Spirituality
11 Apr 12
11 Apr 12
I don't know if this video is viewable outside Australia. It's a one-hour debate between Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion etc) and Cardinal George Pell (top man in the Catholic Church in Australia). Two very intelligent men and a discussion free from the non sequiturs that usually surface in these debates.
The whole video is at http://www.abc.net.au/iview/#/series/3421606 and if you can't see that there's a short clip at http://media.smh.com.au/news/national-news/god-v-science-pell-and-dawkins-go-headtohead-3200957.html
11 Apr 12
Originally posted by Kewpie(2 Corinthians 6:14-16) . . .Or what sharing does light have with darkness? Further,
I don't know if this video is viewable outside Australia. It's a one-hour debate between Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion etc) and Cardinal George Pell (top man in the Catholic Church in Australia). Two very intelligent men and a discussion free from the non sequiturs that usually surface in these debates.
The whole video is at http://www.abc.net.au/ivie ...[text shortened]... edia.smh.com.au/news/national-news/god-v-science-pell-and-dawkins-go-headtohead-3200957.html
what harmony is there between Christ and Belial? Or what portion does a faithful
person have with an unbeliever?
11 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KewpieI think its self evident, but that's just me, so let me spell it out, what is there to debate with an unbeliever?
and your point is?
Please note its not an attack on non believers, its simply a matter of practicality, for
shall they understand the teaching of the torture stake of the Christ, no, it simply
foolishness to them, but to us, its a matter of salvation, shall we be convinced that our
beliefs are a delusion, no, for nothing can separate a Christian from the love of God.
11 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by Kewpiesure thing, i guess its a matter of personal taste. Isn't like your PM an openly
I wonder if Dawkins felt the same way? Personally, I don't see any point in debating the differences between reason and faith, they're not in opposition. Still, not everyone agrees with us - the show drew a record audience from all over Australia.
professed atheist, and a woman 😲, one of the few heads of state to declare her
atheism, a very dangerous combination I hasten to add 😛
11 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KewpieYou know, the only person who comes out of this debate with any sense of integrity is the chairman! Both Dawkins and Pell come across as rather bumbling characters, albeit of immense intellectual stature. Dawkins is clearly harassed and on the defensive, Pell is rather too smug and laid back and we, the audience, know there will never be any consummation of the union. These are always interesting to watch as they sharpen and define our own views, but I doubt whether anyone onthe audience, or indeed watching, will have had a conversion!
I don't know if this video is viewable outside Australia. It's a one-hour debate between Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion etc) and Cardinal George Pell (top man in the Catholic Church in Australia). Two very intelligent men and a discussion free from the non sequiturs that usually surface in these debates.
The whole video is at http://www.abc.net.au/ivie edia.smh.com.au/news/national-news/god-v-science-pell-and-dawkins-go-headtohead-3200957.html
11 Apr 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAre you condemning her because of her lack of religious belief, or her lack of testicles?
sure thing, i guess its a matter of personal taste. Isn't like your PM an openly
professed atheist, and a woman 😲, one of the few heads of state to declare her
atheism, a very dangerous combination I hasten to add 😛
11 Apr 12
1 edit
Originally posted by KewpieDifficult as it is to determine emotions from an internet text, given lack of tone in voice,
So you prove yourself sexist as well as bigoted, it seems.
lack of facial expression, lack of gestures etc etc, the use of emoticons may prove to
be a step for a hint! although it takes a degree of discernment on the part of the
recipient to gauge to what extent the proposer is utilising them and in what manner. If
my jocular approach and general light-heartedness has been misconstrued then so be
it, in the immortal words of Dylan, call me anything you like, I will never deny it. If on
the other hand you prefer something more meaty to chew upon, may i suggest a bar of
French nougat, rather than remonstrate with this jester!
11 Apr 12
Originally posted by robbie carrobieBut you do have women elders and leaders in your JW Kingdom Hall communities, right?
Difficult as it is to determine emotions from an internet text, given lack of tone in voice,
lack of facial expression, lack of gestures etc etc, the use of emoticons may prove to
be a step for a hint! although it takes a degree of discernment on the part of the
recipient to gauge to what extent the proposer is utilising them and in what manne ...[text shortened]... to chew upon, may i suggest a bar of
French nougat, rather than remonstrate with this jester!