Thread closed?

[Geo]

That's why it was closed...

The subject was Folau's possible return to RL and ended with posters calling other posters flogs etc etc...

We are not in the business of deleting posts and banning users but it generally ends up like that when religion or politics are involved so it's easier to nip it in the bud and close a thread that goes way of topic as that one did..

By all means continue the discussion on religion in here if you wish but as was stated above once it becomes personal this thread will end the same way

 

[Abraham]

@MAGPIES1963 Don't get stressed out, its only a forum people use to pass the time.

Make as many pro-religious posts as you like, and try enjoy the banter.

God Bless you.

 

[tigerbalm]

Once Jesus decided to turn to the dark side and play fullback for Satan's Roosters, the forum really turned on religion.

 

[NT_Tiger]

@Abraham
To which, the appropriate response is; Which god? There are many. Quetzalcoatl?
I use the same response when someone close to me says OMG.

 

[Abraham]

@NT_Tiger Not sure what are you talking about here?

 

[NT_Tiger]

@Abraham
You used the phrase; God bless you. The question I have when someone says that is; Which god?

 

[fair dinkum]

Probably because those who don't believe in a God belittle those who do by basically stating they're idiots.
Those who believe are marked as rational, logical and full of good old common sense.
What does that infer they consider the ones who do?
**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**
Each to their own.
As long as people are respectful of each each others views without denigrating them there shouldn't be a problem.

**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**

Truth matters.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim, not the person saying i dont believe you because you have failed to provide a single piece of non anecdotal evidence. Logic 101.

 

[tigerap]

Probably because of certain posters who think of themselves as the SME on theology and dismiss counter opinions as irrelevant or ignorant? Rarely seen at other times but as soon as religion pops up you can bet your house on them chiming in...

Add any hint of perceived racism to that....

 

[Abraham]

@NT_Tiger Why would you ask that when you are aware of exactly what the person is referring to?

But as an aside, all of those theories about Abrahamic God being a manifestation of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian gods were thoroughly debunked in the early 1900's. This is really old news based on bad scholarship, which nobody takes seriously, and haven't for a long time.

The short answer, if your interested, is that all of these other pagan "gods" were said to be creations of the Universe. While the God of the Bible is the actual creator of the Universe. As you can see, that is a huge distinction.

 

[voice_of_reason]

Unfortunately religious and political discussions normally turn into unsavoury poop-fights. People are so fervent in their beliefs they can never be convinced there's another alternative so there's a massive degree of futility and frustration in trying.

Football discussion is hard enough, and we all agree on which team to follow...

 

[NT_Tiger]

@Abraham ..... and a convenient one at that. So, just because a religion was oral and not written, it is less valid as a belief system?
I am never fully aware of exactly what a person is referring to when the reference is to a god. As I said there are many 'gods' or deities that people around the world have belief and or faith in. I personally have many friends that believe in gods other than the one to which you are referring. Their belief is everyday and active in their approaches to the way they live. Much more so, I might add, than what I have personally observed in the believers of the Bible that I know.
I think it is rather arrogant to assume that whenever someone refers to a god, it will necessarily be the god referred to in the Bible.

 

[Tigers17]

I to have made some very pro-religion posts on here and been denigrated for it.

I don't have the theologic knowledge that you have, and I find arguments stressful so I don't put up much of a fight.

I do know however what I seriously object to, and that is the Holy Names of God and Jesus being used in a very in-appropriate way on this forum. So I have referred a number of posts to our administrators for moderation. I wasn't successful on most occasions though.

I also have objected very strongly to the depiction of Jesus being used in an inappropriate and in my opinion disrespectful way.

Let's face it, it's simply a matter of respect for each other's beliefs and points of view.

We are all on the same side on this forum, but we don't act like that sometimes.

Good on you Champion.
I agree with your post 100%.

 

[Harvey]

I often find that people with strong religious beliefs (regardless of the denomination) are among the most intolerant people.

I remember my brother getting bashed at a party by a drunken believer because they took offence to his t-shirt.

It was either the one with a picture of Jesus on the cross and the slogan, “If you’re Jesus and you know it clap your hands” or one with just a slogan. Either “I found Jesus, he was hiding behind my sofa” or, “Jesus did it for the chicks”

 

[Abraham]

@NT_Tiger Except you know which God i believe in. So the question is redundant.

 

[cktiger]

Probably because those who don't believe in a God belittle those who do by basically stating they're idiots.
Those who believe are marked as rational, logical and full of good old common sense.
What does that infer they consider the ones who do?
**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**
Each to their own.
As long as people are respectful of each each others views without denigrating them there shouldn't be a problem.

**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**

Truth matters.

**The burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim**, not the person saying i dont believe you because you have failed to provide a single piece of non anecdotal evidence. **Logic 101.**

I think you've got it the wrong way around.
If you want to debunk someone's belief then you should be able to prove why they're wrong.
Now that's Logic 101.
I'm no bible basher, nor do I attend church ... but I can't think of a way to categorically disprove their may be a God.
Can you?

 

[Sart0ri]

@NT_Tiger Why would you ask that when you are aware of exactly what the person is referring to?

But as an aside, all of those theories about Abrahamic God being a manifestation of the Egyptian and Mesopotamian gods were thoroughly debunked in the early 1900's. This is really old news based on bad scholarship, which nobody takes seriously, and haven't for a long time.

The short answer, if your interested, is that all of these other pagan "gods" were said to be creations of the Universe. While the God of the Bible is the actual creator of the Universe. As you can see, that is a huge distinction.

So the Christian God created the Universe, the Universe created the Aztec Gods Kukulkán and Tepeu, and they created man?

Or are the Mesoamericans wrong in believing Kukulkán and Tepeu created man? I am not an SME, I just spent 2 min on Wikipedia.

You state that "God of the Bible is the actual creator of the Universe" but you don't seems to have any references to back that up.

 

[JD Tiger]

@cktiger I see this on here a lot. You prove it, no you prove it.

It's the person trying to convince the other of their own belief that has the onus to prove it. If you're just saying this is what I believe, and you're not trying to convert another, no onus of proof. If you're trying to show they are wrong, you need to prove it.

Imo, good luck with that to anyone who tries, proving their belief, they're going to need it. Isn't it called faith as there is no proof, you need to have faith? And how can you absolutely know there is no god, you can't? So yeah good luck.

 

[NT_Tiger]

@Abraham I didn't see any reference to your belief in a particular god. If there was one, I missed it. As I said, I know of many gods that are actively worshipped, for want of another word. I understand that yours is important to you, but it can't be assumed it is equally important to others.

 

[Sart0ri]

Russell's teapot is an analogy, formulated by the philosopher Bertrand Russell (1872–1970), to illustrate that the philosophic burden of proof lies upon a person making unfalsifiable claims, rather than shifting the burden of disproof to others.

Russell specifically applied his analogy in the context of religion. He wrote that if he were to assert, without offering proof, that a teapot, too small to be seen by telescopes, orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, he could not expect anyone to believe him solely because his assertion could not be proven wrong.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell%27s_teapot

 

[mike]

Probably because those who don't believe in a God belittle those who do by basically stating they're idiots.
Those who believe are marked as rational, logical and full of good old common sense.
What does that infer they consider the ones who do?
**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**
Each to their own.
As long as people are respectful of each each others views without denigrating them there shouldn't be a problem.

**The one thing these people can't do, however, is totally disprove the idea.**

Truth matters.

The burden of proof is on the person making the positive claim, not the person saying i dont believe you because you have failed to provide a single piece of non anecdotal evidence. Logic 101.

Yep. You can’t prove a negative. The burden of proof rests solely with those making the positive claim.