the plain of issuing uncalled for personal insults to those of faith. For that reason, and for the similar comments by the Wiz on the mental health of believers, I am refraining from participating in this thread any further.
I made it crystal clear in the OP that I would not tolerate this sort of thing in this thread and so I'm sticking by my word and leaving the thread immediately. @DarthDimi also warned about how these types threads eventually descend into personal insults. It's sad that your lot had to lower the tone here, but not altogether surprising given the types of personalities involved.
People of faith aren’t immune from ridicule and reference to mental health is hardly without base. Many people who claim to ‘hear’ and ‘see’ things are sectioned. With the dearth of factual evidence on offer, it’s not a great leap. If people want to practice, that’s their choice, I have no right to stop them. What’s problematic in this thread is that I don’t recall yourself or Risico ever uttering the phrase, ‘I don’t know.’ Something that would garner you far more respect.
It’s the sheer arrogance of having all the answers, the pseudo-scientific gymnastics involved, the ludicrous retro-fitting, the endless obfuscation and the reluctance to consider you may not be right that creates friction.
Every non-believer has at some point conceded they can’t possibly have all the answers and rightly so.
The conviction of Athiests and Agnostics on here seems far stronger than your own, as you’ve threatened to bail on numerous occasions. To a significant degree it suggests you yourself know that deep down you do, even on a very slight level, doubt your belief and can’t handle that fact. No one can stop you believing, but likewise you can’t silence the doubters when you offer no logical retort.
False equivalence. Both events are not even comparable. The 1812 war is actually a historical event supported by evidence.
Except of course you won't because you issued such threats to leave (conservatively) about 20 times already. Even the boy who cried wolf is shaking his head in disbelief at your lack of credibility I'm afraid.
To the impartial observer it does you no favours and, as @RC7 states above, just smacks of someone who has nothing to bring to the argument.
[/quote]
Now that you're leaving (yet again), does this mean we're not going to get skewered with your Paxman-esque questions (that have so far singularly failed to materialise)?
Where is this evidence
Only to reply to your point, to correct a false impression. Two wrongs don't make a right. I'm as critical of Christians as anyone else, if it's called for. That's it for now.
If that's not being brainwashed I don't know what is.
Well, I as Dragonpol think it is wrong too. Perhaps I shouldn't have invoked Christianity there. Sorry if it wasn't clear enough. Faith informs our world view, rather than controlling it.
@Dragonpol I fail to see how 1)using sarcasm and derision is immoral and 2)it's any more rude than a man who got all high and mighty and holier than thou scolding us for alleged immorality while himself said he wouldn't commit adultery with a couple of female coworkers because God ordered him not to.
Sorry but I'm not sorry. I was criticizing what he said through sarcasm, but nobody will say I have no moral compass without backing it up.
You need to lighten up, mate. But then this is what happens when you bring something very personal into a public forum. It’s like me or Wiz starting a thread about marital issues. The devout don’t seem to understand their faith is ultimately very personal and others don’t want to be badgered, lectured or patronised. The dwindling numbers of those with faith in this country should tell you all you need to know. As science evolves, faith regresses.
I see what you did there - given he doesn’t exist and so won’t.
Well, fair enough. I'm staying out of this thread for now. I'm genuinely fed up with petty squabbles about religion and have more productive things to be doing, like getting back into writing again as that is my main passion.
Perhaps I do, but I've never sought to preach or convert anyone here. That I see as a job for others better qualified than I. Nor have I ever "badgered, lectured or patronised", to the best of my knowledge. That's not what I created the thread for in the first place. It was for largely respectful discourse on religion and faith. It has lasted, against the odds, and I can take some comfort from the fact it is still rolling on over 100 pages later. I don't think anyone could have predicted it would have lasted for that long. Therefore, we must be doing something right at least. That said, it is time I stood back from it again and let it all flow on without me. I doubt my input will be missed very much anyhow.
D.