Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

How to be an accepting Catholic

Options
1235»

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Andrewf20 wrote: »
    Perhaps discrimmination leading to depression and suicide drastically reduces the average lifespan of homosexuals. If discimination was drastically reduced it would surely lead to an increase in average lifespans?

    But why such vitriol? Why is smoking not viewed in the same light for example. Why is smoking not a sin, seeing as it curtails life?

    It's a big deal because it;s to do with sex I'd imagine, and Gods initial plan for sex regarding marriage and sexuality.

    Smoking actually is a sin, turning to a nico stick for comfort and relief instead of God is a sin I'd imagine, not mentioning, whilst simultaneously mentioning, the fact that, the body is a temple of the holy spirit and belongs to God, it is designed for honouring and glorifying him, through praise, work, charity etc.

    If someone smokes, they should try to remove this attachment if they can, but God understands still, nicotine is difficult to get off, I know!


  • Options
    #123
    irishconvert
    Registered Users Posts: 1,866 ✭✭✭irishconvert


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    I have no passion, or respect for that matter for people who justify war and hatred against others based on the fact they worship a different supernatural being, no.

    I have no passion, or respect for that matter for people who justify war and hatred against others based on any reason whatsoever.


  • Options
    #124
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Extinction wrote: »
    Who is he respected by? Christians by any chance? Of course he didn't make it up, why would a biased christian make anything up to suit their own agenda? The information in the following christian website couldn't possible be made up to either http://christwire.org/2012/01/nasa-discovers-god-declares-atheists-idiots/ Or could it?

    No, he wouldn't have got it from that website, you're just going too far now. Picking one of the worst sites, come on.

    He is repsected, as Sam Harris says so himself. Watch the Sam Harris and Craig debate, he's impressive. (Didn't follow any of Sam's red herrings either).

    Is it possible you don't like because he's defending Christianity? ;)


  • Options
    #125
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    Mintoz wrote: »
    No, he wouldn't have got it from that website, you're just going too far now. Picking one of the worst sites, come on.

    He is repsected, as Sam Harris says so himself. Watch the Sam Harris and Craig debate, he's impressive. (Didn't follow any of Sam's red herrings either).

    Is it possible you don't like because he's defending Christianity? ;)

    Opinion from another respected debater

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/20/richard-dawkins-william-lane-craig

    Unless, of course, you're going to ignore his opinion because he isn't christian? ;)


  • Options
    #126
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Opinion from another respected debater

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/20/richard-dawkins-william-lane-craig

    Unless, of course, you're going to ignore his opinion because he isn't christian? ;)

    I bet that guy isn't a Christian either. But I haven't even read it, and will. I won't ignore it, no. Craig isn't perfect, but downright logical. I remember him in his audio books, saying it's 40. Considering the risk of AIDS, and how much sex they have, as much as heterosexuals, it's very likely.

    Oh wait, it's Dawkins himself. Well that expalins everything. Yes, Dawkind refused to debate him because Craig explains why God commanded the driving out of the Cannanites. Dawkins felt he was defending genocide, even though for the author of life, murder, thus genocide is impossible..


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    The OP has probably long since departed and who could blame them? It's getting quite impossible to have a reasoned debate on this forum.


  • Options
    #128
    Alactric
    Registered Users Posts: 192 ✭✭Alactric


    Yeah lads... The OP is after turning to Judaism by now.


  • Options
    #129
    Benny_Cake
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,205 ✭✭✭Benny_Cake


    Alactric wrote: »
    Yeah lads... The OP is after turning to Judaism by now.

    He's probably ordered Dianetics at this point!


  • Options
    #130
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    The OP has probably long since departed and who could blame them? It's getting quite impossible to have a reasoned debate on this forum.

    Indeed, it's a tragedy. It's a shame unfortunately that some posters have choice topics that they want to consume this forum with. It's also a shame that when people do have genuine questions that often the debate becomes more consumed with atheist trolling than it does with actually giving the OP a good explanation from a Christian perspective.

    I can see why people are getting tired of it.


  • Options
    #131
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    Mintoz wrote: »
    I bet that guy isn't a Christian either. But I haven't even read it, and will. I won't ignore it, no. Craig isn't perfect, but downright logical. I remember him in his audio books, saying it's 40. Considering the risk of AIDS, and how much sex they have, as much as heterosexuals, it's very likely.

    Oh wait, it's Dawkins himself. Well that expalins everything.

    You know AIDS can also occur in heterosexual people, right?

    Yes, it is dawkins. You know, the man who is actually well respected. Walk into your local bookstore. Count the number written by dawkins, then the number written by Craig.

    There are respectable Christian philosophers out there, and plenty of them.
    That lunatic you're taking your 'facts' from is certainly not one of them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    Alactric
    Registered Users Posts: 192 ✭✭Alactric


    Benny_Cake wrote: »
    He's probably ordered Dianetics at this point!

    "You see...when you're a Scientoligist. And you drive past a car crash...you just know, you're the only man who can do anything about it" :o


  • Options
    #133
    Extinction
    Closed Accounts Posts: 745 ✭✭✭Extinction


    Mintoz wrote: »
    I bet that guy isn't a Christian either. But I haven't even read it, and will. I won't ignore it, no. Craig isn't perfect, but downright logical. I remember him in his audio books, saying it's 40. Considering the risk of AIDS, and how much sex they have, as much as heterosexuals, it's very likely.

    Oh wait, it's Dawkins himself. Well that expalins everything. Yes, Dawkind refused to debate him because Craig explains why God commanded the driving out of the Cannanites. Dawkins felt he was defending genocide, even though for the author of life, murder, thus genocide is impossible..

    I know its off topic and I shouldn't do this but the mention of Craig reminds me of this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPdFrW076R0
    Apologies to
    Christians
    Catholics
    Moderators


  • Options
    #134
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    philologos wrote: »
    Indeed, it's a tragedy. It's a shame unfortunately that some posters have choice topics that they want to consume this forum with. It's also a shame that when people do have genuine questions that often the debate becomes more consumed with atheist trolling than it does with actually giving the OP a good explanation from a Christian perspective.

    I can see why people are getting tired of it.

    Yup, let's indoctrine the crap outta people instead of helping them come to an informed decision. If you look back at my post attempting to help the OP you'll notice I suggested looking into other Christian groups, AS WELL AS, saying there are ways they can avoid feeling alone without joining a religious group.


  • Options
    #135
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    Yup, let's indoctrine the crap outta people instead of helping them come to an informed decision. If you look back at my post attempting to help the OP you'll notice I suggested looking into other Christian groups, AS WELL AS, saying there are ways they can avoid feeling alone without joining a religious group.

    I disagree. If someone asks a question about Christianity on the Christianity forum, it is entirely reasonable to provide them with the best answer from a Christian perspective.

    If they wanted to ask atheists, they'd go to the Atheism and Agnosticism forum, if they wanted to ask Muslims they'd go to the Islam forum, if they wanted to ask Wiccans / pagans they'd go to the Paganism forum.

    If you are coming on this thread to soapbox, that shouldn't be kosher IMO. Part of coming on here, involves listening to other peoples views. I have no problem with atheists posting as long as they do so with respect, I understand that some lines were crossed in some posts.

    This forum, is intended for the discussion of Christianity in a reasonable and a gracious manner. It's not intended for a shouting match.


  • Options
    #136
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Doctor Jimbob wrote: »
    You know AIDS can also occur in heterosexual people, right?

    Yes, it is dawkins. You know, the man who is actually well respected. Walk into your local bookstore. Count the number written by dawkins, then the number written by Craig.

    There are respectable Christian philosophers out there, and plenty of them.
    That lunatic you're taking your 'facts' from is certainly not one of them.

    Dawkins amongst serious philosophers is not well respected. Dawkins is a great scientist, but a terrible theologian and philoshoper. The number of books he has published does not determine the credibility of a mans work. Craig I'd say has written more books than Dawkins, but Richards is famous because it's going against the grain, and has been refuted try the 'The Dawkins Delusion'.

    Dawkins makes terrible arguments, it's embarrasing. Because he's too busy talking about how all religious people believe in unicorns, tooth fairies and santa claus. Even though the Santa Claus story is supposed to teach children not to believe something because it makes you happy or good, but because it's the truth. It teaches to value truth.


  • Options
    #137
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    philologos wrote: »
    I disagree. If someone asks a question about Christianity on the Christianity forum, it is entirely reasonable to provide them with the best answer from a Christian perspective.

    If they wanted to ask atheists, they'd go to the Atheism and Agnosticism forum, if they wanted to ask Muslims they'd go to the Islam forum, if they wanted to ask Wiccans / pagans they'd go to the Paganism forum.

    If you are coming on this thread to soapbox, that shouldn't be kosher IMO. Part of coming on here, involves listening to other peoples views. I have no problem with atheists posting as long as they do so with respect, I understand that some lines were crossed in some posts.

    This forum, is intended for the discussion of Christianity in a reasonable and a gracious manner. It's not intended for a shouting match.

    I'm not coming on here to soapbox, if I were, I would hardly be suggesting the OP look at other brances of Christianity.

    Just because the OP didn't originally ask for input from other groups, does not mean input from other groups won't help them.


  • Options
    #138
    Doctor Jimbob
    Registered Users Posts: 7,631 ✭✭✭Doctor Jimbob


    Mintoz wrote: »
    Dawkins amongst serious philosophers is not well respected. Dawkins is a great scientist, but a terrible theologian and philoshoper. The number of books he has published does not determine the credibility of a mans work. Craig I'd say has written more books than Dawkins, but Richards is famous because it's going against the grain, and has been refuted try the 'The Dawkins Delusion'.

    Dawkins makes terrible arguments, it's embarrasing. Because he's too busy talking about how all religious people believe in unicorns, tooth fairies and santa claus. Even though the Santa Claus story is supposed to teach children not to believe something because it makes you happy or good, but because it's the truth. It teaches to value truth.

    Dawkins does make some terrible arguments, and can often be far too provocative. I'm not his biggest fan for those reasons. That doesn't change the fact that he's a respected intelligent man though, certainly more so than Craig.


  • Options
    #139
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Alactric wrote: »
    Lo-Logic? "Gay people on average live to 40" ...:D

    I didn't say all gay people. I was referring to the average homosexual male in America. Because of all the sex they have over there. There's no way Craig woud make that up, that guy loves the truth, he's dedicated his life to his faith.


  • Options
    #140
    Fanny Cradock
    Registered Users Posts: 10,245 ✭✭✭✭Fanny Cradock


    Honestly, can we not go one thread without the mention of homosexuality?


  • Options
    #141
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Honestly, can we not go one thread without the mention of homosexuality?

    I know right. It's a shame that we actually don't get to discuss Christianity on this forum any more.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Mintoz wrote: »
    I didn't say all gay people. I was referring to the average homosexual male in America. Because of all the sex they have over there. There's no way Craig woud make that up, that guy loves the truth, he's dedicated his life to his faith.

    Only got to a pc now, the stat seems to originate from Paul Cameron and this refutes it rather well...
    Cameron's method had the virtue of simplicity, at least. He and two co-authors read through back numbers of various urban gay community papers, mostly of the giveaway sort that are laden with bar ads and personals. They counted up obituaries and news stories about deaths, noted the ages of the deceased, computed the average, and published the resulting numbers as estimates of gay life expectancy.

    What do vital-statistics buffs think of this technique? Nick Eberstadt at the American Enterprise Institute sums up the reactions of several of his fellow demographers: "The method as you describe it is just ridiculous." But you don't have to be a trained statistician to spot the fallacy at its heart, which is, to quote Centers for Disease Control and Prevention statistician John Karon, that "you're only getting the ages of those who die." Gay men of the same generation destined to live to old age, even if more numerous, won't turn up in the sample.
    ...
    Against this, Cameron and his supporters argue that, according to their survey of obits, even if they don't have AIDS, homosexual males tend to die by their mid-40s (and lesbians by their late 40s). Some downright peculiar results followed from this inference. One is that--contrary to the opinion of virtually everyone else in the world--AIDS in fact hasn't reduced gay males' life expectancy by that much--a few years, at most. Moreover, the obits also recorded lots of violent and accidental deaths. From this Cameron and company concluded not that newsworthy deaths tend to get into newspapers, but that gays must experience shockingly high rates of violent death. With a perfectly straight face they report, for example, that lesbians are at least 300 times more likely to die in car crashes than females of similar ages in general.
    ...
    Unfortunately there really is no satisfactory measure of actual life expectancy among gay men. However, Harry Rosenberg, the mortality-statistics chief at the National Center for Health Statistics, says he's unaware of evidence that HIV-negative gays have a lower life expectancy than other males. Rosenberg also points to one reason to think the HIV-negative gay male may actually live longer on average than the straight male: Gays may have higher incomes and more education on average than straights--two factors powerfully correlated with longer life spans. (Bennett himself appears to share this view, terming gays, "as a group, wealthy and well educated.")
    Complete Article: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/hey_wait_a_minute/1997/12/william_bennett_gays_and_the_truth.html

    So Craig appears to have taken advantage of bull**** stats to grab the attention of his audience. Unless he also claims that lesbians are far more likely to die in car crashes too. Statistical manipulation is not very difficult for those who have agendas and people that want to hear such lies.

    Another article that touches upon it is this.
    http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-3.3/ross.html
    Perhaps you could research rather than spout nonsense next time.


  • Options
    #143
    totus tuus
    Closed Accounts Posts: 375 ✭✭totus tuus


    Fanny Cradock wrote: »
    Honestly, can we not go one thread without the mention of homosexuality?


    Yes, it's the same ol' merry-go-round! :(


  • Options
    #144
    Mintoz
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 50 ✭✭Mintoz


    Corkfeen wrote: »
    Only got to a pc now, the stat seems to originate from Paul Cameron and this refutes it rather well...



    So Craig appears to have taken advantage of bull**** stats to grab the attention of his audience. Unless he also claims that lesbians are far more likely to die in car crashes too. Statistical manipulation is not very difficult for those who have agendas and people that want to hear such lies.

    Another article that touches upon it is this.
    http://www.columbia.edu/cu/21stC/issue-3.3/ross.html
    Perhaps you could research rather than spout nonsense next time.

    Craig, from what I remember was being specific regarding this statistic, he did say 40, but even if he was mislead, he wasn't telling lie, because he believed it to be true. I am going to do some of my own research on this, because I want to know what's true here. And I do know athiests can be biased when they want to.

    Also I think it's unfair to say I was spouting nonsense, since I believed it to be true, and for some parts of the world it could be. Now, if I knew it was nonsense and still said it, then that's a different thing.


  • Options
    #145
    Corkfeen
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,940 ✭✭✭Corkfeen


    Mintoz wrote: »
    Craig, from what I remember was being specific regarding this statistic, he did say 40, but even if he was mislead, he wasn't telling lie, because he believed it to be true. I am going to do some of my own research on this, because I want to know what's true here. And I do know athiests can be biased when they want to.

    Also I think it's unfair to say I was spouting nonsense, since I believed it to be true, and for some parts of the world it could be. Now, if I knew it was nonsense and still said it, then that's a different thing.

    Craig was also spouting nonsense. As an academic, he should be well aware of the fact that he should check if the information that he is using is reliable. I am sure he was well aware of the issues with the statistics but merely ignored it. Either way, it doesn't reflect well upon his ability in academia.

    Also you specifically said it was America, you made the statement without anything to back it up. For such an extreme statement, you are expected to back it up if you don't want it to be viewed as nonsense.


  • Options
    #146
    Plowman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,630 ✭✭✭Plowman


    This post has been deleted.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement