How can we end the use of "OCD" as a frivolous adjective that people without any idea of genuine OCD use to describe their entirely normal habits? Real OCD is a cause of serious torment for many who truly have it - but I constantly observe non-sufferers proudly saying "I'm really OCD about....", and it's horribly inconsiderate of those who actually have it.
But people shouldn't be defined by sexuality. What someone does on a football pitch is entirely separate from what they do in bed. They're a human being, whose sex life is no one else's business, not a novelty for corporations to use for virtue signalling.
Obviously, bullying needs to be stamped out - but Pride campaigns seem to only make bullies more hysterical.
Obviously, bullying needs to be stamped out - but Pride campaigns seem to only make bullies more hysterical.
But so many working families have such low salaries that the number of children growing up in poverty in working households is set to be 1 million (+50%) higher this year than in 2010. So you've put 1miilliion more children into poverty, and they get less time with their parents. https://www.tuc.org.uk/news/
After the recent revelations about Burberry burning tonnes of stock just to keep it out of the hands of the non elite - whilst there are people forced to live in rags - I'm afraid I really hope it collapses.
"Human decency is not derived from religion. It precedes it.” -
Or God created all human beings in His image but with free will (hence evil), so whether or not a person believes in Him (and believing in HIm is not necessarily equivalent to religion, at all) "decency" - compassion, honesty, generosity etc - are the result of being made by Him, rather than only being chance evolved matter.
(just thinking out loud - typing - feel free to think I'm daft but I don't have time to argue)
Or God created all human beings in His image but with free will (hence evil), so whether or not a person believes in Him (and believing in HIm is not necessarily equivalent to religion, at all) "decency" - compassion, honesty, generosity etc - are the result of being made by Him, rather than only being chance evolved matter.
(just thinking out loud - typing - feel free to think I'm daft but I don't have time to argue)
Free will has been debunked by modern neuro-science. Try and keep up before pretending to defend your imaginary invisible sky dwelling daddy figure.
"Free will has been debunked by modern neuro-science" - that's fascinating, can you give me some references? An what point is there in telling me to "try" anything if I apparently have no free will?
You can be a good person with positive qualities without claiming that a religion created human qualities. You and your god must be pretty desperate when you have to join a humanist page in order to try and troll us.
You're missing the point - if God actually created us all, then you can claim whatever you want about why certain human qualities exist, but your belief doesn't change the probability that God did in fact create us.
I didn't "join" the page, I follow it, with hundreds of others of all leanings, so that I can have better understanding of differing views, rather than worsening my echo chamber.
Following a group and pitiful attempts to sway secular individuals makes you look desperate. Your opinions are yours, some of us join these groups to avoid those opinions and the plague of religion and the lies it spews. The odds of your god existing are the same odds of your god magically helping millions of people that suffer from hunger and dehydration, and disease everyday in an instant.
So you think that everyone should just stay in echo chambers?
Yes I'm desperate.
How are you definig and calculating "Odds"? Indeed the probability of God's existence is independent of a believer's circumstances, but what's your point?
I didn't "join" the page, I follow it, with hundreds of others of all leanings, so that I can have better understanding of differing views, rather than worsening my echo chamber.
Following a group and pitiful attempts to sway secular individuals makes you look desperate. Your opinions are yours, some of us join these groups to avoid those opinions and the plague of religion and the lies it spews. The odds of your god existing are the same odds of your god magically helping millions of people that suffer from hunger and dehydration, and disease everyday in an instant.
So you think that everyone should just stay in echo chambers?
Yes I'm desperate.
How are you definig and calculating "Odds"? Indeed the probability of God's existence is independent of a believer's circumstances, but what's your point?
Bullying should be addressed, serious problems do exist that we shouldn't ignore; but I'm struggling to grasp what's meant by pride. And I'm most recently baffled by this - https://www.metro.news/
Pennsylvania investigating sex abuse by priests in six Catholic dioceses
Mary Manning that's tragic! Nearly all Churches are safe and are fantastic places for kids to be - when I was a child, Sunday school and Church youth club were where I felt happy and confident at a time when school was intimidating. But they also taught me values - aiming to be like Jesus - that impact me still (though I know that I need to do far better at becoming more like Him, obviously). Later on, studying science, I came to actually believe for the first time that God exists, and drawing closer to Him since then has made me happier than I ever was before I believed. But I'm still very grateful for things like VeggieTales (I wish that What's in the Bible? had been around when I was a kid). If you don't go to a Church, those, as well as online sermons, are truly fantastic
I hate how so many people now associate Christianity with the very opposite of what Christ did and taught, because of predators like this^ (though as other news has shown, there's sex abuse in all sectors 😠It's grotesque that other Church leaders haven't done more to address this issue, I desperately hope that the victims find comfort, as much as one could; and that changes are made to prevent this in future. God is slow to anger (Psalm 103:8), but SEETHING at abuse like this^.
My nine year old was only baptized and I have not been able to go back due to these fears
Breakfast in bed? We've got you coveredl
So sorry that this will sound judgemental - but wouldn't it actually be better to prep some yourself?
Supermarket: Black Pudding - £2 for 4 slices
Beans - 25p per large tin
Bacon - £2 for 6 rashers
Mushrooms - 79p per box
Eggs - £1.25 for 15
Tomatoes - 79p per pack
Sausages - £2 for 8
To feed 2 - Totalling much less than half the price of having it delivered.
Eating quick recipes at home is so, so much better for the planet - deliveries are using plastic that's wrecking the environment, and fuel to transport it. The money saved would help massively with living costs; or could feed a child with no food at all for weeks. I find that exciting :)
(Seriously, apologies that this seems so patronising, I just felt that it needed to be said - commercialism has conditioned many of us to believe that take outs, restaurants, coffee shops etc are necessary to enjoy life, and it's a lie)
Supermarket: Black Pudding - £2 for 4 slices
Beans - 25p per large tin
Bacon - £2 for 6 rashers
Mushrooms - 79p per box
Eggs - £1.25 for 15
Tomatoes - 79p per pack
Sausages - £2 for 8
To feed 2 - Totalling much less than half the price of having it delivered.
Eating quick recipes at home is so, so much better for the planet - deliveries are using plastic that's wrecking the environment, and fuel to transport it. The money saved would help massively with living costs; or could feed a child with no food at all for weeks. I find that exciting :)
(Seriously, apologies that this seems so patronising, I just felt that it needed to be said - commercialism has conditioned many of us to believe that take outs, restaurants, coffee shops etc are necessary to enjoy life, and it's a lie)
I find it a strange concept, if you can be bothered to get out of bed and answer the door, plus the effort of ordering it, you can be bothering to slap a pan on the cooker its not it needs alot of work. But bringing plastic into it is dumb, the meat products on your list all come in plastic packaging as do the mushrooms and tomatoes and the bread you've strangely left off that list and the beans which come in a plastic lined aluminium tin. All where transported to the supermarket in the first place, although you can't choose tbe origin of your food in this case having no idea if your mushrooms are British, uber does use cyclists for delivering and its likely to be from a local greasy spoon.
But surely the packaging for buying these items that have servings for at least 2 people, will be less than the fraction of packaging when the caterer buys the ingredients, then sends the dishes in per person containers?
Ultimately, I'm far more interested in the meals (or other things) that I can pay for for people in the poorest parts of the world with the money I save by not buying take aways :)
EG - the difference (between making my own full English and ordering it) would be enough to buy sandals or a school bag for a child recovering from leprosy https://leprosymission.org.nz/
and right now, if I donate it this way https://leprosymission.org.nz/
Ultimately, I'm far more interested in the meals (or other things) that I can pay for for people in the poorest parts of the world with the money I save by not buying take aways :)
EG - the difference (between making my own full English and ordering it) would be enough to buy sandals or a school bag for a child recovering from leprosy https://leprosymission.org.nz/
and right now, if I donate it this way https://leprosymission.org.nz/
Although this is vile beyond words, we can't use it as a reason to reduce foreign aid. Extreme poverty in itself leads to abuse in developing countries - for example, girls who are grossly impoverished may be forced into brothels. Conflict in Congo and other places, fuelled by poverty, includes rape as a war crime. We need to give to charities working in developing countries that have been better checked, and contact charities an politicians about our anger regarding sex abuse - many millions of people have had their lives transformed because of overseas aid charities, we shouldn't let the evil of people like this^ lead to more people starving.
A slaughter in silence
Frack why are there laughter reactions to this? We should be far, far, far more concerned about suffering in Africa (though fortunately, poverty has been reduced, thanks to Aid, in recent decades). It's very much because of Western greed, for centuries, that there's such severe poverty and conflict for some people in Africa - and those people are every bit as deserving as any of us. The aim to put one's nation before others -"America First"- as though people in one place are more important than others - is truly unintelligent and evil.
A country is like a family. We provide security for our family such as a fence or door locks and pay the local police/fire etc. We work to insure they are fed and when there is surplus we offer our time and energy to charities and the needy. Suffering of others does not mean the people who are not suffering are evil. Are you evil for making a living? For having a home? For having an income? For protecting your family? For the record, the USA pays for 22% of all of the UN budget, even though there are 193 countries.
Fences and door locks? We've gone into another family's home, stolen most of their things, and forced them to labour for us.
Am I the only one who thinks that they look like petrol pumps?
But seriously, what sort of question is "why have [guns] been banned?"? What I don't understand is why on Earth guns are so often allowed in the US.
But seriously, what sort of question is "why have [guns] been banned?"? What I don't understand is why on Earth guns are so often allowed in the US.
Business owners shouldn't be forced to do things that they feel uncomfortable with. But more importantly, (James 1:27) "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world."
Spin it however but in the end it’s still discrimination and bigotry.
I'm not arguing that people should be able to treat PEOPLE differently , I'm arguing that they should be allowed to not provide items for a specific EVENT or with a specific MESSAGE that they know God has warned humanity to avoid. So all that I was referring to, all that would ever be reasonable to allow, is for business owners to not participate in celebrations/campaigns for things that God has said we should refrain from - it's not OK to discriminate against specific people because of who they are, but that's not necesssarily why someone might refuse a service.
The point is that God loves every human being beyond measure, it's some ACTIONS that He opposes, and that's why some business owners might want not to support those actions. Of course, ~I'm aware that some people who claim themselves to be Christian might simply be hateful, and my sympathies are with their victims- but hate is entirely antithetical to what Jesus taught and practised.
The point is that God loves every human being beyond measure, it's some ACTIONS that He opposes, and that's why some business owners might want not to support those actions. Of course, ~I'm aware that some people who claim themselves to be Christian might simply be hateful, and my sympathies are with their victims- but hate is entirely antithetical to what Jesus taught and practised.
I believe you’re open to the public or you are not. Just because you are a Christian does not allow you to refuse service to gay people. Do I get to refuse service to bigots? It goes very much against my beliefs. Put a tuxedo on a goat. Still a goat. Discrimination and bigotry are wrong.
which part of my comment did you not understand?
Some people may be driven by bigotry, but by no means is that the reason for everyone. If you had a sibling who started doing something that your parent had warned you both not to do, and they asked you to celebrate it, you might refuse. You wouldn't refuse because you hate the sibling, but because you know that your parent loves you both, and that the parent knows better than you and your sibling about what's good for you in the long run. God's knowledge is so far beyond ours that we can't necessarily fathom why He has given certain commands -but He loves you, immeasurably.
But yes, if you were a business owner, you should be free to refuse service to people whose views you disagree with too.
Some people may be driven by bigotry, but by no means is that the reason for everyone. If you had a sibling who started doing something that your parent had warned you both not to do, and they asked you to celebrate it, you might refuse. You wouldn't refuse because you hate the sibling, but because you know that your parent loves you both, and that the parent knows better than you and your sibling about what's good for you in the long run. God's knowledge is so far beyond ours that we can't necessarily fathom why He has given certain commands -but He loves you, immeasurably.
But yes, if you were a business owner, you should be free to refuse service to people whose views you disagree with too.
Have some sympathy for the 60 somethings unable to retire, being over worked at a point when they have less energy (which is, of course, not to say that all 60 something's have less energy, only that it's natural to have less energy than one's younger self or younger colleagues). My generation owe them more respect.
Media outlets like Metro that discuss sex as heroic and vital are no small part of the cause.
I live in London (and always have) - and am seriously annoyed by the stupidity of blaming Khan for crime. The root cause is secularisation; we used to grow up being told to be like Jesus, now we grow up being encouraged to be confident, and, by musicians and films, to put ourselves first. The central government (opposite party to Sadiq Khan) has cut police funding; and aspects of social media exacerbate gang warfare, as do drugs. Blaming Khan is utterly daft.
so because we haven't been outside the USA, we dont know what crime and terrorism is all about? I've never been in a train wreck, but l sure know l don't want to be in one
No, the point is that you don't know what it's like in London. It's huge, and though some parts of dangerous, most of it isn't. When Trump spoke at the NRA conference several months ago and talked about our problem with "horrible knives everywhere" and "blood all over the place" in hospitals, most of us found it hilarious because it's so unrepresentative. Either way, as I said, it's not Khan that's the problem. And essentially all of us are certain that legalisation of guns is insane.
Both our nation and yours need God more than anything. There's no solution to our knife crime issues or your gun crime issues that can come close to making so much of a difference as people turning to Him would.
Both our nation and yours need God more than anything. There's no solution to our knife crime issues or your gun crime issues that can come close to making so much of a difference as people turning to Him would.
What the public presumes it to mean has become something entirely different from what it actually means - but I'm not sure that Rob Bell should be trusted to define it.
10 Powerful Photos That Capture The Horrors Of Illegal Abortions
Abortion is always horrible. Even if it's legal and supposedly safe, there are serious psychological and physical risks to the mother, and there have been fatalities. Whatever happens to the mother, a tiny developing human is killed, sometimes torn limb from limb. The solution is better contraception access and waiting (till hitched) to have sex. There's a far greater source of satisfaction in life than sex, but corporations that benewfit (sex sells) have conned us into thinking that having dozens of sexual partners is healthy.
IDK if you actually read the article...but there was a 9 year old child who gave birth...the baby belonged to her own biological father who had raped her from the age of 7....she had to give birth to that child....disgusting...and u have the audacity to say to wait till youre married and better contraception access....she most likely lived in a country that didn't and or doesn't allow it....she was 9 years old
I didn't say that a child who was raped shouldn't be allowed an abortion - I'm objecting to the 99% of abortions in which the woman has already made a choice (to have sex). It makes no sense to legalise something for everyone on the basis of the very rarest cases.
I didn't say that a child who was raped shouldn't be allowed an abortion - I'm objecting to the 99% of abortions in which the woman has already made a choice (to have sex). It makes no sense to legalise something for everyone on the basis of the very rarest cases.
Abortion (when done by a medical professional) is much safer than childbirth. The risk of death for a woman due to childbirth is 14 times higher than due to a medical induced abortion. Further, partly because pregnancy lasts for months, the comorbidities of pregnancy are worse and more prevalent than those for induced abortion (high blood pressure, diabetes, gastrointestinal issues, eclampsia, anxiety, depression, migraines, and joint pain to name a few).
where did you get the 14x figure from? Either way, abortion kills a tiny human. A woman is safest if she doesn't risk getting pregnant in the first place.
Saying that choosing to have sex equals choosing pregnancy is like saying getting into a car is choosing to get into a crash.
It's nothing like that - cars and bodies are not equivocal. Sex only exists because of reproduction (which doesn't mean that people should only have it now when trying to reproduce, but biologically it wouldn't exist if it weren't necessary to maintain the species). People drive because it enables them to get to places that they need to, it isn't mere recreation. And as I said, contraception and sterilisation should be made easily available.
Congrats on missing the point. We don't withhold medical treatment from crash victims because they chose to drive. Saying sex is only for reproduction is like saying eating is only for nourishment (in other words, eat nothing but the basics when hungry and never for flavor or celebratory purposes). And contraception and sterilization access are fought against by the same crowd that fights against abortion rights.
I specifically said that sex isn't only for reproduction - but it exists (I presume you believe in evolution) because the species needed to reproduce. And the fact that "the same crowd" fights contraception doesn't mean that I do, so what's your point?
I don't "believe" in evolution, I know its real because of scientific evidence. Belief does not apply to science. I see you still fail to grasp the point I made, but I don't know how to make it any more obvious.
How on Earth are you defining "Believe"?
So married people can only have sex if they want a baby at the moment? Pretty much all contraceptives have a risk of failing. Most abortions occur extremely early in pregnancy & are very similar to a miscarriage so no they are not ripped & torn apart. You seem really misinformed.
There are lots of contraceptive methods that are over 90% effective, some 99%https://www.cosmopolitan.com/.../how-effective.../; and they could be combined (eg. use a fertility app, a coil and a condom). There's also tubo-ligation (and vasectomies).
I should add - I'm sorry that the US doesn't have universal health care, I desperately hope that this changes.
I should add - I'm sorry that the US doesn't have universal health care, I desperately hope that this changes.
Tbh: If you’re pregnant than you can apply your views all you want. Till then if it’s not your womb, it is not your concern. 🤷🏽♀️ that’s my opinion tho
I'm well aware that it's not my decision. But I am concerned, because it breaks my heart that tiny humans are killed.
& tiny humans are not killed. They are cells that have a chance to develop into tiny humans. Just like sperm. But you don’t seeing anyone freaking out when he decides to put it in a towel vs making a tiny human. Maybe I’ll start worrying about abortions when our orphanages are completely empty. Until then.. gtfo. We are overpopulated and so many kids living horrible lives with no family. Or kids living with people who should have never been parents or never wanted to be but didn’t believe in abortion and blame the kid for it every day of their lives. Birth control ain’t perfect. Just sayin.
Yes, they are tiny humans. That's just straightforward biology. They have their own unique, complete genome, unlike sperm. Sperm are single cells with half the genome of other cells; a foetus has many millions of cells, working together as cells do in our bodies.
Unlike religion that conned us into believing that if a man is to take ownership of a woman by marrying her, she's more valuable if she's not second hand. You may be happy being thought of like a Ford Cortina but not most women, these days. The circumstances for pregnancies and the need for a termination are innumerable, there is no black and white solution to end them all.
Can you explain what you mean by "religion conned us"? Throughout human history, across cultures, some men have considered that a woman is "more valuable if she's not second hand", it's not that specific to a particular "religion". In fact the Bible's account of Ruth and Boaz, and respect for women with a promiscuous history at a time when they were typically shunned, suggests that your assertion is much mistaken.
What about people who don’t want kids? Should they just stay abstinent their entire lives? Fuck that! Bodily autonomy, girlfriend. Look it up.
Bodily autonomy? To destroy the body of another human being?
As I've already said, there are lots of contraceptive options, which are individually nearly 100% effective, and can be combined. There's also tubo ligation. But seriously, it's tragic that abstinence is considered so unthinkable. Our generation's been brainwashed by corporate forces - sex sells - into thinking that we need sex to be happy. There's an incomparably greater source of happiness, and most of our society is ignoring Him.
As I've already said, there are lots of contraceptive options, which are individually nearly 100% effective, and can be combined. There's also tubo ligation. But seriously, it's tragic that abstinence is considered so unthinkable. Our generation's been brainwashed by corporate forces - sex sells - into thinking that we need sex to be happy. There's an incomparably greater source of happiness, and most of our society is ignoring Him.
Most women in the country who are having abortions are over 18, married, with a child already. So...wtf are you on about???
Where are you getting that from? According to the Department of Health for England and Wales, unmarried women accounted for approximately 84% of all 2015 abortions.
As a social worker I can tell you for certain just because a child is born does not mean it is taken care of. I understand Grace Dalton that you don't like the idea of tiny humans not being born. But I'm also sure you don't like the idea of tiny humans being physically and sexually abused and neglected either. If a child is not wanted this is what can happen. To echo an earlier comment, if you don't want to have an abortion don't have one. It shouldn't be something anyone decides for another person. We have no idea what others lives are like.
Thankyou for what you do as a social worker
If you are so concerned about "tiny humans being killed" then why would you be ok with abortion if the woman was raped? That's still a "tiny human being killed". Why does it matter how it got there? Sounds like you just want to punish women for enjoying sex.
I'm not OK with it. But I'm not going to argue about it. When the woman has already made a choice, and now wants to also choose to kill a tiny human, I'll argue about the general concept - I wouldn't argue about/with a specific person who's had an abortion; because I judge the concept, I'm not judging any actual person.
There is alot of right wing misinformation in your rant
LOL, such as? I always vote left BTW, fairer distribution of wealth matters more to me than most things.
How do you gain public acceptance of putting the common good over brutal justice?
Democratic-Socialist Explains How She'll Raise a Trillion Here, A Trillion There
Higher taxes on the richest 10%, so that the poorest, who have no opportunities, can receive a few of the most vital things that the richest have never had to think twice about. It's common sense, Trump is doing the opposite.
https://www.investopedia.com/.../are-you-top-one-percent...
https://www.investopedia.com/.../are-you-top-one-percent...
It's called WORK FOR IT !!!!!
Seriously? You're entirely unaware of the fact that different people have massively differing salary opportunities?
Aside from Trump himself, the deifying of politicians is tragic.
God isn't what you decide that He is. God hates sex that's outside of His plan (marriage) - but He also offers forgiveness to anyone who genuinely turns away from it, and He offers far more enjoyment than sex ever can.
Our culture has rejected the offer of eternal life with God through Jesus after death (heaven), so death has become a terrifying mystery that is put off for as long as possible.
You have your beliefs, others have their own, please don't preach.
Preach? I'm commenting, that's what we do on Facebook. What bothers you about what I wrote?
Because no one likes holy roller bible thumpers prostyletizing.
What, in my comment, was so offensive? How do you define proselytizing? Some politicians are frustrating, that doesn't mean that anyone who makes a political statement should be told to shut up. Some "proselytizers" are frustrating, that doesn't mean that my comment necessarily is.
Better the reality, that we do not know if anything of us continues after death, then a fantasy story made up to placate the simple-minded.
I see this conspiracy theory trope parroted endlessly - but how do you know that the Gospel is a "fantasy story made up to placate the simple-minded"?. And how much have you investigated the endless array of articles and lectures about why - reasoning from science, history and philosophy - we should conclude that it's true? This was a starting point for me: https://www.reasonablefaith.org/finetuning but there are many books worth of discussion to be had, this can't be reduced to a Facebook thread.
There is no offer of eternal life. Jesus' has been distorted by St. Paul from the start and everything taught by the churches is erroneous.
There are many statements by Jesus about heaven - how have you concluded that Paul and the Churches distorted the Gospel entirely?
goddess you hypocrite christians...don't you have something to do that is productive...
What exactly have I done that hypocritical?
It's depressing. It's increasingly fashionable to celebrate "body positivity" and embrace different body shapes - but the same magazines/celebrities etc leading that heroic crusade are simultaneously imploring us to spend absurd amounts of money and time on our make up.
LOL, our culture is barely Christian now. Either way, why assume that one person's actions illustrate the worldview that that nation once followed? Jesus told us to care for our parents - but Meghan's not a Christian, and this situation is very complicated.
I hate how so many people now associate Christianity with the very opposite of what Christ did and taught, because of predators like this^ (though as other news has shown, there's sex abuse in all sectors 😠It's grotesque that other Church leaders haven't done more to address this issue, I desperately hope that the victims find comfort, as much as one could; and that changes are made to prevent this in future. God is slow to anger (Psalm 103:8), but SEETHING at this^ abuse.
I'm not sure why, because it happens throughout all major religions, not only the Catholic Church.As for the Bible, there is plenty of appalling crap in that.
Sam Dean there are also sex abuse scandals in school, sports clubs, the media, the government, foster homes....it's a humanity ssue, not a Church issue specifically.
The Bible does indeed record a lot of c**p things that people have done - it also tells us that God was made angry, and that Jesus came to teach how God wants us to live.
The Bible does indeed record a lot of c**p things that people have done - it also tells us that God was made angry, and that Jesus came to teach how God wants us to live.
Maybe if people had more faith in themselves, than an imaginary sky fairy.
How have you concluded that God is "an imaginary sky fairy"? How much have you investigated the endless array of articles and lectures about why - reasoning from scence, history and philosophy - we should conclude that God exists?
Well, when you consider religion itself is, in fact, a scam and was really meant to control the populace....these sorts of things shouldn't be something that is surprising. Men in religion like control and sex and if they think they can get away with it, then, they'll probably do it.
" religion itself is, in fact, a scam and was really meant to control the populace" - how do you know? How do you even define religion?
By the fact that for one, if you look at the Bible's history, men have never been that awesome to each other or women.And two, you couldn't prove that god herself is even real. So................
You're claiming that the fact that human beings throughout history have mistreated each other proves that the following of Christ, who compelled us to love others, then died for us, s a con that leads to abuse?
Does the fact that human beings throughout history have mistreated each other mean that every other organisation is also trying to con and take advantage of you? Why do you trust the educational institutions and online materials that have fed you the ubiquitous, unevidenced trope that religion is a scam to control the populace. You presume "can't prove God" - but how do you prove your assumption about Christianity?
What do you mean by "prove" anyway? Seriously, which other things that you trust have you looked at proof for? Have you studied the endless array of articles and lectures about why we should conclude that God exists?
Becky Fly "People choose to have abortions because they have job insecurity or don't make enough to support a child"? Each situation is unique ,each woman will have a combination of reasons, but ultimately , all but several % have them because they chose to have sex and don't want to go through pregnancy (they could overjoy an infertile couple by offering the baby for adopton - there may not be enough couples happy to adopt all of the children who need new homes, but there are couples desperate for a baby). Sex sells, so for decades, corporate greed has meant that it's been increasingly shoved in our faces so that most people have been conned into the le that it's healthy to have sex outside of marriage and that you can't enjoy life otherwise. It's this deceitful manipulation that's the root cause of most abortions. Countless people suffer as a result - the brain releases oxytocin during sex, so emotional scars are left when the relationship ends; and future relationships (including marriages) can be affected. People suffer the pain and costs of sexually transmitted diseases, and, if they have an abortion, they can suffer an array of painful/dangerous consequences, as well as psychological suffering
And a tiny human dies.
We need, urgently, to tell the world that God offers ultimate and eternal satsfactiion, not sex.Please note, I'm in support of free contraception (though giving out freely here n the UK doesn't resolve the situation, there are still plenty of abortions); and I'm DESPERATE for there to be universal health care, more welfare/social security provision, better salaries for the lowest paid, more overseas and support for refugees. (Oh, and for guns to be banned, just in case anyone makes the weirdly common assumption being pro life means I'd be pro gun)
What makes this even more horrendous is that, had our Western nations not grossly taken advantage of Africa, Ebola couldn't spread as much as it does. There's far, far, far less healthcare and public information that could stop the spread of disease; and drugs companies haven't invested as much as they would have done (were it a disease affecting us privileged Westerners) into developing vaccinations and treatment. We forget how fortunate we are to have the healthcare infrastructure that do - but as imperfect (and I'm aware that it is very far from perfect - in part because of our culture) as our health services are, we're generally very fortunate. In Congo, the annual average expenditure on healthcare per person is $32 - less than 100th of the average$ on health per person in the UK (even more is spent on health per person, on average in the US - I'm well aware that this is not remotely fairly distributed)Were Ebola to be here, it would quickly be quarantined and drugs would have been developed to end it. I desperately hope that the outbreak in Congo can be stopped ASAP.
I'm not debating embryos, I'm concerned about foetuses, but either way the fact that one would save a 5 year old doesn't mean that it's OK to kill unborn humans. A person who has an abortion isn't doing it because it would save a life in a burning building. There are people who want to adopt but specifically want to adopt a baby, for obvious reasons, that's why there are children stuck in the foster system, But there are many Christians trying to help struggling mothers and children without homes
Ultimately pregnancy s the result of the mother's choice literally 99% of the time, you wouldn't argue that a parent should be allowed to kill their newborn on the basis that no one had the spare income and time needed to raise them.
I really wish that the press spent more time informing us about things that have the greatest impact on human well-being, and that we can help, rather than feeding our hunger for scandal. How many hours did the BBC spend on telling us about Cliff Richard, and how would any of that help anyone at all?
What if, for example, that time had been spent on reporting on the sex slavery entrapping millions of children - mainly in impoverished countries? Such reporting might actually prompt a few viewers to sponsor children, to report on signs of trafficking that they witness here, and to warn their children about the dangers of the cyber sex industry. Instead we were given someone to demonise for the sake of entertainment.
Many of Trump’s words and actions make truly furious. But these protests are only making things worse. They’re making those who don’t despise Trump more defensive of him, and more angry with those who are concerned about his policies. Those people are thus less willing to listen, which means fewer will consider donating to help refugees or voting for politicians wth compassion.. Protesting can change what those in authority are doing – but not when their authority isn’t dependent on our votes. Trump needs enough Americans to vote for him to cling to power, but he has no reason to change any of his policies to appease us in the UK.
The collective energy of the thousands planning to march would enable serious fundraising - and the money could truly help refugees, abused women and those with no healthcare (who, presumably, Anti Trump protesters are concerned about?).
There have long been politicians who oppose helping those from elsewhere; what I find particularly daft is that Trump’s administration claims to follow Christian values, but the Bible makes it clear that God wants us to show compassion to the poor and to refugees. Jesus is God our primary example of how God wants us to live – and He taught us that those in need, including those from opposing nations, are neighbours that we should help (the parable is so well known that we still use the word Samaritan in common language).
Can we concentrate on campaigning to our politicians, who (unlike Trump) care about our votes; and on raising money to help those in need, rather than (as angry protests will) just making members of the public with right leaning attitudes more unwilling to listen?
His parents fled with Him to Egypt, I don't suppose they had papers to permit entry. It's making me truly furious to see people misrepresent Christianity like this. There are many things about which Christians can legitimately disagree and debate - but this is nonsense.Trump’s administration claims to follow Christian values, but the Bible makes it clear that God wants us to help refugees.
Does the fact that human beings throughout history have mistreated each other mean that every other organisation is also trying to con and take advantage of you? Why do you trust the educational institutions and online materials that have fed you the ubiquitous, unevidenced trope that religion is a scam to control the populace. You presume "can't prove God" - but how do you prove your assumption about Christianity?
What do you mean by "prove" anyway? Seriously, which other things that you trust have you looked at proof for? Have you studied the endless array of articles and lectures about why we should conclude that God exists?
SCOTUS: Evangelicals Are Pledging to Pause the Culture Wars
Speaking from the UK (where I vote left, but am pro life, and abortion is almost never debated) I'm confused - why don't those on the left in the US, at least within the Christian community, stop arguing so hard in support of abortion access? Surely if they/you didn't, you could convince more centrist pro lifers to vote left rather than right? Then more socially minded politicians will get into power, and more people can be helped.
The Right created the abortion issue to polarize voters. It is the Right continually driving the issue so that their voters focus on that one thing. If you are pro-life then you must understand that making abortions illegal only makes them dangerous. People will just get risky illegal abortions. Anyone who truly cares about the issue, should focus on what has proven to make a difference and address the issues that actually affect people's decision to have an abortion. Access to health care dramatically lowers the abortion rate. People choose to have abortions because they have job insecurity or don't make enough to support a child. They don't have access to affordable childcare. If you want to do something about abortion, not just sweep it under the rug by making it illegal, then address what's proven to reduce it (healthcare) and the issues that affect people's decisions (jobs, childcare, wages)
Becky Fly "People choose to have abortions because they have job insecurity or don't make enough to support a child"? Each situation is unique ,each woman will have a combination of reasons, but ultimately , all but several % have them because they chose to have sex and don't want to go through pregnancy (they could overjoy an infertile couple by offering the baby for adopton - there may not be enough couples happy to adopt all of the children who need new homes, but there are couples desperate for a baby). Sex sells, so for decades, corporate greed has meant that it's been increasingly shoved in our faces so that most people have been conned into the le that it's healthy to have sex outside of marriage and that you can't enjoy life otherwise. It's this deceitful manipulation that's the root cause of most abortions. Countless people suffer as a result - the brain releases oxytocin during sex, so emotional scars are left when the relationship ends; and future relationships (including marriages) can be affected. People suffer the pain and costs of sexually transmitted diseases, and, if they have an abortion, they can suffer an array of painful/dangerous consequences, as well as psychological sufferingAnd a tiny human dies.
We need, urgently, to tell the world that God offers ultimate and eternal satsfactiion, not sex.Please note, I'm in support of free contraception (though giving out freely here n the UK doesn't resolve the situation, there are still plenty of abortions); and I'm DESPERATE for there to be universal health care, more welfare/social security provision, better salaries for the lowest paid, more overseas and support for refugees. (Oh, and for guns to be banned, just in case anyone makes the weirdly common assumption being pro life means I'd be pro gun)
Awful. Of course, what he says is effectively meaningless (in that he'll change his mind when he feels like it)
This story^ has baffled me - surely, if you want more normalisation and exposure of something previously deemed unusual, you'd want a Hollywood A lister to draw in crowds to see it glamourised?
What makes this even more horrendous is that, had our Western nations not grossly taken advantage of Africa, Ebola couldn't spread as much as it does. There's far, far, far less healthcare and public information that could stop the spread of disease; and drugs companies haven't invested as much as they would have done (were it a disease affecting us privileged Westerners) into developing vaccinations and treatment. We forget how fortunate we are to have the healthcare infrastructure that do - but as imperfect (and I'm aware that it is very far from perfect - in part because of our culture) as our health services are, we're generally very fortunate. In Congo, the annual average expenditure on healthcare per person is $32 - less than 100th of the average$ on health per person in the UK (even more is spent on health per person, on average in the US - I'm well aware that this is not remotely fairly distributed)Were Ebola to be here, it would quickly be quarantined and drugs would have been developed to end it. I desperately hope that the outbreak in Congo can be stopped ASAP.
We should be spending more money there - we can help address the problem by tackling poverty and by providing education and protection for girls.
Republicans Want a Tax Break For Gym Memberships. That's a Terrible Idea.
We can buy an exercise bike or treadmill and spinlock dumbbells and workout at home (where you can watch TV/ lectures online etc at the same time, skip travelling to a gym and have privacy). With the money saved (by not having a gym membership), we can literally save/transform lives (by donating to charities working with the world's poorest people - eg, sponsoring a child with money saved from not using a gym will mean they have lessons, healthchecks and protection from traffickers).
(Sorry, just mentioning because many people haven't thought of it -corporate forces want us to spend on ourselves so that they get our cash, thus they work to make us forget that we have a disproportionate share of humanity's wealth, and -excitingly- we have the privilege of genuinely changing lives :) )
We can buy an exercise bike or treadmill and spinlock dumbbells and workout at home (where you can watch TV/ lectures online etc at the same time, skip travelling to a gym and have privacy). With the money saved (by not having a gym membership), we can literally save/transform lives (by donating to charities working with the world's poorest people - eg, sponsoring a child with money saved from not using a gym will mean they have lessons, healthchecks and protection from traffickers).
(Sorry, just mentioning because many people haven't thought of it -corporate forces want us to spend on ourselves so that they get our cash, thus they work to make us forget that we have a disproportionate share of humanity's wealth, and -excitingly- we have the privilege of genuinely changing lives :) )
We need more stories like this in the news. We constantly have news outlets moaning about NHS problems - and I'm well aware that the NHS needs help; but we forget how lucky we are. Jaber^ s every bit as human, valuable an deserving as anyone here, yet we forget that there are hundreds of millions of innocent human beings who have no access to surgery that we'd expect to receive, if needed, without question.
It's seriously disturbing that so many people (on other FB posts about this too) are laughing and mocking his appearance. I agree his choice of hairstyle and tattoos are seriously weird, but he's a human being in the news for being the victim of an extreme crime - it's gross that to laugh at this.
(Cue people laughing at me, I imagine)
(Cue people laughing at me, I imagine)
Nah. You have a nativity, implying worship of the God proclaimed by/through Christ - but He (Jehovah, Yaweh) makes it extremely clear that you aren't to worship other gods ("which are not gods at all"). The God of the Bible would smash up an altar for Buddha or, as you mention, Guns and Roses. It's pretty darn obvious from the 10 commandments.
Apologies for sounding so critical
Apologies for sounding so critical
"Religion" has too many connotations and historical misuses. Jesus offered eternal life - we need to each investigate whether we want to accept that or not. It's incomparably more significant than wealth.
We need to stop putting people in boxes. Christianity doesn't support abortion, and most of us conclude that God hates it (obviously the Bible doesn't mention it directly, having been written 2000+ years ago, we have to discern based on numerous things that God has said). But the Bible makes clear that we MUST have concern for the poor and for refugees.
So that means if you're in a fire and there's a 5 year old child and a frozen embryo and you can only take one which one are you going to choose to take?
You and I both know you'll take the five year old child.
In addition, after the child is born who is going to raise them who is going to feed them who is going to make sure they get sufficient education are in good health offered good opportunities and lead a quality life?
If there were is many pro-lifers standing in line to adopt children in the Foster system we would have a deficit and those people would be waiting for children to adopt
You and I both know you'll take the five year old child.
In addition, after the child is born who is going to raise them who is going to feed them who is going to make sure they get sufficient education are in good health offered good opportunities and lead a quality life?
If there were is many pro-lifers standing in line to adopt children in the Foster system we would have a deficit and those people would be waiting for children to adopt
Ultimately pregnancy s the result of the mother's choice literally 99% of the time, you wouldn't argue that a parent should be allowed to kill their newborn on the basis that no one had the spare income and time needed to raise them.
Those same pro-lifers are cheering on latino children separated from their families and put into cages. You want "foreigners' to be documented and called vermin, while a "fetus" has NO documentation, nor can they breath as their lungs are not formed until the 24th week.
When did say "You want "foreigners' to be documented and called vermin"? I absolutely HATE the lack of compassion being shown to foreigners. As I sad at the beginning, the Bible makes clear that we should care for foreigners - an I feel inclined to instinctively, in addition to what the Bible says. You're making entirely unfounded assumptions, which was what I commented against in the first place.
And where did you hear that lungs aren't formed until the 24th week?
And where did you hear that lungs aren't formed until the 24th week?
Yuh, but Vice regularly promotes witchcraft, so why are you complaining?
It's incredibly exciting how much our money can do when we resist corporations' greed and donate to the world's poorest people. Eg, we can feed a starving child for a month with every $6 (Feed The Hungry USA); or sponsor a child for $38 (providing education, health checks, supplementary food and bedding; and protection from trafficking - Compassion International and many others).
Incomparably more satisfying than succumbing to shops' attempts to lure us.
It's incredibly exciting how much our money can do when we resist corporations' greed and donate to the world's poorest people. Eg, we can feed a starving child for a month with every $6 (Feed The Hungry USA); or sponsor a child for $38 (providing education, health checks, supplementary food and bedding; and protection from trafficking - Compassion International and many others).
Incomparably more satisfying than succumbing to shops' attempts to lure us.
Everyone with an ounce of humanity.
I care for humanity too I only hate their religion this religion has done a lot damages in my country
That makes no sense. Being born in the Middle East doesn't mean that a person follows the evil parts of Islam. I agree the religion is extremely harmful; but most Muslims aren't practising, or aren't even aware of, the violent parts. Any one us could have been born there.
That they’re now safe is obviously, wonderful beyond words :)
Yet I can't help but feel frustrated that our nation almost entirely ignores the poverty and slavery that many young people in Thailand face and is only interested when there's a story that satisfies our own thirst for excitement. Can we have more news coverage of those in the region living in slums, and suffering unimaginably from slavery in the sex and fishing industries, so that we can inspired to help them, rather than just derive entertainment from one incident?
Yet I can't help but feel frustrated that our nation almost entirely ignores the poverty and slavery that many young people in Thailand face and is only interested when there's a story that satisfies our own thirst for excitement. Can we have more news coverage of those in the region living in slums, and suffering unimaginably from slavery in the sex and fishing industries, so that we can inspired to help them, rather than just derive entertainment from one incident?
Why do that when it was there God who got them stuck in the first place
God has reasons for things that we've not yet been made aware of. But they're not worshipping God, there s no God in Buddhism.
God has reasons for things that we've not yet been made aware of. But they're not worshipping God, there s no God in Buddhism.
What's depressing is that most people are so uninformed (no disrespect intended, truly) that they didn't work this out themselves.
Awesome. Genuine CHRISTianity - choosing to follow Christ's teachings and actions, is the best solution to most problems. I need to get better at it.
Consider - most of the things for which people resent "religion" or "Christianity" are things done by people labelling themselves as Christians whilst not actually trying to emulate Christ at all. Such as some of those refusing to have compassion for the victims of violence in El Salvador. Jesus made it abundantly clear that He detests selfishness towards immigrants.
Consider - most of the things for which people resent "religion" or "Christianity" are things done by people labelling themselves as Christians whilst not actually trying to emulate Christ at all. Such as some of those refusing to have compassion for the victims of violence in El Salvador. Jesus made it abundantly clear that He detests selfishness towards immigrants.
Greater how, exactly? In the sense that they get more attention and respect, absolutely. Very few people are aware of the array of scientific and philosophical reasons to conclude God exists, and would rather presume that He doesn't.
How This Summer's Fiery and Aggressive Mars Retrograde Will Affect Your Sign
How This Summer's Fiery and Aggressive Mars Retrograde Will Affect Your Sign
Would Vice care to explain why on Earth horoscopes would be thought to have any relation to who we are, or what happens to us, at all?There are an array of historical, scientific and philosophical arguments for the existence of God (eg. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/finetuning ), that we should each weigh up for ourselves to reach our own conclusions - but I've never seen anyone present any explanation for believing in horoscopes. Will anyone enlighten me?
It would be amazing if more people were keen to adopt children in need of homes, and to save themselves the ache of IVF
Furious? We are some of the most privileged people on the planet - there are people who have to walk for hours each day carrying water, which is still very dirty. Children, teens lose out on school lessons as a result, ruining their future; they and women risk injury and assault; infants are at particular risk from water bourne diseases, and 6,000 people die daily from dirty water. We almost always have clean water on tap, at the temperature we choose. How can people be furious?
It's incredibly exciting how affordable it is for us to make a difference for someone:
http://www.givingcatalogue.org.uk/
It's incredibly exciting how affordable it is for us to make a difference for someone:
http://www.givingcatalogue.org.uk/
Totally different topic for another day maybe
Why? It's a topic that's incomparably more important than most things in the media, yet it's hardly ever discussed, so we forget how lucky we are - hence the above "fury". We enjoy what we have more when we remember that it's not universal, and we are reminded that we can choose to save lives.
We eat, drink and breathe, through the same hole in our head. Every year thousands of people die through choking on our food. Any designer worth his salt would have come up with something better than this. Especially given the depth you assert said designer goes to in order to produce Vitamin D.
Why?
I'm happy endeavouring to answer any questions, Grace, but I'll need more to go on than "why?"
Why would "Any designer worth his salt would have come up with something better than this"? You're making prejudgements about what's "better". What if God knows that those individuals who die choking will go to heaven, or at least be saved from something bad that would happen if they continued on Earth? My apologies that this sounds so very callous to choking victims - but we all die at some point, and if we choose to accept Jesus' offer, what comes next will be incomparably greater than life on Earth. The thing that's always "better" s that people make a choice that leads to eternal life n paradise. God might know that an individual is about to go straight there when they choke, or He might know that they're never going to choose to follow Him and will do harm to others, so He terminates them; there are various theoretical possibilities, but you can't prove Christianity false on the basis of an assumption of how things should be.
Neither can you prove Christianity correct with unsupported assertions. Of course this inability to prove/disprove the existence of deities means that your god of choice enjoys the same status as Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu and the Great Dreamtime Snake of the Australian Aborigines.
Why? You seem to have entirely overlooked the fact that Christianity hinges on a historical event. Though there's also an array of fulfilled prophecies and science references in the Bible that support its credibility as having been directed by God. Obviously, we need to examine these to reach conclusions - but He's fundamentally different from the gods you've mentioned.
Science is the investigation of the universe using observation and reason. What we have with science is trust and expectation based on a long and brilliantly successful career of explaining and predicting nature. Science has been so incredibly successful that we expect it to continue succeeding.
Religion, by contrast, has a history of failure. Where are your religion's successes with physical reality? You've got a flat earth with four corners under a dome. The earth is also stationary and is orbited by a perfectly round and spotless sun. You've got cud chewing rabbits and bats for birds, You've got a talking snake and donkey, giants, dragons, witches and unicorns. I'm hardly getting started here!
The Bible doesn't tell us that the Earth is flat. Dragons exist (eg. Komodo dragons). Witches exist too, tragically - are you honestly unaware of them? You can argue that they have no power, but there's no sense in claiming that the Bible is wrong to mention them.
Where in the Bible does it mention Unicorns?
Yes, I know about Komodo Dragons although I suspect the authors of the scriptures didn't. Likewise, I was referring to the belief that witches were really using magic and casting spells. In fact, it's thanks to the scriptures that so many people were killed because it was believed they were witches practicing magic.
Unicorns are mentioned in a number of places including: Psalms 29:6, Psalms 92:10 & Isaiah 34:7
However, I will concede that while the latin of the KJV refers to unicorns, there is a chance it could be talking about rhinos.
Re: Flat Earth - there's quite a lot I'd like to say about that but it'll need to wait till tomorrow as I've got too much to do this evening!
My point is that Komodo dragons are large reptiles, and that's what the Biblical writers were obviously referring to. The exact species s unknown, but they used a Hebrew word that was translated into dragon. They're not claiming the existence of giant, fire breathing, flying creatures.s Similarly RE unicorns, it's simply about how Hebrew words were translated centuries ago. Current Bible translations use Ox instead of unicorn; but the author, describing an "Ox" with a single horn, might have been describing something like a rhinoceros. https://www.merriam-webster.com/.../unicorn-nothing-is... The verses you claim support flat-earthism are plainly not literal. Today we use phrases like "the sun goes down", we don't mean t literally.
Though I don't agree with all of the site's views, this article makes good points- https://answersingenesis.org/.../does-bible-teach-earth.../
My latest paper supports a Panentheistic notion of God, which I think is more biblical, less based on Neoplatonic philosophy and far more in line with scientific panpsychism.
How do you define Panentheism - and how, if at all do you distinguish it from Pantheism, and Paganism?
Pantheism posits that everything is god and indistinguishable from God, paganism as a word means nothing in real terms other than polytheism. Pan (everything) en (in) Theos (God) posits that everything is within God, but God is also beyond the order of being. As mystic Judaism posits, God created within himself.
I'm struggling to get what you mean exactly, obviously, we don't have adequate language nor scientific description for this. What exactly is meant by "in" in your definition of Panentheism? Why, for example, would we be told that creation declares God if He is "in" it? You refer to Jewish mystics, but Jesus rebuked Jewish leaders and told them that the rocks would praise God - how can does that work if God is "in" the rocks?
How can Jesus pray to the Father if God is ‘in’ Jesus? But also, Jesus was a Jewish Mystic, he fits comfortably in the stream of charismatic Judaism.
As I said, I need to understand what you mean by the "in" in your proposition of Panentheism. My knowledge of translations is nothing compared to yours, but the different translations of Col1:16 don't all use "in", some use "by" or "through", which had always given me the implication that this verse, when translated using "in", means it more in the sense of "in the name of" than in a material sense as your earlier comments (esp. in partially affirming Alex's suggestion) seemed to imply.
You asked "how can Jesus pray to the Father if God is ‘in’ Jesus" but I didn't say that God is "in" Jesus, I'd personally use other words since I feel that in 21st century English, "in" is a confusing word to describe the Trinity. Of course, it's correct in one sense that God is "in" Jesus, but I can't see how the relationship between them is equivocal to the relationship between God and rocks. http://biblehub.com/colossians/1-16.htm
The Greek ἐν is used in the vast majority of instances to describe ‘in’ ‘inside of’ or even ‘pregnant with’ in the nativity scenes.
Some bible translations use ‘by’ because it’s more convenient both in terms of theology but also in terms of abstract cosmology in western thought. It is most correct to say that God is ‘in’ Jesus, Paul describes the Trinity this way in 2 Corinthians. This is difficult for us to comprehend or understand because we rely on neoplatonic, patristic and enlightenment philosophy to describe cosmology, but actually, these concepts distort the ideas of ancient Christianity. This is because Plato and his students are dualistic in nature, with the spiritual being away from the physical, which is not what we have in Judaism nor early Christianity. This is why we have a bodily resurrection, there is no dualism, the body and the spirit are not in conflict. If anything, the creation narrative in Genesis specifically ruptures the idea of God being at odds with the material and presents God in a form of sexual Union with primordial matter, which I think is a better understanding than creation ex nihilo, which is, again, Greek Philosophy!I explain a little more about this in a podcast episode if you are interested: https://soundcloud.com/user-33613709/emerging-from-the-deep
I listened to your podcast^ several times when you released it. I hadn't commented because it would take forever to discuss it sufficiently thoroughly. But just quickly - you seem to be dismissing ancient religions and agree that we should observe science, but you also seem to be suggesting that Christianity is derived from ancient religions. Could you clarify? Anf in the next episode (Emmanuel - kudos on the spoken word skills BTW), I was particularly struck by you saying that there was no beginning - which seems a surprising choice of phrase given the Bible's very first words?
Good :) So many people would benefit massively if it again became normal not to have sex before getting married, mad as I know that sounds. People would be saved heartache and STIs, and children would be more likely to enjoy the privilege of growing up with both parents at home (which has been statistically proven to significantly improve life prospects - though of course there are single parents who do fantastically).
We've been conned by corporate greed (sex sells - so it's now everywhere in film, TV, music and adverts) into thinking that lots of sex, with lots of people, ASAP is healthy, and necessary for happiness. In fact, just as junk food looks tempting but pigging out on it leads to an array of problems; sexual liberation looks tempting but is causing a lot of people serious suffering.
But this is nothing like the vast majority of cases today. We shouldn't base laws that enable millions of deaths on the basis of several% of cases. What if one child desperately pleaded for a gun because they had to walk through a forest with bears on the way to school - would it be right to give all kids guns?
Why Science Does Not Disprove God
Things that I've been aching to tell people for years, laid out by a writer in Time magazine - I'm thrilled.
Slight mistake in the title. It should read: "Science does not disprove gods". Plural, you see- not singular.Why?
I'm happy endeavouring to answer any questions, Grace, but I'll need more to go on than "why?"
Why would "Any designer worth his salt would have come up with something better than this"? You're making prejudgements about what's "better". What if God knows that those individuals who die choking will go to heaven, or at least be saved from something bad that would happen if they continued on Earth? My apologies that this sounds so very callous to choking victims - but we all die at some point, and if we choose to accept Jesus' offer, what comes next will be incomparably greater than life on Earth. The thing that's always "better" s that people make a choice that leads to eternal life n paradise. God might know that an individual is about to go straight there when they choke, or He might know that they're never going to choose to follow Him and will do harm to others, so He terminates them; there are various theoretical possibilities, but you can't prove Christianity false on the basis of an assumption of how things should be.
Neither can you prove Christianity correct with unsupported assertions. Of course this inability to prove/disprove the existence of deities means that your god of choice enjoys the same status as Brahma, Shiva, Vishnu and the Great Dreamtime Snake of the Australian Aborigines.
Why? You seem to have entirely overlooked the fact that Christianity hinges on a historical event. Though there's also an array of fulfilled prophecies and science references in the Bible that support its credibility as having been directed by God. Obviously, we need to examine these to reach conclusions - but He's fundamentally different from the gods you've mentioned.
Science is the investigation of the universe using observation and reason. What we have with science is trust and expectation based on a long and brilliantly successful career of explaining and predicting nature. Science has been so incredibly successful that we expect it to continue succeeding.
Religion, by contrast, has a history of failure. Where are your religion's successes with physical reality? You've got a flat earth with four corners under a dome. The earth is also stationary and is orbited by a perfectly round and spotless sun. You've got cud chewing rabbits and bats for birds, You've got a talking snake and donkey, giants, dragons, witches and unicorns. I'm hardly getting started here!
The Bible doesn't tell us that the Earth is flat. Dragons exist (eg. Komodo dragons). Witches exist too, tragically - are you honestly unaware of them? You can argue that they have no power, but there's no sense in claiming that the Bible is wrong to mention them.
Where in the Bible does it mention Unicorns?
Yes, I know about Komodo Dragons although I suspect the authors of the scriptures didn't. Likewise, I was referring to the belief that witches were really using magic and casting spells. In fact, it's thanks to the scriptures that so many people were killed because it was believed they were witches practicing magic. Unicorns are mentioned in a number of places including: Psalms 29:6, Psalms 92:10 & Isaiah 34:7
However, I will concede that while the latin of the KJV refers to unicorns, there is a chance it could be talking about rhinos.
Re: Flat Earth - there's quite a lot I'd like to say about that but it'll need to wait till tomorrow as I've got too much to do this evening!
My point is that Komodo dragons are large reptiles, and that's what the Biblical writers were obviously referring to. The exact species s unknown, but they used a Hebrew word that was translated into dragon. They're not claiming the existence of giant, fire breathing, flying creatures.s Similarly RE unicorns, it's simply about how Hebrew words were translated centuries ago. Current Bible translations use Ox instead of unicorn; but the author, describing an "Ox" with a single horn, might have been describing something like a rhinoceros. https://www.merriam-webster.com/.../unicorn-nothing-is... The verses you claim support flat-earthism are plainly not literal. Today we use phrases like "the sun goes down", we don't mean t literally.
Though I don't agree with all of the site's views, this article makes good points- https://answersingenesis.org/.../does-bible-teach-earth.../
My latest paper supports a Panentheistic notion of God, which I think is more biblical, less based on Neoplatonic philosophy and far more in line with scientific panpsychism.
How do you define Panentheism - and how, if at all do you distinguish it from Pantheism, and Paganism?
Pantheism posits that everything is god and indistinguishable from God, paganism as a word means nothing in real terms other than polytheism. Pan (everything) en (in) Theos (God) posits that everything is within God, but God is also beyond the order of being. As mystic Judaism posits, God created within himself.
I'm struggling to get what you mean exactly, obviously, we don't have adequate language nor scientific description for this. What exactly is meant by "in" in your definition of Panentheism? Why, for example, would we be told that creation declares God if He is "in" it? You refer to Jewish mystics, but Jesus rebuked Jewish leaders and told them that the rocks would praise God - how can does that work if God is "in" the rocks?
How can Jesus pray to the Father if God is ‘in’ Jesus? But also, Jesus was a Jewish Mystic, he fits comfortably in the stream of charismatic Judaism.
As I said, I need to understand what you mean by the "in" in your proposition of Panentheism. My knowledge of translations is nothing compared to yours, but the different translations of Col1:16 don't all use "in", some use "by" or "through", which had always given me the implication that this verse, when translated using "in", means it more in the sense of "in the name of" than in a material sense as your earlier comments (esp. in partially affirming Alex's suggestion) seemed to imply.
You asked "how can Jesus pray to the Father if God is ‘in’ Jesus" but I didn't say that God is "in" Jesus, I'd personally use other words since I feel that in 21st century English, "in" is a confusing word to describe the Trinity. Of course, it's correct in one sense that God is "in" Jesus, but I can't see how the relationship between them is equivocal to the relationship between God and rocks. http://biblehub.com/colossians/1-16.htm
The Greek ἐν is used in the vast majority of instances to describe ‘in’ ‘inside of’ or even ‘pregnant with’ in the nativity scenes.
Some bible translations use ‘by’ because it’s more convenient both in terms of theology but also in terms of abstract cosmology in western thought. It is most correct to say that God is ‘in’ Jesus, Paul describes the Trinity this way in 2 Corinthians. This is difficult for us to comprehend or understand because we rely on neoplatonic, patristic and enlightenment philosophy to describe cosmology, but actually, these concepts distort the ideas of ancient Christianity. This is because Plato and his students are dualistic in nature, with the spiritual being away from the physical, which is not what we have in Judaism nor early Christianity. This is why we have a bodily resurrection, there is no dualism, the body and the spirit are not in conflict. If anything, the creation narrative in Genesis specifically ruptures the idea of God being at odds with the material and presents God in a form of sexual Union with primordial matter, which I think is a better understanding than creation ex nihilo, which is, again, Greek Philosophy!I explain a little more about this in a podcast episode if you are interested: https://soundcloud.com/user-33613709/emerging-from-the-deep
I listened to your podcast^ several times when you released it. I hadn't commented because it would take forever to discuss it sufficiently thoroughly. But just quickly - you seem to be dismissing ancient religions and agree that we should observe science, but you also seem to be suggesting that Christianity is derived from ancient religions. Could you clarify? Anf in the next episode (Emmanuel - kudos on the spoken word skills BTW), I was particularly struck by you saying that there was no beginning - which seems a surprising choice of phrase given the Bible's very first words?
You could just not have sex. It's remarkably effective for avoiding all STIs, and unwanted pregnancies.
As a child I had singing lessons briefly, and "The Greatest Love of All" by her^ was one of the songs I had to learn. I still remember Frances telling me that lyrics were wrong - that the greatest love of all is not, as Whitney Houston sings, "learning to love yourself" - that's as nothing by comparison to the greatness of God's sacrificial love for us manifest in Christ's death in our place, But our society is ever more obsessed with the self love.
Messed up. Prayer is, by definition, communicating with God. A "National Prayer Breakfast" is entirely misnamed if it becomes predominantly about politics.
Good :) So many people would benefit massively if it again became normal not to have sex before getting married, mad as I know that sounds. People would be saved heartache and STIs, and children would be more likely to enjoy the privilege of growing up with both parents at home (which has been statistically proven to significantly improve life prospects - though of course there are single parents who do fantastically).
We've been conned by corporate greed (sex sells - so it's now everywhere in film, TV, music and adverts) into thinking that lots of sex, with lots of people, ASAP is healthy, and necessary for happiness. In fact, just as junk food looks tempting but pigging out on it leads to an array of problems; sexual liberation looks tempting but is causing a lot of people serious suffering.
Will he be the Butt of lots of jokes?
Here's hoping this helps ever so slightly in ASSuaging the trend for women to feel compelled to spend thousands on altering their bodies. (if only)
Here's hoping this helps ever so slightly in ASSuaging the trend for women to feel compelled to spend thousands on altering their bodies. (if only)
He also said that he similarly holds himself responsible for things that happen in the country he leads. I was in stitches.
I really wish that the press spent more time informing us about things that have the greatest impact on human well-being, and that we can help, rather than feeding our hunger for scandal. How many hours did the BBC spend on telling us about Cliff Richard, and how would any of that help anyone at all?
What if, for example, that time had been spent on reporting on the sex slavery entrapping millions of children - mainly in impoverished countries? Such reporting might actually prompt a few viewers to sponsor children, to report on signs of trafficking that they witness here, and to warn their children about the dangers of the cyber sex industry. Instead we were given someone to demonise for the sake of entertainment.
Perhaps, but to self diagnose with depression when you're one of the most privileged people in the planet seems hurtful to those with diagnosed clinical depression and or genuine reason to be upset about their circumstances.
The blimp wasn't doing anyone any harm. It brought laughs to countless people around the world.
But iven that he doesn't rely on votes from Britons, protesting isn't going to change anything. It only makes those with similar views to his, more angry - they become more hardened against left leaning groups and less willing to reconsider their hostility to refugees.What's tragic is that hating Trump seems to have taken priority over finding solutions to problems that he's been making worse. We all need to prioritise actually making things better, rather than spending so much time and energy on attacking each other. All the time that and energy was spent, collectively, on making plaquards and marching to protest Trump, could have literally saved scores of lives had it been used instead to help or fundraise for the very poorest people. Left and right arguing ever more viciously isn't making our world a better place.
But iven that he doesn't rely on votes from Britons, protesting isn't going to change anything. It only makes those with similar views to his, more angry - they become more hardened against left leaning groups and less willing to reconsider their hostility to refugees.What's tragic is that hating Trump seems to have taken priority over finding solutions to problems that he's been making worse. We all need to prioritise actually making things better, rather than spending so much time and energy on attacking each other. All the time that and energy was spent, collectively, on making plaquards and marching to protest Trump, could have literally saved scores of lives had it been used instead to help or fundraise for the very poorest people. Left and right arguing ever more viciously isn't making our world a better place.
Other than the fact God doesn't exist, there should be a separation from church and state, I question anyone's politics who base them on a fictional characters. I respect anyone's right to hold religious views but they need to be kept out of politics.
I mentioned Him because many of Trump's administration have purported to be upholding His values.
I fully understand you concern about politics being influenced by "religion"/ "church". However - could you define what you mean by those? How are we to form an agreed standard about what is right and wrong in the absence of the Judeo/Christian foundation on which our culture is built?
Most importantly, how have you reached the conclusion that "God doesn't exist"? And what are your views on Jesus?
I fully understand you concern about politics being influenced by "religion"/ "church". However - could you define what you mean by those? How are we to form an agreed standard about what is right and wrong in the absence of the Judeo/Christian foundation on which our culture is built?
Most importantly, how have you reached the conclusion that "God doesn't exist"? And what are your views on Jesus?
I wouldn't reference the Bible as a moral compass, after all, God drowned everyone, sanctioned slavery, condemns to hell, stones people to death etc etc... cherry picking the ''good'' parts of the Bible to reference doing good has as much validity as people cherry picking the ''bad'' parts to validate doing bad.
Also, Religious scriptures are only around 3,000 yrs old while science proves the Earth much older (13.5 billion) via carbon dating etc. Abrahamic religions are just plagiarized from paganism. The only argument left for religion is the ''God of the gaps'', which even the majority of theologians don't use.
Also, Religious scriptures are only around 3,000 yrs old while science proves the Earth much older (13.5 billion) via carbon dating etc. Abrahamic religions are just plagiarized from paganism. The only argument left for religion is the ''God of the gaps'', which even the majority of theologians don't use.
How have you concluded that "Abrahamic religions are just plagiarized from paganism"? Seriously - there many fundamental aspects that are distinctly different from paganism (at the contemporary periods).
The OT is extremely complex - Christianity is to follow Jesus, who makes clear how God feels about humanity and wants us to treat each other, whilst the OT records various events that each need contextual and theological examination.RE the flood - people were choosing to reject God, and engage in extreme barbarism, including child sacrifice. So God cut short their lives, to wipe away the cancerous evil that had spread throughout humanity. If there were there any innocent people amongst those who drowned, they'll have gone to heaven without having to endure more years on Earth surrounded by horror.
The OT is extremely complex - Christianity is to follow Jesus, who makes clear how God feels about humanity and wants us to treat each other, whilst the OT records various events that each need contextual and theological examination.RE the flood - people were choosing to reject God, and engage in extreme barbarism, including child sacrifice. So God cut short their lives, to wipe away the cancerous evil that had spread throughout humanity. If there were there any innocent people amongst those who drowned, they'll have gone to heaven without having to endure more years on Earth surrounded by horror.
So does God believe that freeloading and not doing anything to help yourself is ok,Is god now the PC brigade and the do gooders who believe that giving everything to the people who don't want to do anything about their own country and expect to live off another countries handouts
Refugees aren't "freeloading and not doing anything to help [themselves]". They're fleeing extreme violence and/or poverty, and they work harder than most of us.
Jesus also started a big ol’ riot and kicked the money lenders out of the temple.
Indeed - but he didn't protest political or military leaders. He threw the tables in the temple over because the traders there were trying to make money out of peoples' attempts to worship God. Jesus' teachings make it clear that He'd have hated things that Trump has said and done - but angry protests aren't the solution.
Protesting has changed many things throughout history. We want to show the world what we think of this idiot. You apparently assume that those who are protesting do not also raise funds for those in need. You need to get out more.
I know that protesting can work - but that's dependent on the target of the protests wanting to appease the protesters for the sake of their position. protesting Trump in the US might be effective, since he'd be made aware that he's losing voter support, but here in the UK, it just makes people on the right more unwilling to listen to people on the left.
So you're saying we shouldn't protest against a racist sex offender in case it annoys people who admire racist sex offenders?
We - in the UK - will only make other racist sex offenders more stubborn, and unwilling to listen to those opposed to their racism and sex offending, if we protest angrily. We'll only change their minds, and thus make society better, by showing them why they're wrong and by demonstrating that we want to make the world a better place (such as by using collective energy to actually help refugees etc, rather than waving plaquards)
Mayim Bialik Why I'm Religious
How do we define "religious"? The practices can indeed be comforting; but can be a burden or used as an excuse to judge others. I think that we need to start by exploring what's true - we should each examine the reasons given by academics of different faiths as to how they've come to the conclusion that what they believe is a reality. Personally, I believe that there's good reasoning to conclude that God exists and that Jesus rose, defeating death (offering a way to heaven) - but we need to each form our own conclusions. Then, if we practice a "religion" it really means something - and it can give more life satisfaction, and motivation to make the world better, than anything else.
Whilst there are still people in the world without food and clean water, it's not necessarily the case that more of limited funds should be spent on weapons.
What makes me particularly sad is that we've all grown up well aware that there are people in our world still starving. We can feed a starving child for a month with $6/£4; but instead, culture promotes pride in spending our money on eliminating gluten.
This kind of righteousness really gets to me. People don't cut gluten, or whatever food because they're bored or because it's trendy : they have crippling chronic illneses with no clear diagnosis and no available treatment. Culture? More like total lack of quality of life and daily horrible pain. DO NOT judge when you have no idea what people are going through.
You're talking about those who have serious intolerances - and my sympathies are with them 
<3 But they're a tiny minority of those who've started buying more expensive gluten free foods. When I scroll through Pinterest with search terms cake, dessert, pudding, cookies, bake etc, loads of the results say that they're GF. My point was that far, far more people cut ccertain things than need to - eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39488047 "only about 5% of the population needed to avoid certain food groups for medical reasons, 54% of households joined the trend" or https://www.theguardian.com/.../gluten-free-eating-celiac... - etc.
I know that some people really do need to cut things, but it seems tragic that any don't need to cut things yet do anyway, as it means losing money that they could probably use for more exciting things for themselves - or even for some of the human beings who haven't got enough food at all.
Also, avoiding allergens can create intolerances over time - people who don't need to cut things and do anyway, for enough time, may become intolerant of those allergens.
<3 But they're a tiny minority of those who've started buying more expensive gluten free foods. When I scroll through Pinterest with search terms cake, dessert, pudding, cookies, bake etc, loads of the results say that they're GF. My point was that far, far more people cut ccertain things than need to - eg https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-39488047 "only about 5% of the population needed to avoid certain food groups for medical reasons, 54% of households joined the trend" or https://www.theguardian.com/.../gluten-free-eating-celiac... - etc.I know that some people really do need to cut things, but it seems tragic that any don't need to cut things yet do anyway, as it means losing money that they could probably use for more exciting things for themselves - or even for some of the human beings who haven't got enough food at all.
Also, avoiding allergens can create intolerances over time - people who don't need to cut things and do anyway, for enough time, may become intolerant of those allergens.
Hey, you need to call my gastroenterologist and give him your smug assessment as to why he shouldn’t have told me to eliminate wheat from my diet. Notice I said wheat. No issue with gluten, but a wheat allergy. I eat gluten free because it’s the only foods without wheat. As to cross contamination in restaurants, as previous posters have mentioned, small amounts aren’t a problem. I don’t ask for gluten free when I go to restaurants, because it’s easy enough not to order bread or pasta or other wheat based foods. And trust me when I tell you that the gluten free options out there are NOT equivalent. No one eats that stuff for very long who doesn’t have to. I can even eat a cupcake or sandwich once in a blue moon with nothing more serious than stiff joints for a day or two. But if I eat wheat for a couple days I have very painful, unpleasant gastrointestinal symptoms, that only get worse the more wheat I eat, along with ever worsening joint pain. So tired of the holier-than-thou pronouncements of people who have no clue what medical issues people face. I have in fact been told to my face, that my wheat allergy is all in my head, by know-it-alls who have read an article like this and think that I’m just jumping on the trendy bandwagon.
Why do you not understand what I've said? I know that some people have genuine serious intolerances (I was using gluten as an example since its the one that I see discussed most often, I'm well aware of the others), but the facts are that there are also many people who don't need to cut things yet do because cutting things has been marketed as healthy and pure. Have you read the Vice article or the ones I linked to? (I could add many more)
I'm genuinely sorry about your illness - but I wasn't talking about you.
I'm genuinely sorry about your illness - but I wasn't talking about you.
We know The Way to eternal life (and the greatest joy in this lifetime). Church services - and we, in our interactions with others - need to make that clearer.
It's not awesome that some people have such ridiculous excess fortune whilst there are still people without clean water. Especially when the former make us feel dissatisfied/ugly etc and less focused on the fact that we could be helping the latter.
So sorry that this will sound judgemental - but wouldn't it actually be better to prep something simple yourself? Eating quick recipes at home is so, so much better for the planet - deliveries are using plastic that's wrecking the environment, and fuel to transport it. The money saved would help massively with living costs; or could feed a child with no food at all for weeks. I find that exciting :)
(Seriously, apologies that this seems so patronising, I just felt that it needed to be said - commercialism has conditioned many of us to believe that take outs, restaurants, coffee shops etc are necessary to enjoy life, and it's a lie)
(Seriously, apologies that this seems so patronising, I just felt that it needed to be said - commercialism has conditioned many of us to believe that take outs, restaurants, coffee shops etc are necessary to enjoy life, and it's a lie)
Ukip leader Gerard Batten calls Mohamed a paedophile at Tommy Robinson rally
That's because Muhammed, according to traditional Islamic sources, married a child (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Muhammad#Aisha ) . But that in no way proves that Muslims would ever follow this example. We need to have the common sense to distinguish between Islam and Muslims themselves - most Muslims only follow parts of Islam. Muhammed is agreed by historians as having undertaken extremely violent acts, but the vast majority of Muslims are Muslims because they've been born into Muslim families, and many endeavour to do good in the community. We need to get it through our thick skulls that though Islam is evidently dangerous, Muslims are as varied as the rest of us. https://jamesbishopblog.com/.../jesus-vs-muhammad-33.../
Most of these people have never read the bible and are unaware of what is in the old testament...
I'm well aware of what's in the OT. But Christianity is not to re-enact the Bible, it's to follow Jesus. Each incidence of violence in the Old Testament requires a lot of serious examination of context, cultural poetic use of language etc. And ultimately, God can take people straight to heaven; their time living on Earth where they live amongst barbarism and child sacrifice is shortened by the commands you reference. The pagan religions that some were practising were separating some people from God, and thus from heaven - and the Hebrew people began following those fatal pagan religions. Thus when God instructed elimination of other tribes, it was to eradicate the cancer of paganism before it stole eternal lives.
As I said, Christianity is to follow Jesus, who demonstrated how God wants us to treat others and who gave up His life to offer us The way to heaven/paradise.
As I said, Christianity is to follow Jesus, who demonstrated how God wants us to treat others and who gave up His life to offer us The way to heaven/paradise.
Islam is to follow Muhammed, whose actions and message were entirely different from those of Christ. The error of those on the right is that they presume Muslims will follow actions of Muhammed that in fact most Muslims would be horrified by.
Our society worships sex. It's utterly heartbreaking.
Many of Trump’s words and actions make truly furious. But these protests are only making things worse. They’re making those who don’t despise Trump more defensive of him, and more angry with those who are concerned about his policies. Those people are thus less willing to listen, which means fewer will consider donating to help refugees or voting for politicians wth compassion.. Protesting can change what those in authority are doing – but not when their authority isn’t dependent on our votes. Trump needs enough Americans to vote for him to cling to power, but he has no reason to change any of his policies to appease us in the UK.
The collective energy of the thousands planning to march would enable serious fundraising - and the money could truly help refugees, abused women and those with no healthcare (who, presumably, Anti Trump protesters are concerned about?).
There have long been politicians who oppose helping those from elsewhere; what I find particularly daft is that Trump’s administration claims to follow Christian values, but the Bible makes it clear that God wants us to show compassion to the poor and to refugees. Jesus is God our primary example of how God wants us to live – and He taught us that those in need, including those from opposing nations, are neighbours that we should help (the parable is so well known that we still use the word Samaritan in common language).
Can we concentrate on campaigning to our politicians, who (unlike Trump) care about our votes; and on raising money to help those in need, rather than (as angry protests will) just making members of the public with right leaning attitudes more unwilling to listen?
Keeping children separated from their parents in cages? What would Jesus say?
Good question. Jesus is - obviously - very angry about the cruelty being shown to migrants. He taught us that those in need, including those from opposing nations, are neighbours that we should help (the parable is so well known that we still use the word Samaritan in common language).
The parable of the sheep and the goats makes it indisputable that God wants us to help the underprivileged.
Matthew 22:37-9, “Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
But He didn't riot against political leaders - it wouldn't have helped, and His mission was to tell people about The Way to eternal life (heaven). That's incomparably more important than anything else.
He'd want us to do what we can to help the migrants, absolutely - what I was trying to say is that ii don't think a march will achieve that, it will only make swing voters more likely to vote right in future and to resent organisations that are trying to help refugees.
The parable of the sheep and the goats makes it indisputable that God wants us to help the underprivileged.
Matthew 22:37-9, “Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
But He didn't riot against political leaders - it wouldn't have helped, and His mission was to tell people about The Way to eternal life (heaven). That's incomparably more important than anything else.
He'd want us to do what we can to help the migrants, absolutely - what I was trying to say is that ii don't think a march will achieve that, it will only make swing voters more likely to vote right in future and to resent organisations that are trying to help refugees.
Fans of trump, his team and the UK establishment getting annoyed or embarrassed is largely the point. I'd have thought it was a pretty obvious one.
But that won't make anything better - and could well make things worse. There are plenty of people who are right leaning, but might consider voting left, or donating to charities helping refugees, in the future. Making them more angry with the left (as a blimp and angry plaquards do) makes them less likely to do either of those.
If the organisation and funds went into helping refugees, it could really make a difference to numerous families in need.
If the organisation and funds went into helping refugees, it could really make a difference to numerous families in need.
This is why people are trying to cross the border into the US - they're fleeing the extreme violence around them in South America. Why are so many people completely lacking in empathy for them?
The USA is not the dumping ground for these alien, hostile, high birth rate Third Worlders which have turned countries such as Brazil into these crime ridden (redacted).
The refugees fleeing countries did not "turn countries into crime ridden..." - being born in a country with criminals doesn't mean that you're criminals yourself. What on Earth do you mean by "third worlders"? Why would people from the third world be any less deserving of respect and safety? Especially when it's the injustice that's made our nations rich which have rendered their nations poor. What on Earth do you mean by the "sludge of humanity"? I never said that we white people can't "live as whites" - but we have no right to treat others poorly because they aren't white. They are every bit as human, valuable and deserving as we are, and we have undeserved privileges whilst they're far more likely to suffer unfairly.
We are empathetic, just come here legally.
They would if they could.
The sooner we take care of the 500,000 foster kids and 600,000 homeless we have in the U.S. the sooner we can take care of everyone else. How's that sound?
And who is saying none of them get in? If they seek asylum and everything is good let them in. Which they do.
And who is saying none of them get in? If they seek asylum and everything is good let them in. Which they do.
It has nothing to do with existing foster children and homeless people, they come to look after themselves. The reason they're coming is that they're fleeing extreme violence, not because they expect to be given homes.
I agree that she shouldn't have been arrested - but her industry does massive damage. ATM, it's far more harmful than the flawed law that had her arrested.
Her putting her tits in somebody's face is more harmful then morality police arresting people for dumb shit like this?
Have you not considered the scores of women who've been heartbroken to discover that the partners have attended strip clubs? Or the children who've lives are impacted by the resulting arguments or break ups? What about the women who can't help but feel inadequate because they don't have the big assets that strippers do? What about the men who get so used to doing whatever they want to women that they're more prone to acting without consent? What about the women who are pressured into the work by pimps, people traffickers and abusive boyfriends? What about the fact that women working in this industry are statistically far more likely to be sexually assaulted?
What about choices and free will?
They don't negate the facts of harm done. Free will shouldn't be used as an excuse for things that have substantial net negative impact on people who've had no choice in the matter.
We constantly hear in the media about the supposed inadequacies of the NHS (long waiting times, lack of IVF access etc) but the reality is that we have far, far more healthcare than the vast majority of humanity has (or has had throughout history).
I find it exciting that we can genuinely make a huge difference for some of those without healthcare
I find it exciting that we can genuinely make a huge difference for some of those without healthcare
"Crushing blow"? He changes his mind constantly
His parents fled with Him to Egypt, I don't suppose they had papers to permit entry. It's making me truly furious to see people misrepresent Christianity like this. There are many things about which Christians can legitimately disagree and debate - but this is nonsense.Trump’s administration claims to follow Christian values, but the Bible makes it clear that God wants us to help refugees.
Jesus is God our primary example of how God wants us to live – and He taught us that those in need, including those from opposing nations, are neighbours that we should help (the parable is so well known that we still use the word Samaritan in common language).
The parable of the sheep and the goats makes it indisputable that God wants us to help the underprivileged.
And in Matthew 22:37-9, “Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: [says] the Lord your God. "
Galatians 5:14 “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.””
And so on...
The parable of the sheep and the goats makes it indisputable that God wants us to help the underprivileged.
And in Matthew 22:37-9, “Jesus replied: ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’”
Leviticus 19:33-34 “When a stranger sojourns with you in your land, you shall not do him wrong. You shall treat the stranger who sojourns with you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: [says] the Lord your God. "
Galatians 5:14 “For the whole law is fulfilled in one word: “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.””
And so on...
You do realize he is against ILLEGAL immigrants right? Or do you even know the difference?
The Bible tells us that most important is to love God, then love others - it doesn't say that all laws should be followed. It refers to instances in which the Jewish people and first Christians were told to adhere to the laws at that time, since many wanted to rebel, and it was important that following and spreading the message of Christ was their focus. If they'd have broken the laws of the land, it would have scuppered the growth of Christianity.
Some laws are daft, so illegal doesn't necessarily mean morally wrong. In Saudi Arabia, it's been illegal until this year for women to drive, does that mean that if a woman did so before the law change, you'd judge them as wrong? Hitler legislated for mass murder - do you think that that was OK in God's eyes because it had been brought into their laws? Until 2000, in Alabama, interracial marriage was illegal - do you think that interracial couples who tried to marry there should be separated because of the law? Here, in the UK, it's illegal to die in Parliament; it's also apparently illegal to get drunk at a pub, though obviously, people do that all the time. I could go on and on - https://thoughtcatalog.com/.../67-ridiculous-laws-from.../
Some laws are daft, so illegal doesn't necessarily mean morally wrong. In Saudi Arabia, it's been illegal until this year for women to drive, does that mean that if a woman did so before the law change, you'd judge them as wrong? Hitler legislated for mass murder - do you think that that was OK in God's eyes because it had been brought into their laws? Until 2000, in Alabama, interracial marriage was illegal - do you think that interracial couples who tried to marry there should be separated because of the law? Here, in the UK, it's illegal to die in Parliament; it's also apparently illegal to get drunk at a pub, though obviously, people do that all the time. I could go on and on - https://thoughtcatalog.com/.../67-ridiculous-laws-from.../
Put them in your house. We can't take everyone. We aren't ruled by your book of fairy tales.
The problem is that anyone - regardless of those individuals' genders - gets a 6 figure salary, whilst there are innocent, hard working humans struggling to feed to feed their families.
If I owned a home, I would - but it's not the same to simply allow people into an area of land.
I didn't say that you're ruled by anything, but the current government has made numerous claims to be upholding Christian values.
Why do you think that the Bible is fairytales? How much have you studied it?
I didn't say that you're ruled by anything, but the current government has made numerous claims to be upholding Christian values.
Why do you think that the Bible is fairytales? How much have you studied it?
Don't be ridiculous. This country cannot admit every single person who wants to enter. The Bible also makes a distinction between the laws of God, and the laws of man. It admonishes us to respect both.
The Bible doesn't say that all laws should be followed. It refers to instances in which the Jewish people and first Christians were told to adhere to the laws at that time, since many wanted to rebel, and it was important that following and spreading the message of Christ was their focus. If they'd have broken the laws of the land, it would have scuppered the growth of Christianity.
Some laws are daft, so illegal doesn't necessarily mean morally wrong. In Saudi Arabia, it's been illegal until this year for women to drive, does that mean that if a woman did so before the law change, you'd judge them as wrong? Hitler legislated for mass murder - do you think that that was OK in God's eyes because it had been brought into their laws? Until 2000, in Alabama, interracial marriage was illegal - do you think that interracial couples who tried to marry there should be separated because of the law? Here, in the UK, it's illegal to die in Parliament; it's also apparently illegal to get drunk at a pub, though obviously, people do that all the time. I could go on and on...
Some laws are daft, so illegal doesn't necessarily mean morally wrong. In Saudi Arabia, it's been illegal until this year for women to drive, does that mean that if a woman did so before the law change, you'd judge them as wrong? Hitler legislated for mass murder - do you think that that was OK in God's eyes because it had been brought into their laws? Until 2000, in Alabama, interracial marriage was illegal - do you think that interracial couples who tried to marry there should be separated because of the law? Here, in the UK, it's illegal to die in Parliament; it's also apparently illegal to get drunk at a pub, though obviously, people do that all the time. I could go on and on...
Firstly - don't use the bible to appeal to reason. That same book also tells people to stone promiscuous women and not to wear certain types of fabric together. "What Would Jesus Do" is not a comparison because frankly, most people who call themselves Christian are in it for the social aspect and personal inflection. If you want to use the bible, go tell churches to start helping with this crisis.
You've not done Bible study, have you? Explaining the Old Testament points that you mention would take longer than I have right now, but essentially, not all instructions given to the Hebrew people at a specific time are intended to apply to all humanity at all times. Jesus IS the example that we're called to follow, and IS God's demonstration of Himself. So, note that when He was presented with a promiscuous woman that religious leaders planned to stone, He saved her and told her to "Go and sin no more". The instructions on fabrics (and similar Levitical laws) relate to pagan customs at that time which needed to be avoided.
Plenty of Churches are helping the poor - but we absolutely need to do more.
And "if they don't try to swim the Rio Grande" they'd be at significant risk of being raped or killed in what are some of the very most dangerous nations in the world. Jesus calls us to care about others - including those from other nations - as much as we'd want people to care about us.
And He sacrificed Himself for anyone who's open to Him. No national self-interest and pride has any value whatsoever by comparison.
Plenty of Churches are helping the poor - but we absolutely need to do more.
And "if they don't try to swim the Rio Grande" they'd be at significant risk of being raped or killed in what are some of the very most dangerous nations in the world. Jesus calls us to care about others - including those from other nations - as much as we'd want people to care about us.
And He sacrificed Himself for anyone who's open to Him. No national self-interest and pride has any value whatsoever by comparison.
Ridiculous. Not having access to abortions (which is still extremely unlikely) is nothing like being raped and enslaved.
Did you know that there are scores of people who are so impoverished that their only ensembles are of second hand clothes from Western countries that are too tatty for charity shops to sell? Meghan is made to wear stupidly overpriced clothes because of her job - but we could refuse corporate attempts to lure us into obsessing about designer outfits, and genuinely transform lives instead. Meghan's been an ambassador for World Vision USA, it would make more sense to read about what they're doing than about what she's wearing.
No, she's just looking for excuses. The bran releases oxytocin during sex, so we're designed to bond and stay with one person.
Yup - we're far, far wealthier than most people on the planet, with state provisions that most human beings can only dream of. It's thrilling how much of a difference we can make when we donate to the world's poorest people (rather than allowing corporations to convince us to spend money on loads that we don't need)
"Jesus hasn't saved us"? He never promised that this life would be safer or wealthier with Him (which is NOT to say that the injustice the black community face is in any way OK, obviously); He saves us by offering us deep joy to cope with the difficulty of life in a world that's been messed up by sin, and, incomparably more importantly, He offers us forgiveness that we don't deserve so that we can have eternal life in perfect peace with God (heaven).
Obviously, no one should simply swallow this because their parents told them to - but the case for the resurrection having actually taken place is pretty compelling when investigated. If one then opens their heart to Christ, there's deeper joy to be found than anything else this world offers.
The most important thing about baby Jesus is that He grew up and died in our place to make a way possible for us to have eternal life (heaven) if we choose to accept Him. That doesn't apply to the kids at the border. However, those children are priceless, and it's vital that we try to find a way to help them and their families.
There are people who call themselves Christians of all political persuasions and social attitudes - what matters is Christ, and some people who claim to be Christians aren't following Him at all. Jesus made it clear that we should treat others as we'd like to be treated; and specifically criticised those who mistreat children.
ALL evidence shows there is no such being. No "god" ( being worthy of worship) would allow little babies to starve, be beaten, get raped or tortured, or would appear to favour one group of his/her creations over another.
If he was capable of creating everything then he would be perfectly capable of sorting the mess out.
Saying he is "testing us" is a massive cop out. If he created us then he should have done a better job.
We are brainwashed into religions from birth and told not to question....that is just so wrong. Man has always created gods...from Sun worship to all the Roman gods, Greek gods, Hindu gods and whatever else people want to spend time allocating "prayers" to.
Why would the Christian god be any better to the rest? Just because WE are told this is truth? Nope....sorry but I don't buy it.
I do, however, respect everyone else's rights to believe in whatever gets them through life.I went to a Convent Boarding School. Believe me I know the bible inside out...and I still think, although a well put together compilation of documents, it is cobblers.
We live in a world where millions are told what to think and hardly any are taught how to question...
Trump is a useful memo to all of us to eschew the traits he's been criticised for. But surely a protest won't change anything? And it will certainly make those on the right more opposed to the left.
You can fight back by eating at home - you have privacy, have entertainment of your choice; can monitor your diet far more easily; can snuggle on the couch in PJs; and can save enough money to ongoingly feed scores of starving children (Feed The Hungry USA can feed a starving child for a month with each $6 - imagine how much hunger and malnourishment you could end if you swapped all restaurant meals / take outs / fast food / coffees from cafes etc for food and drink at home....seriously exciting :) )
The BBC spends far too long talking about Brexit already. It should be giving more of that time to more serious international affairs - issues that have a bigger impact on lives, and that we the public may be able to help even slightly (through our purchasing habits and charity donations). Ie - droughts, famine, flooding and landslides in developing countries (accentuated by global warming, and the victims of which we can donate to); slavery (much driven by our consumer demand); sweatshops; conflict minerals etc. People are suffering far, far, far more than we will if Brexit goes badly - which we can't affect anyway - yet the BBC and other media mostly ignores them, whilst many of us become more and more resentful of Brexit and the EU because we're drowning in it.
Nah, culture is conning us into thinking that a "healthy sex life" is necessary for happiness - it isn't at all. We're hungering for thrills, and for meaning in life, and we've been duped into thinking that sex can fill the void.
Why go abroad?
We live in one of the best places to be already. There's more than enough to do, and plenty of days of sunshine in the summer. If we holiday here, it will help the local economies of what are some of the poorer parts of the country, and save a huge amount of greenhouse gas (that we create by travelling abroad).
We're incredibly privileged if we have enough wealth to be able to spend £hundreds on a week's entertainment - why not do something more exciting with that money? I'd far rather fund a year's sponsorship for an impoverished child than spend a week somewhere exotic.
(Apologies if I sound like I'm trying to be self righteous, I need to be more useful to the world's poor - I just genuinely don't understand why holidays that cost as much as they do for such brief unnecessary amusement is normal.)
400million people have no access to surgery at all (even for life-threatening emergencies)
It amazes me that people think that May would risk her relationship with the DUP to do this (given that she needs them to cling to power) - and that she'd want to support abortion given that she herself has been unable to have children.
No, she's just looking for excuses. The bran releases oxytocin during sex, so we're designed to bond and stay with one person.
Surely it's her fault that Trump is president? (ie, if a less distrusted, pro-abortion candidate had run for the Democrats, Trump might well have lost)
Yup - we're far, far wealthier than most people on the planet, with state provisions that most human beings can only dream of. It's thrilling how much of a difference we can make when we donate to the world's poorest people (rather than allowing corporations to convince us to spend money on loads that we don't need)
The World Cup is football, not soccer (yes I know they're the same, but I'm being pedantic about the name used). It's run by FIFA, not FISA, and they define the game as having started in England, where it's always called football.
Jeremy Hunt appointed new foreign secretary after Boris Johnson resigns
How much does anyone care about foreign matters anyway? Countless innocent people are suffering because of the poverty and slavery that are rooted in the history of colonisation; and present day commercial exploitation that have made our nation wealthy at the expense of others. https://www.filmsforaction.org/articles/
Our government should be cracking down on companies that make the lives of the world’s poorest people a living hell, and supporting development of infrastructure and democracy. But our politicians are too busy bickering with each other, and our media has always spent incomparably more time covering the blond bombshell ex foreign secretary than foreign affairs relating to scores of human lives.
It’s right that there’s long been substantial coverage of how the NHS has been struggling under the new foreign secretary – but why are we almost never reminded that most people living in foreign nations will never have access to anything like the healthcare that we do?
Our government should be cracking down on companies that make the lives of the world’s poorest people a living hell, and supporting development of infrastructure and democracy. But our politicians are too busy bickering with each other, and our media has always spent incomparably more time covering the blond bombshell ex foreign secretary than foreign affairs relating to scores of human lives.
It’s right that there’s long been substantial coverage of how the NHS has been struggling under the new foreign secretary – but why are we almost never reminded that most people living in foreign nations will never have access to anything like the healthcare that we do?
Christ made it very clear that we should love our neighbours (specifically, people from other nations - ie the Good Samaritan) - the treatment of migrants completely contradicts that. Jesus told us to treat others as we'd want to be treated ourselves - "America first" and reducing overseas aid make it clear that Trump isn't following Jesus at all.
If you're married, you stay with that person for life. Being at all attracted to any other person is a moot point because if you act on the new attraction you'll ruin the most valuable thing you have (your marriage). Temptation to try something new could destroy a relationship that will give far more satisfaction and enjoyment in the long run. Stay with your wife, and stop trying to score brownie points with LGBT people.
I hate how so many people now associate Christianity with things that are the very opposite of what Jesus did and taught, because the media is only interested in the people who call themselves Christians whilst not following Christ at all.
Have you read the bible
Yes, many times. It tells us about things that happened, it's not all an instruction manual.
It may be because christianity has been inundated with all of those things since it's inception as the best ever way to disguise affinity for all of those things
What matters, ultimately, is Jesus. There's good cause to conclude that He rose from the dead, having told us that He is the way to eternal life (heaven). If that's true, then He has defeated death. So each of us needs to decide whether we want to genuinely confess to God that we've messed up, and have forgiveness through Jesus' sacrifice. We're each given the option to reject Jesus (and in turn His offer of eternal life with God) but it would be tragic to do so on the basis of the actions of human beings calling themselves Christians whilst ignoring Christ.
Jesus is a wonderful character, but plenty of religions have a jesus and somehow, they are all used for evil purposes.
Many religions indeed have wonderful figures, but Jesus is distinctly different from others.
Why do you describe Him as a "character" as though He wasn't an actual human in history? Unlike other faith founders, He claimed deity. Unlike other faith leaders, He taught that He, through His sacrificial death, has made The way available to eternal life with God (heaven) - then rose from death, demonstrating victory over it. Other faiths hypothesise about earning one's way to heaven (or nirvana etc) by following certain rules - Jesus taught that He is the way, as opposed to us trying to earn it. If we genuinely accept Him, we will naturally want to follow God's guidance, but religiosity itself, according to Christianity, can't save anyone.
Obviously, there are tonnes of articles that explain this better than me. Eg - https://jamesbishopblog.com/.../jesus-vs-muhammad.../
Why do you describe Him as a "character" as though He wasn't an actual human in history? Unlike other faith founders, He claimed deity. Unlike other faith leaders, He taught that He, through His sacrificial death, has made The way available to eternal life with God (heaven) - then rose from death, demonstrating victory over it. Other faiths hypothesise about earning one's way to heaven (or nirvana etc) by following certain rules - Jesus taught that He is the way, as opposed to us trying to earn it. If we genuinely accept Him, we will naturally want to follow God's guidance, but religiosity itself, according to Christianity, can't save anyone.
Obviously, there are tonnes of articles that explain this better than me. Eg - https://jamesbishopblog.com/.../jesus-vs-muhammad.../
Yuh - but sexuality is just one tiny facet of being human, and our society has made it a religion. Adolescence, with current cultural influences, brainwashes us into thinking that sex is the biggest part of human happiness; and so, so much suffering results from this lie.
I'm always amazed by catwalk models ability to maintain such a serious expression whilst dressed in such hilarious things.
What I want answered is when it'll finally be over, or at least take up less of the media, and there can be more political action and conversation on serious issues. I want answered why politicians are so much more passionate about this^ than about working to end extreme poverty and to put in place solutions to the problems causing the most suffering.
My life would be more bearable if particular Vice content didn't exist (I still follow Vice because I need to keep informed, but a lot of it is unbearable to know exists)
What's meant by "religion"? What actually matters is what Jesus did an taught - it's meaningless for politicians, or anyone, to claim to be defending Christianity if they're demonstrating values antithetical to those that Christ called us to.
So depressing. Unlike previous generations, we millennials, and teens, have grown up well aware of the extreme poverty in our world. Why do we feel so excited by, and entitled to, any random new items that we like, when we know that we're already extremely fortunate and could be using our money for far more exciting things?
Excuse me Grace, previous generations were well aware of poverty. Many of us lived through it. Have you ever heard of the Great Depression? It's not an emotional affliction either.
Exactly - after the Great Depression, it would be less surprising if people were keen to indulge when things began to improve, and people had less awareness of the more severe poverty in developing countries. We, however, have known all our lives that we have far, far more than most of humanity. Knowing that there are people struggling to survive, wearing ragged cast offs from us Westerners; and that many clothes are made in sweatshops; why would we feel entitled to demand that people randomly buy us new things simply because we like them? (as opposed to occasions when new clothes are needed, or gifts for special events)
"Jesus hasn't saved us"? He never promised that this life would be safer or wealthier with Him (which is NOT to say that the injustice the black community face is in any way OK, obviously); He saves us by offering us deep joy to cope with the difficulty of life in a world that's been messed up by sin, and, incomparably more importantly, He offers us forgiveness that we don't deserve so that we can have eternal life in perfect peace with God (heaven).
Obviously, no one should simply swallow this because their parents told them to - but the case for the resurrection having actually taken place is pretty compelling when investigated. If one then opens their heart to Christ, there's deeper joy to be found than anything else this world offers.
Christianity is the colonizers religion. Keep it!
Genuine Christianity is to follow Christ. Colonisers claimed to be Christian, to be Christian, but clearly weren't following Him at all.
There are more pleasant souvenirs than STIs.
The most important thing about baby Jesus is that He grew up and died in our place to make a way possible for us to have eternal life (heaven) if we choose to accept Him. That doesn't apply to the kids at the border. However, those children are priceless, and it's vital that we try to find a way to help them and their families.
There are people who call themselves Christians of all political persuasions and social attitudes - what matters is Christ, and some people who claim to be Christians aren't following Him at all. Jesus made it clear that we should treat others as we'd like to be treated; and specifically criticised those who mistreat children.
Jesus said that should a normal person not just know it i hate religion
I never said anything about "religion"- how do you define it? Why do you hate Jesus?
Jesus is to do with religion
But lots of "religion" is nothing to do with Jesus - so it makes no sense to say "I hate religion" when I only mentioned Jesus. There are many, many aspects of "religion" that Jesus was completely against, and He argued against the religious leaders around Him constantly. He told us to treat others as we want to be treated, and that He is the way to eternal life (heaven) - rather than to earn heaven with religious practices. The things that people hate about "religion" are usually nothing to do with Jesus - or even things that He hated too. So don't avoid Jesus, who died to give you the option of heaven, because of aspects of"religion" that He never stood for.
When you put it like that you do have a point, I stand corrected. Learn something new everyday I suppose
We - Britain and most of Europe - have the wealth that we do mostly because our economies have grown through colonisation. Our ancestors, and multinational companies today, have been exploiting other nations' people and natural resources, It's brought money into our economies that makes it possible for us to earn salaries, and have a standard of living, that people working longer hours in poorer nations could never dream of. Migrants are only risking their lives to get into Europe because Europe's greed has left their home countries impoverished and ripe for the most corrupt individuals to take positions of power. The only real solution to the "migrant crisis" is to force our corporations to pay developing nations and their people fairly for their labour and resources; and to spend aid well so that young people have the education and infrastructure to make their countries self-sufficient. https://www.filmsforaction.org/.../aid-in-reverse-how.../
Well our countries will just have to develop elastic sides, however water could be a problem. How many poor souls have you taken in ?
What I'm saying is that we should do more to help those countries to develop. Taking a person into your home is, obviously, entirely different to having them live on the same land mass. But I would take people in if I owned my own home or had permission. In the mean time, I'll keep sponsoring children in developing countries.
Most African countries have been untouched by colonisation for at least several decades.
Why do they still struggle economically? Why are many of them still riddled with terrorism and civil war? Why has their technological advancement always been stunted and inferior? You cannot blame the West for everything.
Why do they still struggle economically? Why are many of them still riddled with terrorism and civil war? Why has their technological advancement always been stunted and inferior? You cannot blame the West for everything.
The problems that colonialisation caused can't simply be eradicated by a few decades of "freedom" - especially when there's extreme lack infrastructure and resources, no stable governance, and gross exploitation by Western multinational corporations
Undeveloped African nations have been given close to £800 billion in foreign aid since the 1960s. That's more than 50 years of free funding, yet there is still an extreme lack of infrastructure. Have you never explored the idea that the people of these nations are simply ineffective at utilising their resources?
The aid given is pitiful in terms of the amounts that nations need - if UKAid is 0.7% of what our gov. spends - ie, the other 99% is needed for public services in the running of our nation - how can you think that the aid given would have resolved Africa's struggles already?
As the article explains, far, far, far more wealth is leaving Africa for developed nations than developed nations are giving it in aid.
And if you blame the people of these nations for being "ineffective at utilising their resources", how do you expect them to resolve this when many are born into slums, struggling throughout life just to survive and with no opportunities to get into positions of influence?
What would you do, if you grew up malnourished; at risk without healthcare or police services; too poor to complete school; with no career opportunities?
As the article explains, far, far, far more wealth is leaving Africa for developed nations than developed nations are giving it in aid.
And if you blame the people of these nations for being "ineffective at utilising their resources", how do you expect them to resolve this when many are born into slums, struggling throughout life just to survive and with no opportunities to get into positions of influence?
What would you do, if you grew up malnourished; at risk without healthcare or police services; too poor to complete school; with no career opportunities?
Hmmm 65 million abortions last year
What are you talking about? Are you presuming that I'm in favour of abortion?
Just what we need one more religious nutter
LOL - I diidn't say what I believe, I discussed the biible because Republican politicians have claimed to defend Christian values. How do you define "religious nutter"? Following Jesus is more important to me than anything else - that's entirely different from religiosity, and from Jihadism.
We have our own needy that we need to attend to first. When they are all taken care of, then maybe we can take on more.
We - Britain and most of Europe - have the wealth that we do mostly because our economies have grown through colonisation. Our ancestors, and multinational companies today, have been exploiting other nations' people and natural resources, It's brought money into our economies that makes it possible for us to earn salaries, and have a standard of living, that people working longer hours in pooer nations could never dream of. Migrants are only risking their lives to get into Europe because Europe's greed has left their home countries impoverished and ripe for the most corrupt individuals to take positions of power. The only real solution to the "migrant crisis" is to force our corporations to pay developing nations and their people fairly for their labour and resources; and to spend aid well so that young people have the education and infrastructure to make their countries self-sufficient.
I'm translating this for others to understand - I hope you don't mind. "We colonised them and gave them infrastructure some hundreds of years ago so now it's only fair that they come rape and exploit us now"
Why should innocent people suffer because of several idiots from the same country as them? Should you be judged on the basis of the rapists in your country?
So who covers the costs of all this...because "god" won't, and most of us have a hard enough time paying for ourselves and our own families. We also have our own homeless and vulnerable people in the UK, notably some who served in the Armed Forces. Family first, Countrymen next, strangers after that. Just saying...,
"family first, Countrymen next, strangers after that" according to who? Why not "those suffering most"; "those with fewest opportunities to help themselves" or "those for whom each £ can make the most difference" first?
Costs aren't the issue, immigrants work harder than us natives. God does cover the costs - He's provided more than enough for humanity, the problem is that many people have ignored? His commands to practice justice, so that many of the resources are hogged by some people, leaving others with too little.
Costs aren't the issue, immigrants work harder than us natives. God does cover the costs - He's provided more than enough for humanity, the problem is that many people have ignored? His commands to practice justice, so that many of the resources are hogged by some people, leaving others with too little.
If there WAS a "god/s" then he/she could stop ALL suffering but he/she chooses not to. Religion is a manmade concept that was needed at a time when there were no "Police" to keep the masses under control. (Imo).
Also, you say the financial cost is not the point. Of course it is...houses, NHS, schools, jobs..we can't magic these these things up out of nowhere. As for these wonderful migrants " working harder than us", that is a fallacy. There will be the same mix of people amongst them as amongst any other group of people. Many of them might want to work hard ( IF we take them in), but just as many are after something for nothing..at the expense of the people they land amongst.
No "god" in any of this...or does this "god" prefer us to them?
Also, you say the financial cost is not the point. Of course it is...houses, NHS, schools, jobs..we can't magic these these things up out of nowhere. As for these wonderful migrants " working harder than us", that is a fallacy. There will be the same mix of people amongst them as amongst any other group of people. Many of them might want to work hard ( IF we take them in), but just as many are after something for nothing..at the expense of the people they land amongst.
No "god" in any of this...or does this "god" prefer us to them?
God's priority is that as many people as possible choose to follow Him, so that they can have eternal life (heaven). When life is going perfectly, we evidently are more likely to turn away from Him. Why would He simply eliminate all of the problems on Earth right now, when doing so would clearly mean that fewer people ended up enjoying unending joy?
I never advocated "religion" -I know that some "church" leaders have tried to control and exploit people, but that doesn't change the fact that science demonstrates that there is a designer - God - and that Jesus evidenced victory over death by rising from it, telling us the He is The Way to eternal life (not to be subjugated by the control of priests). Obviously, no one should just believe this, we each need to assess the reasoning for ourselves
I never advocated "religion" -I know that some "church" leaders have tried to control and exploit people, but that doesn't change the fact that science demonstrates that there is a designer - God - and that Jesus evidenced victory over death by rising from it, telling us the He is The Way to eternal life (not to be subjugated by the control of priests). Obviously, no one should just believe this, we each need to assess the reasoning for ourselves
Sorry but I think to hold that opinion is to be deluded. Obviously you disagree, and have every right to your opinion, but I would say all the evidence clearly shows that there is no such being as a "god" or "gods".
What evidence "clearly shows that there is no such being as a "god" or "gods"."?
Also, why would a "god" create beings that were flawed and then blame them for not being perfect? The "free will" argument doesn't cut it as he/she ("god") apparently already has the end result written down in some book of judgement.
Why would a supposedly " loving father" play silly testing games with his creations? Plus the fact that the last time he/she is supposed to have actually spoken to anyone was to some random person/people, in some random place, over 2 thousand years ago. Nope...not good enough, if there are "rules" then they should not have been given to illiterate old men, EVERYONE should know them. The bible is, imo, just another book...there are others.
Why would a supposedly " loving father" play silly testing games with his creations? Plus the fact that the last time he/she is supposed to have actually spoken to anyone was to some random person/people, in some random place, over 2 thousand years ago. Nope...not good enough, if there are "rules" then they should not have been given to illiterate old men, EVERYONE should know them. The bible is, imo, just another book...there are others.
IMO just another book? How much have you studied it? And the history of its documents?
He doesn't "play silly games" - He offers us all the option of forgiveness through Jesus. What do you mean that "the last time he/she is supposed to have actually spoken to anyone was to some random person/people, in some random place, over 2 thousand years ago"?
There are lots of complicated theological questions that theologians have debated for centuries, but they're of secondary importance - that we can't understand the purposes and plans of the universe's creator with the few lbs of neural tissue between our ears doesn't mean that there's not good reasoning, from history, science and philosophy to conclude that He exists.
He doesn't "play silly games" - He offers us all the option of forgiveness through Jesus. What do you mean that "the last time he/she is supposed to have actually spoken to anyone was to some random person/people, in some random place, over 2 thousand years ago"?
There are lots of complicated theological questions that theologians have debated for centuries, but they're of secondary importance - that we can't understand the purposes and plans of the universe's creator with the few lbs of neural tissue between our ears doesn't mean that there's not good reasoning, from history, science and philosophy to conclude that He exists.
ALL evidence shows there is no such being. No "god" ( being worthy of worship) would allow little babies to starve, be beaten, get raped or tortured, or would appear to favour one group of his/her creations over another.If he was capable of creating everything then he would be perfectly capable of sorting the mess out.
Saying he is "testing us" is a massive cop out. If he created us then he should have done a better job.
We are brainwashed into religions from birth and told not to question....that is just so wrong. Man has always created gods...from Sun worship to all the Roman gods, Greek gods, Hindu gods and whatever else people want to spend time allocating "prayers" to.
Why would the Christian god be any better to the rest? Just because WE are told this is truth? Nope....sorry but I don't buy it.
I do, however, respect everyone else's rights to believe in whatever gets them through life.I went to a Convent Boarding School. Believe me I know the bible inside out...and I still think, although a well put together compilation of documents, it is cobblers.
We live in a world where millions are told what to think and hardly any are taught how to question...
Indeed millions of people don't question the belief set that's most common in their society - but that doesn't erase the intellectual arguments for God's existence (but I get the impression that you've not examined them?). And right now, the majority of people in the UK have been taught that God is a delusion, and don't question it. Why have you ignored what I commented RE suffering? What is the evidence that God doesn't exist that you refer to?
Your self righteous, false piety is displayed by your inability to care for your own people. Remember what Paul said? Those who can't provide for their own households are worst than unbelievers. Sit down.
Excuse me? How exactly does my comment demonstrate self-righteous? Why do you presume I'm being "false"? how have I failed to "care for my own people"?
I love it when you folks cherry-pick the OT and completely ignore the teachings of your Christ. jfc...
How am I cherry picking? I've referenced relevant verses from a variety of Bible books and could add many, many more. What do you think the Bible's message on this subject is?
These are not refugees, they are criminals, wake up.....
No, they aren't. As I said, research has found that they're statistically significantly less likely to commit crime than US born residents. https://www.washingtonpost.com/.../two-charts.../...
Um no, we really, really don't. We need to challenge abusive relationships. Monogamy is far, far better for optimising happiness.
Precisely - the priority needs to be to do anything possible to address the huge industry of children in the Philipines and others being forced into online sex work (including being raped on screen) for Western customers. How can these women^ think that their potential to make money from this choice of career should take priority?
Because it sponsors Pride for the PC brownie points and advertising opportunity, obviously.
Trump is a useful memo to all of us to eschew the traits he's been criticised for. But surely a protest won't change anything? And it will certainly make those on the right more opposed to the left.
Seriously? You're angry with someone for not sharing your attitudes to sex? That's gross - Alex has every right not to have sex. It is, in fact, called Love Island, it's supposed to be about relationships. There's, apparently, plenty of porn for you to watch, so why on Earth are you complaining? How can it be OK to demand that someone has sex?
If I were LGBT, I'm pretty sure I'd feel frustrated by the incessant barrage of entertainment celebrities trying to score political correctness brownie points with these "love letters" and similar things.
Surely what needs to be done is for strong statements to be made against bullying of LGBT people; and recognition that each human being is unique and is immeasurably more important than their sexuality?
Whether a person is straight, gay or somewhere in between, cis, trans or somewhere in between, doesn't determine their humanity and ability to enjoy Placebo.
Sorry for being such an ignorant cynic.
Surely what needs to be done is for strong statements to be made against bullying of LGBT people; and recognition that each human being is unique and is immeasurably more important than their sexuality?
Whether a person is straight, gay or somewhere in between, cis, trans or somewhere in between, doesn't determine their humanity and ability to enjoy Placebo.
Sorry for being such an ignorant cynic.
I would rather "love letters" from celebrities that the hate from conservatives and bigots.
I didn't say that hate is OK, I specifically suggested strong statements against bullying. But I'm pretty sure that a few bigots are more fervent because of "loveletters"
Keeping someone in prison costs around £40 000 of public money annually. That's 1 less nurse, police officer, firefighter or teacher. Would it not make sense to castrate instead of keeping rapists locked up for decades? Then there'd be more funding for desperately needed services.
Then you really know nothing about genuine Christianity.
That's literally in the Christian bible
Wow, what Bible have you been reading?
Zechariah/14-2,isaiah/13-16, Of course there's Deuteronomy, commanding a woman to marry her rapist. And then god commanding Moses to take revenge on the Midianites, as he proceeds to have his men rape their women, in Numbers. I mean, have you even read the Bible?
Of course I’ve read the Bible. All of it, numerous times, with lots of analysis – which is nothing to boast about obviously, but to make the point that it’s far more complex than we can discuss thoroughly here, or than pulling verses out of context as you have. I’m well aware that there are plenty of websites put together by atheists that list the most brutal cherry picked verses – perhaps that’s how you became aware of the verses you’ve listed (?). But each – especially in the Old Testament, needs serious exploration of context and various philosophical points.
You said that the Bible “literally” says that God wouldn’t stop child abuse, but you’ve not provided any evidence of that, you’ve taken snippets from complex narratives which aren’t about child rape anyway. Briefly – that rapists should marry their victims was, at that time, because it was the best way to ensure that rape victims would be provided for; the rapist is being forced to take responsibility and ensure that the victim has a home and provisions, rather than being left alone because the community considers them defiled.
When violence occurs, God is trying desperately to warn His people to turn away from the paganism that they’ve wrapped themselves in, so that they don’t all miss out on heaven. The innocent people, inc. children, who died in that conflict could have gone straight from life in the dessert, surrounded by savagery and child sacrifice, to heaven; and the Hebrews might have been turned away from the cancer of paganism before it caused more of them to miss out on eternal joy.
Ultimately, we follow Jesus, who is God as man and gives us a more straight forward demonstration of who God is than trying to understand all of the Old Testament. Jesus tells us to treat others as we’d like to be treated, to resist the temptation to violence and to forgive others. He died to make a way for any of us to have life free from the consequences of evil forever.
You said that the Bible “literally” says that God wouldn’t stop child abuse, but you’ve not provided any evidence of that, you’ve taken snippets from complex narratives which aren’t about child rape anyway. Briefly – that rapists should marry their victims was, at that time, because it was the best way to ensure that rape victims would be provided for; the rapist is being forced to take responsibility and ensure that the victim has a home and provisions, rather than being left alone because the community considers them defiled.
When violence occurs, God is trying desperately to warn His people to turn away from the paganism that they’ve wrapped themselves in, so that they don’t all miss out on heaven. The innocent people, inc. children, who died in that conflict could have gone straight from life in the dessert, surrounded by savagery and child sacrifice, to heaven; and the Hebrews might have been turned away from the cancer of paganism before it caused more of them to miss out on eternal joy.
Ultimately, we follow Jesus, who is God as man and gives us a more straight forward demonstration of who God is than trying to understand all of the Old Testament. Jesus tells us to treat others as we’d like to be treated, to resist the temptation to violence and to forgive others. He died to make a way for any of us to have life free from the consequences of evil forever.
Lmao, Jews never even believed in heaven. And of course, every single passage that you don't like is merely "out of context", which is a completely stupid and unintelligent way to look at any piece of literature. And I've actually read the Hebrew Bible, instead of the shitty Christian apologetics you're half heartedly trying to parrot.
I know that Jewish people didn't believe in heaven, that doesn't mean that it can't have been God's reasoning. Why are you boasting about not having read the Christian Bible? Throwing slur words at it doesn't change whether or not it's true - but whatever the truth is, this post^ is clearly aimed at Christianity.
Wow, that's pretty good evidence that the EU really is immoral and racist after all - unless it intends to give all of that money to similar charities. Wherever they're offices are, overseas aid charities are some of the very most important organisations on the planet, and should receive far, far more money; but they do also need to improve how they spend and monitor their resources.
If our ancestors hadn't grossly exploited Africa, there wouldn't be as many young people desperate to gamble; there wouldn't be such a lack of governance that allows greedy owners of machines to flout laws, and there might not even be these Western looking machines at all. Whoever it happens to, gambling addiction is a neurophysiological illness that a sufferer is unable to immediately escape. It's truly grotesque that there are numerous laughter reactions to this post.
One's actual husband is incomparably more important. And in fact, it is possible to enjoy life completely without any contact with anyone's genitals (or fake ones).
The BBC spends far too long talking about Brexit already. It should be giving more of that time to more serious international affairs - issues that have a bigger impact on lives, and that we the public may be able to help even slightly (through our purchasing habits and charity donations). Ie - droughts, famine, flooding and landslides in developing countries (accentuated by global warming, and the victims of which we can donate to); slavery (much driven by our consumer demand); sweatshops; conflict minerals etc. People are suffering far, far, far more than we will if Brexit goes badly - which we can't affect anyway - yet the BBC and other media mostly ignores them, whilst many of us become more and more resentful of Brexit and the EU because we're drowning in it.
We need to break the assumption that views about economic politics must be tied to views about social politics. Recently I've been told off over the border separation crisis because I was arguing against abortion, and told off over abortion because I was arguing against border separation. Why assume that everyone fits perfectly into one of 2 boxes?
Then he should be assessed. As someone with diagnosed Asperger's syndrome, that makes careers very difficult, it's irksome seeing someone who's been stupendously lucky career wise claiming to have it. It's not my place to say, and I'm sorry for seeming so unsympathetic; perhaps he does have it, but he really should have experts test for it.
That's insulting, of course she's different; most other women have to return to work to earn enough to support their families. Some would love to have more time at home with their new arrival but - unlike Serena Williams - don't have the option.
It's the epitome of tragedy that this is dividing the Church. Our society is so sex obsessed that we're constantly arguing about it, when a relationship with God is incomparably better, and most people around us have no idea.
Nah, culture is conning us into thinking that a "healthy sex life" is necessary for happiness - it isn't at all. We're hungering for thrills, and for meaning in life, and we've been duped into thinking that sex can fill the void.
Why presume he's telling the truth? Having slept with any number of people isn't anything to be proud of, but apparently, plenty of blokes think that it is, so it seems very likely that he'd claim a high number just in an attempt to show off.
Why go abroad?
We live in one of the best places to be already. There's more than enough to do, and plenty of days of sunshine in the summer. If we holiday here, it will help the local economies of what are some of the poorer parts of the country, and save a huge amount of greenhouse gas (that we create by travelling abroad).
We're incredibly privileged if we have enough wealth to be able to spend £hundreds on a week's entertainment - why not do something more exciting with that money? I'd far rather fund a year's sponsorship for an impoverished child than spend a week somewhere exotic.
(Apologies if I sound like I'm trying to be self righteous, I need to be more useful to the world's poor - I just genuinely don't understand why holidays that cost as much as they do for such brief unnecessary amusement is normal.)
No comments:
Post a Comment