General Debate 2 January 2014

January 2nd, 2014 at 8:00 am by Kokila Patel
Tags:

200 Responses to “General Debate 2 January 2014”

  1. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    Predictions for the new year . . .
    Politics
    With Prime Minister John Key pushing for a third term against a Labour Party reinvigorated by a change of leader – and with a strong third party ally in the Greens – what does 2014 hold?
    After one of their best “days of reckoning” in recent years, scoring 133/200 for their picks in 2013, here are the Fairfax press gallery team’s 20 not-always-entirely-serious tips for the 12 months ahead. As usual, the predictions will be scored out of 10 on the last day of the year.
    1. National will get a lift in the polls early in the year as the economic news gets better. [YEP]
    2. John Key will reshuffle his Cabinet line-up in the first two months of 2014. [YEP]
    3. At least one of the Green MPs will step down before the general election. [ SEEMS POSSIBLE – NORMAN? ]
    4. Two of Labour’s “old guard” will go on the list to give themselves the option of quitting after the election without triggering a by-election. [PREDICTABLE SPIN BULL]
    5. Brendan Horan, Eric Roy and John Hayes will not be MPs by the end of the year. [two from three - ROY AND HORAN]
    6. Irrespective of the election result, David Cunliffe will stay on as Labour leader. [AND THOSE CUNNER PIGS ARE FLYING]
    7. The Genesis Energy sale will go ahead, but for the election campaign National will call it a day on the partial privatisation programme. [ FIVE FROM 10]
    8. Conservative leader Colin Craig will stand in the East Coast Bays seat, his party will get into Parliament but will not cross the 5 per cent threshold. [YEP]
    9. The economy will start flagging late in 2014 as rising interest rates start to bite. [NOPE – STILL GOING STRONG]
    10. The brawl between Judith Collins and Steven Joyce over who will inherit John Key’s crown will heat up as the election approaches. [CRAP - COLLINS WILL BE TOLD TO PULL HER RAVENSBRUCK-LIKE HEAD IN. SHE HAS 10% OF Steven’s intellect. Just a silly tax lawyer.]
    11. Mr Key will give the thumbs up to talks with all of National’s potential allies: ACT, the Conservatives, the Maori Party and UnitedFuture. But he will make it clear NZ First will be his last cab off the rank if he is in a position to form a Government. [YEP]
    12. The Maori Party will win two seats at the election. [THREE]
    13. Mr Key will visit the White House and host a high-profile return visit. [PROBABLY YEP – AFTER THE AUSSIE CONF?]
    14. ACT will not get more than 1.5 per cent of the vote. [YEP]
    15. New Zealand’s push for a temporary seat on the United Nations Security Council will be successful. [PASS]
    16. A senior member of David Cunliffe’s office will quit. [PASS, BUT FAIRFAX IS WIRED TO LABOUR & CUNNERS]
    17. Housing will be one of the most contentious themes of the year, prompting National to announce further measures to help low-income and first-home buyers. [YEP]
    18. There will be upsets in the seats of Napier, Mt Roskill, Te Tai Hauauru, Ohariu and Maungakiekie. [MORE LABOUR SPIN ]
    19. The election will be held in October. [COULD BE]
    20. National will form a Government with at least two other parties. [YEP]

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    Science itself is as much pro-life as the Christian religion. :cool:

    “…..In an age that has elevated indiscriminate freedom to the status of fetish, can it be doubted that not everything that sprouts from the imagination of blighted minds is morally acceptable or desirable?

    While in our bedeviled state of moral anomie a country can no longer aspire to make men good, but it can certainly restrain the demons of our baser natures from defiling ourselves, and generations hence, by subsidizing a ponderous chain of wickedness.

    To a good biological scientist a human conceptus is not merely a human entity and yet not a human being. It is a new distinct member of the species Homo sapiens, therefore it is a human being. It is from creation, from conception, from fertilization, an organism and not in any lower category of the so-called hierarchy of existence. In other words, it is not merely an atom, molecule, intracellular organelle, cell, tissue, organ, organ system, etc. Even as a single-celled entity, i.e., the zygote, it is a single-celled organism. Virtually every Introductory Biology textbook written before the onslaught of the feminist baby killers states clearly that a zygote is a new organism or equivalently, a new member of its species. A human zygote, morula, blastocyst, gastrula, neurula, etc., IOWs any state of embryonic development of the human conceptus, is always a human organism, therefore always a human being. This is what biological science has taught for years.

    There is another point I wish to make. The term “nascent life” is biologically illiterate.

    Healthy cells are alive. A healthy egg is alive. It has life. Ditto, for a sperm. A healthy tree is alive. It has life. Life does NOT begin at conception. Life is passed on in the form of a new individual. It doesn’t begin at birth either. It is present long before those events. A conceptus is not nascent life. It IS life. It is alive. One can kill it, and that is what abortion does. What is created at human conception is not a new human nascent life. It is a new human organism, a new individual human being. And it should have the same right to continued life as any other human being/human organism/member of the human species at the hands of another human being. That right is conferred to it either by its Creator, if there is One, or by its creators, i.e., mom and dad, who, because they are human beings and persons therefore pass that right to human life on to a new member of the species.

    The Progressives believe they don’t need a centuries-old religion created by a man/God who sacrificed his life in defense of a philosophy that scorned human dictators for spiritual and secular freedom. Progressives are just the latest in a long line of would-be human dictators who want to play God………..”

    Christianity needs to pick up the sword again and remind those who wield the scalpel – who shall live! :cool:

    http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2014/01/conservatism_and_the_moral_calculus_of_abortion_comments.html#disqus_thread

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    DAVID….

    Please, please, please ….
    Can we have a religion thread???????????????

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    flipper

    As a National supporter (but not a member of any political party) I find #5 relevant. I refer of course to our seldom seen & possibly deceased local MP, John Hayes.

    I’m well aware that you personally count on his arse movements to herald the sun each morning but to the humble constituents of the Wairarapa electorate the man may as well be invisible. What ever work he performs…..ditto.

    With the upcoming election he needs to promote himself to the people or be replaced…..if this is not possible then perhaps even a cardboard cut out moved around the electorate would help.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Here we go again with the devil dodgers. Fuck this, I’m off to WO

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. bringbackdemocracy (350 comments) says:

    flipper re. Fairfax predictions.
    8) Conservatives should get more than 5%. They got 2.7% last time with a seven week campaign, already this in 2013, TV3 have had them at 2.8% and UMR at 3.8%.
    They doubled their share of the vote in the Christchurch East by-election and in the Auckland local body elections their candidates averaged 20% of the vote where they stood.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    Agreed. Let the inadequates have their own thread where they can argue amongst themselves about Santa Claus and desperately assure each other that the Earth really was created just 6000 years ago (notwithstanding the geological record, the fossil record, our understanding of the DNA evolutionary mechanism, the laughable impossibility of tooth fairies etc.)

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    13. Mr Key will visit the White House and host a high-profile return visit. [PROBABLY YEP – AFTER THE AUSSIE CONF?]

    Hardly…………the Chicongo Tyrant is on the nose everywhere around the world.

    It would be a fucken insult if anything!

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    nasska…..

    You are away with the fairies… or is it the stuff that you grow in the bush?

    You claim to be a NP supporter, but not a member. It seems obvious from your smart arsed inaccuracies that you will vote for Labour’s TAB bookie.

    The spin you apply in your comment seems consistent with the bullshit promoted by Labour, and also by a certain pissed wine merchant ….. and the pot smoking greens :-)

    It seems clear, also, that you have trouble comprehending what you read. 28000 Wairarapa households got a detailed update just two weeks ago with the distribution of the Hayes Herald . Naturally, the Labour biased WTAge, with a circulation of less than 6000, ignores all Hayes’ efforts on behalf of a constituency that is bigger than the State of Israel.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    You’re going to have do do better than shooting the messenger flipper. The Hayes Herald will have been binned by 27999 households, along with the latest Warehouse flyer.

    If all else fails,get a few volunteers together & carry Mr Hayes around the electorate so we can get an idea of what he looks like.

    Ref: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/wairarapa-times-age/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=1503411&objectid=11173678

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    11. Mr Key will give the thumbs up to talks with all of National’s potential allies: ACT, the Conservatives, the Maori Party and UnitedFuture. But he will make it clear NZ First will be his last cab off the rank if he is in a position to form a Government. [YEP]

    ‘Mr key will give the thumbs up’?

    No. They’ll all play Key out publicly in front of the voters to get what they want -be it the smart ones will- but they just better make sure that it is warranted! It makes them look very smart to potential voters.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. graham (2,211 comments) says:

    wat dabney at 8:31 am

    I am a Christian, and hence you would probably consider me religious and lump me in with all other “religious whack-jobs”. But to set the record straight:

    I don’t believe in Santa Claus
    I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago (I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth wasn’t created 6000 years ago either, but it’s not an issue that keeps me awake at night)
    I don’t believe in the tooth fairy

    But, y’know, if it makes you feel better you continue to apply your sweeping generalisations and simple-minded prejudices. That also won’t keep me awake at night. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    graham

    Who was the miserable bugger who spoiled Santa Claus & the Tooth Fairy for you? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    Nasska….

    Now provide the link to Hayes devastating response to Bonallack’s bullshit.

    How many times was this Labour hack proved a liar ???

    On the other hand, perhaps he is doing a “rat” on APN for the perpetually pissed wine seller who is angling for a list only nomination (if he is lucky!).

    So which is it Nasska?

    Is it the Labour TAB Bookie, or the wine merchant, that you are attempting to spin?

    Either way Nasska…. check out the NP Rules. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago (I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth wasn’t created 6000 years ago either, but it’s not an issue that keeps me awake at night)

    Sounds like a very Colin Craigish non-commitment to something with a scientifically obvious answer.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Right of way is Way of Right (1,125 comments) says:

    I think my mum and dad were a little mixed up with Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy.

    Every Christmas morning, I used to go downstairs to see all the teeth I had lost that year neatly arranged under the tree……

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..Sounds like a very Colin Craigish non-commitment to something with a scientifically obvious answer….”

    So you don’t mind Mr Craig talking about the science behind abortion then Pete?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. wreck1080 (3,522 comments) says:

    Doh! impossible to pass trucks on passing lanes now! Especially with the tendency of mr plod waiting to ping you for going 105kph passing a truck going at 100kph!!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    flipper

    I’ve got no doubts whatsoever that Andrew Bonallack would sit to the left of Kim Jong-un but perceptions matter. It’s your call but the Wairarapa is by no means a safe National seat & given that Mr Hayes & the limelight would be strange bedfellows I suggest that you do something to boost his profile.

    I may not be much of Hayes fan but the thought of having a smarmy anti agriculture Labour MP doesn’t do it for me.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    Colin Craig on abortion:

    Our abortion policy is to bring in “full and informed consent” as practiced in Western European nations. We think that this policy could gain support to become law.

    Full and informed consent requires women contemplating an abortion to be fully informed of potential health issues and consequences. The advice is given by an independent medical experts.

    This would still leave the decision with the women in a situation such as you have outlined. There would still be a need to meet current legislative requirements.

    That’s from Colin Craig answers – NBR

    How different is that to what we have now? Depends on detail.

    Craig covered this differently on Kiwiblog in Guest Post: Colin Craig on whether he would vote for “Abortion on Demand”?

    A challenging situation could arise if a Conservative Party candidate is elected as the MP for an electorate. He is then being sent to parliament to represent an electorate (not a party). I do believe that an MP is required to faithfully represent those who sent him even if he does not agree with them. A simple servant-master situation.

    If the electorate required the MP to vote in a way that was against his conscience (and “yes” abortion on demand is against mine), he has in my view the following options:

    - To vote as directed by the electorate (against his own conscience)
    - To abstain on the issue
    - To go back to the electorate and negotiate with them. If there is an impasse then to offer his resignation.
    - To ignore the electorate and vote as he pleases

    The first and last options (1 & 4) I believe to be incorrect choices. The first, because it breaches conscience, and the last because it usurps the servant role of the representative (it would be unfaithful to those who sent him). This leaves only 2 & 3 as options in my view. Personally I would elect the third option.

    To close then, “no” I would not vote for “abortion on demand” but I would recognise that as an electorate MP this might require my resignation. If so then I would be pleased to stand aside so that a representative who was “more in tune” with the electorate could take my place.

    That could make it easy for his electorate to force Craig to resign if they chose.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 10 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    graham,

    I don’t believe in Santa Claus…I don’t believe in the tooth fairy

    But why?

    There is no difference in professing a belief in any of Santa Claus, the Tooth Fairy, Zeus, Apollo, Yahweh, Ra, Naptune, Vishnu, etc, etc ad infinitum.

    You are in the position of claiming that Spiderman exists whilst rejecting the idea of the Hulk and Iron Man and so on. And you expect to be taken seriously?

    But, y’know, if it makes you feel better you continue to apply your sweeping generalisations and simple-minded prejudices.

    The point, of course, is that there is no difference in professing a belief in one magic pixie as opposed to any other. If you reject Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy you must, if you have any integrity, reject Zeus, Apollo, Yahweh, etc, for exactly the same reasons.

    Belief in Yahweh is on a par with belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. The only difference is that one of these mythical animals is a barbaric, cruel monster and the other two are good guys.

    I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago (I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth wasn’t created 6000 years ago either, but it’s not an issue that keeps me awake at night)

    If you were genuinely interested in the truth then you would certainly be interested, since the age of the Earth is either consistent with your belief system’s creation myth or it contradicts it.

    Your “belief”, then, is based on nothing more than a willingness to close your eyes and ears to anything and everything which contradicts your wishful thinking and your deep need to believe in space daddy.

    By all means indulge yourself. Nobody says you have to grow up.

    The problems come when people like you start interfering in other people’s lives.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. mara (639 comments) says:

    Paying pregnant women $300 to stop smoking while pregnant …. applying a 4km speed limit tolerance ….. the Easter bunny lays Easter eggs … Stupid, stupid stupid, though I’m not sure about the Easter bunny.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..Our abortion policy is to bring in “full and informed consent” as practiced in Western European nations. We think that this policy could gain support to become law………….How different is that to what we have now? Depends on detail….”

    Exactly Pete. Sex education and abortion education.

    I can’t see girls having too much wayward sex in the future.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. graham (2,211 comments) says:

    Oh Pete. For you to sneer at me for being “non-committal” is deliciously ironic!

    Incidentally, you do rather seem to have a fixation with Colin Craig, introducing his name into topics where he wasn’t mentioned at all, and trying to discredit him. Why the obsession?

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  25. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    nasska (8,511 comments) says:

    January 2nd, 2014 at 9:37 am

    *****

    OK….. that is getting close.

    But you seriously under rate what Hayes gets done as Parliamentary Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and you seriously under rate the quality of his business backing throughout the whole of the Wairarapa electorate. Take a look at the airport committee and the work being done there as just one example. Moreover, his SFA ranking enables him to pull well beyond the weight of an ordinary MP. And newspaper crap does not equal achievement.

    The wine seller has not got a prayer….,and his three or four supporters (who wrongly believe they are movers and shakers) will find they are a small group of non-entities. Too many gins in the Masterton Club …. or quaffs at the winery. :-)

    And YES…. Wairarapa is NOT a National shoo in. But why squander a 7000+ majority for someone who says he will not be living in the electorate???

    See what I mean ??????

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  26. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    “For you to sneer at me for being “non-committal” is deliciously ironic!”

    The irony is on you graham. I express clear views on many things. Like I think there’s a huge amount of science that supports the Earth being billions of years old and no evidence that Earth is 6000 years old so there’s no chance (or an infinitesimally small chance) of that being true.

    The fact is that your comment about neither confirming or denying a 6000 year old Earth seems similar to Craig’s position on creation when he said “Don’t know, I wasn’t there. Seems there are lots of theories and opinions. I realise it is important to some people but I just don’t know the answer.”

    I didn’t introduce Craig into the topic of abortion, Harriet did that.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  27. graham (2,211 comments) says:

    wat dabney … again with the sweeping generalisations, which aren’t even based on facts.

    There is a huge difference in professing a belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, and professing a belief in Jesus Christ and in God. I assure you that my belief is emphatically not based on “a willingness to close your eyes and ears to anything and everything which contradicts your wishful thinking and your deep need to believe in space daddy”. My belief is based on what I observe around me, and on the logical conclusions that reason and thought lead me to. I don’t really have the eloquence to explain myself, but for starters I look at the wonders and marvels of the creation around me, the incredible complexity and detail of each leaf and fish and animal and organism and all the vast wonders of nature (which science does an excellent job of revealing to us). I multiply this out until it stretches across the earth and throughout the universe and beyond, and realise that for all this to just “happen” by chance and unguided evolution requires a far bigger leap of faith than I’m able to make.

    The facts of my own belief is that I have indeed opened my eyes and my mind to what is around me. I don’t have a “deep need” to believe in “space daddy” (what the hell does that even mean?), and I fail to see how my lifestyle – which you know nothing about whatsoever – qualifies as indulging myself.

    “Nobody says you have to grow up.” Really? Again, how much do you know about my life, what I do for a job, and so on, that places you in the position to be able to judge whether I have or haven’t grown up?

    And, would you care to offer examples of how I, personally, have ever interfered in other people’s lives? As you’re levelling that accusation against me?

    How about you start backing up your accusations against me with facts? Not wishful thinking of what “all Christians are like”, or blind thoughtless biases, but actual facts? Facts that are true about me, personally?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  28. graham (2,211 comments) says:

    Facts like, some of us have grown up and have jobs to tend to around the house and garden. But wat, you feel free to continue frothing at me behind the computer.

    Personally, I’m going to make the most of the good weather and get out and catch up on some house repairs and gardening.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  29. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    I think it would be helpful for vocal atheists to understand that the difference between a theist and an atheist is that one believes “God exists” and the other does not. Theism and materialistic atheism are different ways of looking at everything, not just that one binary on-off question of “God exists”. The paper on which beliefs are written is different between the two; not just what the words say.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  30. stephieboy (1,118 comments) says:

    Dear Prime Minster,

    I would like to congratulate you on a pretty solid performance so far this term and the auguries for this year would strongly indicate you and your party will likely romp home come election time. Naturally there is no room for complacency but am sure your only to aware of that.
    One thing I need to say is a big thank you and your government been prepared to stick solidly in the center and mainstream of NZ Politics promoting and pushing forward a range of progressive and forward thinking policies including gay and trans gender rights. I might add though , I too feel a little uncomfortable at times with the thought of Gay marriages put on the same footing as between a man and a woman. But the reality is no harm of a lasting kind has been done.
    I would like to comment finally on one thing though. I would if I was you exercise some real caution in dealings with Colin Craig and the Conservative Party. This is not only because some of the wacko ideas and beliefs that Mr Craig evidently harbours’ but the kind of people that are attracted to him and his party. Just a cursory glance at some of the the postings on KB here could make you feel rather unsettled and perturbed . A small but vocal motley crew with disturbing far right agendas and beliefs . They range from crack pot conspiracy theorists, Fox news and US based conservative/ tea party blogs fans, wacky libertarians , Obama haters etc, etc
    But I believe your wise and experienced enough to understand that this lot as well as the Conservatives do not represent both sound
    ,balanced and a mainstream thinking . You are after all a master of consensus politics.
    May good fortune continue to attend you and your parties endeavuors this new year.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  31. flipper (3,268 comments) says:

    Apropos the road toll discussion…. and the point I made about the toll being one of chance – nothing more nor less. This just posted on Stuff:

    ****
    “Eight freed from crash

    Westpac helicopter 9:42am
    Man climbs bank with baby to get help to free six others trapped in a van that crashed on the Napier-Taupo road. …. **** “

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  32. stephieboy (1,118 comments) says:

    If there is no God, everything is permitted.

    Fyodor Dostoevsky

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7 You need to be logged in to vote
  33. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “……..I would like to comment finally on one thing though. I would if I was you exercise some real caution in dealings with Colin Craig and the Conservative Party………… Just a cursory glance at some of the the postings on KB here could make you feel rather unsettled and perturbed . A small but vocal motley crew with disturbing far right agendas and beliefs . They range from crack pot conspiracy theorists, Fox news and US based conservative/ tea party blogs fans, wacky libertarians , Obama haters etc, etc…..”

    LOL

    Key thinks O’bama is a solid President. And American polls are wrong.

    Key thinks TVNZ and the Herald are the font of wisdom and knowledge.

    Key hates libertarian ACT.

    Key thinks Wall Street is a Jewish conspiracy.

    Key thinks public political commentry websites should be restricted.

    Keep going. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  34. SGA (515 comments) says:

    flipper at 10:43 am

    Apropos the road toll discussion…. and the point I made about the toll being one of chance – nothing more nor less.

    Not sure that I followed what you meant by this yesterday (or today). Yes, ultimately it is an issue of chance of course, but the probabilities are affected by things such as the handling and safety features of the vehicle, the design of the road, the skill and experience of the driver(s), drugs that impair performance, and the speed that you are travelling, aren’t they? Sorry, not sure what your point is.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  35. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “….and the point I made about the toll being one of chance – nothing more nor less…..”

    As I told the kids when they started to drive:

    “You may be the best driver in the world on this stretch of road, but anyone can come from the opposite direction and crash into you.”

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  36. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    graham,

    There is a huge difference in professing a belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, and professing a belief in Jesus Christ and in God.

    No, there isn’t. They are absolutely the same thing.

    1) I posit that the Tooth Fairy created the universe.

    2) The universe certainly exists, in all its wonders

    3) Therefore it is logical to believe in the Tooth Fairy.

    My belief is based on what I observe around me

    Rubbish. By your own admission you ignore evidence such as the geological and fossil records which completely disprove your belief system’s creation myth. You happily live a comforting lie.

    I multiply this out until it stretches across the earth and throughout the universe and beyond, and realise that for all this to just “happen” by chance and unguided evolution requires a far bigger leap of faith than I’m able to make.

    And how did this creator pixie come to exist?

    The only “logical” (sic) explanation according to your theory is a regressive and infinite sequence of other pixies. It’s elephants all the way down.

    Your positing magic pixie explains nothing. Rather, it is simply a childish way of avoiding trying to explain things.

    As I said, by all means wallow in your wilful ignorance. It’s a free choice, since there are no costs or consequences. And you get to imagine you are morally superior to rationalists. That must be nice.
    However, when you fake Christians try to (very selectively) impose your weakness on others you cross the line. Witness the hypocritical outrage over gay marriage, for example.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 12 You need to be logged in to vote
  37. stephieboy (1,118 comments) says:

    Harriet!
    .
    Your can’t run a country at the whim of polls like Fox News etc seem to think.

    Has the PM preferred an opinion on those two media outlets.?

    Why should he defer to e.g Infowars or e.g Fox or other media outlets or blogs that find favour with you,?

    He doesn’t hate ACT or Libertarianism he just correctly thinks there marginal and irrelevant.

    Wall St a Jewish Conspiracy from a Jew Himself.???

    Restricting KB, Daily Blog, Whale Oil, TM etc, etc .???

    Your off your tree again.

    Yes.?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  38. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “….They range from crack pot conspiracy theorists, Fox news and US based conservative/ tea party blogs fans, wacky libertarians , Obama haters etc, etc…..”

    Well according to you Key should be believing in the opposite of what you suggest us conservatives are currently doing- which is what I pointed out.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  39. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “……..“There is a huge difference in professing a belief in Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy, and professing a belief in Jesus Christ and in God. ”

    No, there isn’t. They are absolutely the same thing…………”

    HAhahahhahahahahahhahahahhahah

    Watty thinks he’s going to the North Pole when he dies. And he’s taking all his teeth with him. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  40. stephieboy (1,118 comments) says:

    Harriet your wrong again.

    Its not about believing the opposite but believing things that rational , reasoned and based and commonsense which you and many others seem to conspicuously lack.

    “When reason fails, the devil helps!”

    ― Fyodor Dostoyevsky,

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  41. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    Watty thinks he’s going to the North Pole when he dies. And he’s taking all his teeth with him

    Agreed. Promises of magical life after death are indeed pathetic and laughable.

    Pitiable, even.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  42. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Don’t be an imbecile Harriet

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  43. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “….Promises of magical life after death are indeed pathetic and laughable…..”

    Promises of magical life after society wide religious purges are indeed pathetic and brutal. And recorded history. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  44. stephieboy (1,118 comments) says:

    “If you were to destroy the belief in immortality in mankind, not only love but every living force on which the continuation of all life in the world depended, would dry up at once.”

    Fyodor Dostoevsky

    \

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  45. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..Its not about believing the opposite but believing things that rational , reasoned and based and commonsense which you and many others seem to conspicuously lack….”

    What…..like abortion?

    Look at Gay Marriage……….gay relationships are the equivelent to hetrosexual ones? Seriously? – maybe only to people who can’t distinguish between penises and vaginas. Men and women. Mothers and Fathers. Sons and daughters. And pregnancy – how the fuck can’t you notice pregnant women?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  46. graham (2,211 comments) says:

    (Comes in for drink of water)

    wat dabney at 11:05 am –

    And you get to imagine you are morally superior to rationalists.

    Really? Please do point out where I said that, for I certainly don’t remember saying it.

    However when you fake Christians try to (very selectively) impose your weakness on others you cross the line. Witness the hypocritical outrage over gay marriage, for example.

    Once again, I would really appreciate you pointing out where I, personally, said anything along those lines. Because, in fact, I am confident that if you go back over what I said during the debate, you’ll find that I specifically stated that I would not impose my beliefs on other people over this issue.

    But I guess it’s easier for you to just trot out the same tired old lines and apply them to all Christians equally, rather than check the facts and realise that your prejudices don’t necessarily apply to me.

    (Back out again to continue working …)

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  47. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    The poor whinger:

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  48. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    The sheeple have spoken: http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11180340

    A summer crackdown on speeding which will lead to fines for drivers travelling more than 4km/h above the legal limit is strongly supported by the public, a Herald-DigiPoll survey shows.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  49. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    Christianity needs to pick up the sword again and remind those who wield the scalpel – who shall live! :cool:

    You should be locked up Harry.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  50. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    Lunacy which will please KB’s resident feminist:
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2529783/Thomas-Tank-Engine-blamed-lack-female-train-drivers-engines-male-says-Labour-minister.html

    Thomas the Tank Engine has been blamed for a lack of women train drivers by the shadow transport secretary.

    Mary Creagh said all the main characters in the original books – published in the 1940s – are male, and the only female characters are an ‘annoyance, a nuisance and in some cases a danger’ to the railway.

    ‘There is a preponderance of men in the transport industry and I am very keen to unpack some of the myths that stop women from taking up what are often highly-paid and highly-skilled jobs,’ she said.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  51. Pauleastbay (5,030 comments) says:

    ostrich farming
    goat farming
    global warming

    fads for fuck wits

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  52. ShawnLH (1,854 comments) says:

    wat dabney shows his ignorance yet again! :) It’s so much fun watching people who call themselves “rational” utter ignorant nonsense. In this case:

    ” Let the inadequates have their own thread where they can argue amongst themselves about Santa Claus and desperately assure each other that the Earth really was created just 6000 years ago (notwithstanding the geological record, the fossil record, our understanding of the DNA evolutionary mechanism,”

    Correction. The Bible does not say the Earth is 6000 years old. Not anywhere at all :)

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  53. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    For what?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  54. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth was created 6000 years ago (I don’t necessarily believe that the Earth wasn’t created 6000 years ago either, but it’s not an issue that keeps me awake at night)

    Crikey Graham, you’re starting to sound like Colin Craig.

    edit: See PG beat me to it.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  55. ShawnLH (1,854 comments) says:

    “…..Its not about believing the opposite but believing things that rational , reasoned and based and commonsense which you and many others seem to conspicuously lack….”

    Words like “rational”, “reason” and “commonsense” are just covers for subjective political ideology.

    True reason is just a tool, and a fairly limited one, for counting things. It cannot tell us anything about values and morals, and people who claim it does are either lying or very, very stupid.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  56. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    US IT companies international sales are falling off a cliff because of their cooperation with the NSA: e.g. IBM’s hardware sales to China are down 40%. Is this Snowden’s fault for telling people what the NSA does or is it NSA’s fault for operating a model that would foreseeably damage the US economy if the news ever broke?

    http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/12/nsa-partners-getting-hit-hurts.html

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  57. ShawnLH (1,854 comments) says:

    “8) Conservatives should get more than 5%. They got 2.7% last time with a seven week campaign, already this in 2013, TV3 have had them at 2.8% and UMR at 3.8%.
    They doubled their share of the vote in the Christchurch East by-election and in the Auckland local body elections their candidates averaged 20% of the vote where they stood.”

    I suspect 5-6%. Most of the lower predictions are just biased propaganda from the cultural Marxists in the media, or the irrational, brainwashed dupes of the Frankfurt School who infest this blog like a nasty STD.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  58. Snarkle (118 comments) says:

    One way to look at this issue is to imagine what would happen if a “lost tribe” were discovered and brought up to date with 21st century science. We then ask them to read Genesis. Would they not be puzzled as to why God created so much universe for one little (insignificant) planet and one small group of organisms? It would make as much sense, they would conclude, as a cockroach assuming the house he lives in was created specifically for his benefit. In fact, even less sense, because the universe is unimaginably larger in proportion to our planet than the house is to the cockroach! The lost tribe would politely ask us to come up with something a little less anthropocentric…
    Colin Craig, one suspects, would see no problem at all for the entire universe to have been created solely so he could be elected to represent the good folk of North Harbour (or wherever). After all, he deserves it!

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  59. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (38 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 12:20 pm
    Correction. The Bible does not say the Earth is 6000 years old. Not anywhere at all

    Got to love an argument between followers of an ancient text over who interprets it correctly

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  60. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    I don’t believe in Santa Claus

    Oh ye of little faith:

    Saint Nicholas (15 March 270 – 6 December 343) also called Nikolaos of Myra, was a historic 4th-century Christian saint and Greek Bishop of Myra (Demre, part of modern-day Turkey) in Lycia. Because of the many miracles attributed to his intercession, he is also known as Nikolaos the Wonderworker. He had a reputation for secret gift-giving, such as putting coins in the shoes of those who left them out for him, and thus became the model for Santa Claus, whose modern name comes from the Dutch Sinterklaas, itself from a series of elisions and corruptions of the transliteration of “Saint Nikolaos”. His reputation evolved among the faithful, as was common for early Christian saints.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  61. ShawnLH (1,854 comments) says:

    “Is this Snowden’s fault for telling people what the NSA does or is it NSA’s fault for operating a model that would foreseeably damage the US economy if the news ever broke?”

    Probably both. Arab terrorism is a real threat, but it does not require governments to spy on their own people. Closing the West’s doors to Arab/Muslim immigrants would be a better option, as would taking a far more aggressive approach to terrorist groups and States that support them.

    I suspect the NSA program has more to do with Obama’s fear that the US people will get so fed up with his tyranny they will take uncivil action.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  62. ShawnLH (1,854 comments) says:

    “Got to love an argument between followers of an ancient text over who interprets it correctly”

    It’s not a matter of interpretation. The 6000 year claim just is not there in the first place. Neither is my Mother’s address.

    The Great Tradition, broadly speaking the creedal orthodoxy shared by Orthodox, Roman and Protestant traditions, is very consistent on the core issues.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  63. Odakyu-sen (248 comments) says:

    “If you were to destroy the belief in immortality in mankind, not only love but every living force on which the continuation of all life in the world depended, would dry up at once.” Fyodor Dostoevsky

    Immortality? I can think of no greater punishment.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  64. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    To be fair to ShawnLH, the Bible does not give an age for the earth. The 6,000 year old supposition was advanced by Dr. John Lightfoot, a 17th century Anglican clergyman. He estimated that creation occurred during 4004 BCE.

    That some Godfreaks still give voice to the theory is the result of poor education, lower IQ’s and brainwashing…..all the things that religion thrives on.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  65. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Immortality? I can think of no greater punishment.

    It would be great if there was nothing but love, but most humans refuse to practice that or even to attempt to practice it. Why? Pride. That’s the root source of all evil and it causes all the others from strife to malice to envy to avarice and all the others. There’s even a very subtle source of pride that comes from being proud about how good one is – how generous, how forgiving, how kind, how loving. It’s only when you eliminate all of that on a permanent, 24/7/365 basis from not just your actions but critically from your thoughts, that this place becomes worth living in.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  66. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    Immortality? I can think of no greater punishment.

    Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (From Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe)

    Wowbagger The Infinitely Prolonged was – indeed, is- one of the Universe’s very small number of immortal beings.

    Most of those who are born immortal instinctively know how to cope with it, but Wowbagger was not one of them. Indeed, he had come to hate them, the load of serene bastards. He had his immortaility inadvertantly thrust upon him by an unfortunate accident with an irrational particle accelerator, a liquid lunch, and a pair of rubber bands. The precise details are not important because no one has ever managed to duplicate the exact circumstances under which it happened, and many people have ended up looking very silly, or dead, or both, trying.

    To begin with it was fun, he had a ball, living dangerously, taking risks, cleaning up on high-yield long-term investments, and just generally outliving the hell out of everybody.

    In the end, it was Sunday afternoons he couldn’t cope with, and that terrible listlessness that starts to set in at about 2:55 when you know you’ve taken all the baths you can usefully take that day, that however hard you stare at any given paragraph in the newspaper you will never actually read it, or use the revolutionary new pruning technique it describes, and that as you stare at the clock the hands will move relentlessly on to four o’clock, and you will enter the Long Dark Teatime of the Soul.

    So things began to pall for him. The merry smiles he used to wear at other people’s funerals began to fade. He began to despise the Universe in general, and everybody in it in particular.

    This was the point at which he conceived his purpose, the thing that would drive him on, and which, as far as he could see, would drive him on forever. It was this:

    He would insult the Universe.

    That is, he would insult everybody in it. Individually, personally, one by one, and (this was the thing he really decided to grit his teeth over) in Alphabetical Order.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  67. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    ShawnLH (42 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 12:36 pm

    It’s not a matter of interpretation. The 6000 year claim just is not there in the first place. Neither is my Mother’s address.
    The Great Tradition, broadly speaking the creedal orthodoxy shared by Orthodox, Roman and Protestant traditions, is very consistent on the core issues.

    And divisive on the details and what adherents choose to believe

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  68. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    How do you score yourself against those criteria Reid?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  69. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Badly nasska. How bout you?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  70. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    The same. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  71. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    Or perhaps we are in hell and we’ve been condemned to argue perpetually about religion on Kiwiblog…..

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  72. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    And how did this creator pixie come to exist?

    The only “logical” (sic) explanation according to your theory is a regressive and infinite sequence of other pixies. It’s elephants all the way down.

    You think that, because we live in Time where one event happens after another in linear fashion. Everything must be caused by something else: the table must be caused by shaping a tree, which had to grow, which seed had to come from another tree etc..

    The thing is, that God created Time. Thanks to Einstein, we know that space and time are linked – that both began at once. What was there before the Big Bang? Before space and time? Only God, the Prime Mover – the Uncaused Cause. It may be hard to get your head around, yes. But that is what I believe.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  73. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    ….” It may be hard to get your head around, yes. But that is what I believe.”…..

    If you can get your head around an immaculate conception & talking snakes then anything is possible for you Fletch. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  74. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Fletch (5,323 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 12:58 pm
    The thing is, that God created Time. Thanks to Einstein, we know that space and time are linked – that both began at once. What was there before the Big Bang? Before space and time? Only God, the Prime Mover – the Uncaused Cause. It may be hard to get your head around, yes. But that is what I believe.

    You are welcome to your belief Fletch but please do not tell us it has any basis in fact or science
    There is some interesting work being done on what came before the big bang. A creator is not necessary.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  75. SGA (515 comments) says:

    Scott Chris at 12:51 pm

    Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged (From Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Universe)

    This was the point at which he conceived his purpose, the thing that would drive him on, and which, as far as he could see, would drive him on forever. It was this:
    He would insult the Universe.
    That is, he would insult everybody in it. Individually, personally, one by one, and (this was the thing he really decided to grit his teeth over) in Alphabetical Order.

    And he comments on Kiwiblog as?

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  76. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    You think that, because we live in Time where one event happens after another in linear fashion. Everything must be caused by something else: the table must be caused by shaping a tree, which had to grow, which seed had to come from another tree etc..

    The thing is, that God created Time. Thanks to Einstein, we know that space and time are linked – that both began at once. What was there before the Big Bang? Before space and time? Only God, the Prime Mover – the Uncaused Cause. It may be hard to get your head around, yes. But that is what I believe.

    It’s perhaps harder to get one’s head around the fact that this makes no sense at all. It feels like you can imagine God somehow sitting “outside” of space and “before” time, but in reality outside-ness requires the context of space and before-ness requires the context of time for them to be intelligible at all. Similarly with God “causing” the Big Bang – causation is only intelligible within the context of time.

    Saying that God acts outside of the context of time is like saying “the colour yellow is five feet tall”.

    If time began with the Big Bang, nothing caused the Big Bang.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  77. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    ….”And he comments on Kiwiblog as?”….

    Redbaiter. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  78. Fletch (5,719 comments) says:

    A creator is not necessary.

    An uncaused cause or Prime Mover is still necessary.
    Even the atoms that might have ‘rubbed together’ to start the Big Bang had to be created or come from somewhere.
    Everything has to been caused by something else – except the prime Mover.

    Here is Thomas E Woods, explaining Saint Thomas’ First Cause in a simple way –

    Saint Thomas’s views are best understood if we begin with thought experiments from the secular world. Suppose you want to purchase a pound of turkey at the deli counter. Upon arrival there, you find that you must take a number before you can place your order. Just as you are about to take a number, however, you find that you are required to take a number before you can take a number. And just as you are about to take that number, you find that you must first take yet another number.Thus you must take a number to take a number to take a number to be able to place your order at the deli counter.

    Suppose further that the series of numbers you are required to take is infinite. Every single time you are about to take a number, you discover that there exists a prior number you must first take before you can take the next number. You will never get to the deli counter under such conditions. From now until the end of time you will be forever taking numbers . Now if you were to come across someone in the grocery store walking around with half a pound of roast beef that he had purchased at the deli counter, you would instantly know that the series of numbers must in fact not go on forever.

    We have seen that with an infinite series of numbers no one could ever reach the deli counter. But the person with the roast beef must somehow have managed to get to the counter. Thus the series cannot be infinite.Consider another example. Suppose you wish to register for a college course, and you therefore pay a visit to the registrar, Mr. Smith. Mr. Smith tells you that in order to register for that particular course, you must see Mr. Jones. Mr. Jones, in turn, instructs you to see Mr. Young. Mr. Young sends you to Mr. Brown. If this series went on infinitely-if there were always another person you had to see before you could register-it is abundantly clear that you would never be able to register for the course.

    These examples may appear quite remote from the question of God’s existence, but they are not; Saint Thomas’s proof is in a certain way analogous to them both. He begins with the idea that every effect requires a cause, and that nothing that exists in the physical world is the cause of its own existence. This is known as the principle of sufficient reason. When we encounter a table, for example, we know perfectly well that it did not come into existence spontaneously. It owes its existence to something else: a builder and previously existing raw materials. An existing thing Z owes its existence to some cause Y. But Y itself, not being self-existing, is also in need of a cause. Y owes its own existence to cause X. But now X must be accounted for. X owes its existence to cause W.

    We are faced, as with the examples of the deli counter and the college course, with the difficulties posed by an infinite series. In this case, we are faced with the following problem: Every cause of a given effect itself demands a cause in order to account for its own existence; this cause in turn requires a cause, and so on. If we have an infinite series on our hands, in which each cause itself requires a cause, then nothing could ever have come into existence.

    Saint Thomas explains that there must, therefore, be an Uncaused Cause-a cause that is not itself in need of a cause. This first cause can therefore begin the sequence of causes. This first cause, Saint Thomas says, is God. God is the one self-existing being whose existence is part of His very essence. No human being must exist; there was a time before each one came into existence, and the world will continue to exist after each one perishes. Existence is not part of the essence of any human being. But God is different. He cannot not exist. And He depends on nothing prior to Himself in order to account for His existence.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  79. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “……but in reality outside-ness requires the context of space and before-ness requires the context of time for them to be intelligible at all……”

    So there is no chance at all that something else could be out there other than space and time? Says what?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  80. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    An uncaused cause or Prime Mover is still necessary.
    Even the atoms that might have ‘rubbed together’ to start the Big Bang had to be created or come from somewhere.
    Everything has to been caused by something else – except the prime Mover.

    Declaring a rule for everything, then defining God as the Exception To The Rule, is not an argument.

    Here, I’ll do it:

    Everything has to be caused by something else – except the universe.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  81. Ryan Sproull (6,661 comments) says:

    So there is no chance at all that something else could be out there other than space and time? Says what?

    Could be, Harriet. But the moment you start talking about events and actions, you’re talking within the context of time. If you avoid talking about events (which have a “before” and an “after” by definition), you can talk about things other than space-time.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  82. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Fletch (5,324 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 1:12 pm
    A creator is not necessary.
    An uncaused cause or Prime Mover is still necessary.

    Setting aside the special pleading which Ryan has covered, what makes the “uncaused cause” god, particularly the christian god of the bible?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  83. MH (558 comments) says:

    all that time in hawaii,has Key found Obama’s birth certificate yet?
    why can’t he spend one miserable xmzs with us in the drowned out camps on the Coromandel where the early pumpkins blow with the Yonghy-Bonghy-Bo and two old chairs,and half a candle handing out relief from one old jug without a handle.
    He could of at least book a decent position for one of our warships to secure alongside at the main naval base.
    I suppose his popularity and adoration makes it difficult for him to stay anywhere in NZ anymore. Any bodyguards go with him or does the Yankee FO protection squad take over?
    anyone else confirm that thereis no God in the trenches either.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  84. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    Until they prove otherwise there is still no reason that each generation of children can’t believe in the existance of God.

    No one has yet proved he exists – let alone harmful.

    I can’t understand why so called adults at KB get so outragously upset about people talking about God – when they themselves link God to Santa and the Tooth Fairy.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  85. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    Fletch,

    It may be hard to get your head around

    Believe me, there is nothing at all that is hard to grasp when you invent a magic pixie as the explanation for anything.

    Real science can be hard to get your head around. By contrast, even a child of four can understand your stories of evil pixies and talking animals for what they are.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  86. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Harriet (3,311 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 1:34 pm
    Until they prove otherwise there is still no reason that each generation of children can’t believe in the existance of God.
    No one has yet proved he exists – let alone harmful.

    Until they prove otherwise there is still no reason that each generation of children can’t believe in the existence of Santa.
    No one has yet proved he exists – let alone harmful

    That is why I can equate god to Santa or any other unproven entity for whom no evidence exists

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  87. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..By contrast, even a child of four can understand your stories of evil pixies and talking animals for what they are….”

    You clearly don’t then Watty.

    Children of four don’t go and argue the case against………..day after day after day.

    As that scientist Einstein said “……..Doing the same thing over and over……. :cool:

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  88. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    The “there’s no other possible explanation than my belief” story is very clever, it convinces many people who want to be thus convinced.

    …then nothing could ever have come into existence.

    What if everything always existed and just goes bang and expands and evolves and contracts? That’s far more likely than nothing suddenly becoming everything caused by something that is not anything but is always everywhere.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  89. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..That is why I can equate god to Santa or any other unproven entity for whom no evidence exists….”

    But for what reason Richard?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  90. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    Harriet,

    You seem to be conveniently forgetting that it was you that introduced magic pixies to this thread, trying to argue against abortion on that grounds that the tiniest cluster of cells is the equivalent of a full human life because it has received a sprinkling of magic pixie dust.

    Now you’re complaining when others point out that there is no such thing as magic pixie dust. Nor magic pixies.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  91. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    Ryan, unless you fully understand some of the more arcane aspects of quantum theory, aren’t you making a leap of faith in accepting the superfluity of a prime mover?

    And how come quantum physics has always been around?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  92. Scott Chris (5,675 comments) says:

    What if everything always existed and just goes bang and expands and evolves and contracts? That’s far more likely than nothing suddenly becoming everything caused by something that is not anything but is always everywhere.

    Because it makes as much sense to say that something came from nothing as to say that something has always existed.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  93. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..on that grounds that the tiniest cluster of cells is the equivalent of a full human life because it has received a sprinkling of magic pixie dust…..”

    Your’re talking outright shit watty. That comment doesn’t go anywhere near what you suggest.

    “…..Now you’re complaining when others point out that there is no such thing as magic pixie dust. Nor magic pixies…..”

    I don’t believe in pixies. Just like nearly all other adults don’t.

    But I still believe in God.

    Where’s the scientific link between pixies and God anyway?

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  94. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Don’t be an imbecile Harriet
    The expanation is in the post. I cannot assist with your failure to comprehend

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  95. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    Harriet,

    I don’t believe in pixies…But I still believe in God.

    Tomato, tomato.

    (Okay, that doesn’t work too well in print.)

    Declaring a magic pixie to be a deity changes nothing.

    And by the way, you believe in a god. (Which, surprise surprise, just happens to the the legacy deity in your community. What are the chances, eh?) Remember, every other deity from every other belief system has just as much credibility as yours. The only difference is that you happen to worship one of the most barbaric, vile and despicable of the bunch.)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  96. slijmbal (1,133 comments) says:

    A religious thread would be nice. The bad science hurts the tolerance gland in my brain – it’s not used to doing so much work.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  97. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..The only difference is that you happen to worship one of the most barbaric, vile and despicable of the bunch….”

    How on earth would you ever know that Watty…………..devine intervention? Idiot.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  98. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..Because it makes as much sense to say that something came from nothing as to say that something has always existed….”

    FFS Scott. That doesn’t make any sense…..let alone ‘as much sense’.

    Half the scientists would then be looking at existance from the opposing point of view. They don’t, they ALL look at it from the creation point of view.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  99. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Harriet (3,315 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 2:19 pm
    “…..The only difference is that you happen to worship one of the most barbaric, vile and despicable of the bunch….”
    How on earth would you ever know that Watty…………..devine intervention? Idiot.

    Don’t be an imbecile Harriet
    Wat can read the bible and it backs his assertion

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  100. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Harriet (3,316 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 2:25 pm
    Half the scientists would then be looking at existance from the opposing point of view. They don’t, they ALL look at it from the creation point of view.

    Don’t be an imbecile Harriet
    You are making up stuff again

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  101. Chuck Bird (4,401 comments) says:

    $300 ‘carrot’ to quit smoking

    The Counties Manukau District Health Board is giving vouchers at one week, four, eight and 12 weeks after a woman’s quit-smoking date if she remains smokefree, verified by tests on a machine that measures carbon monoxide.

    The vouchers are offered to Maori and Pacific women up to 28 weeks pregnant who live in Manurewa, where the DHB says there are around 370 “smoke-exposed” births a year.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11180347

    This racially discriminatory policy has been approved by the Counties Manukau District Health Board. The majority do not appear to be Maori or PI so I hope we do not comments condemning this policy can be directed and them and the government who appointed many of them rather than Maori in general. Why should races other than Maori and PI be discriminated against?

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  102. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Wat can read the bible and it backs his assertion

    No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  103. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    Don’t be an imbecile Harriet
    You are making up stuff again.

    ———————

    All scientists look at the universe from the creation point of view.

    Not one scientist looks at it from the view that it has always existed.

    Everyone here would agree on that I would think Richard.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  104. Sofia (778 comments) says:

    A religious thread would be nice.

    This has been suggested several times since when it was actually tried, and that was may be four years or so ago.

    The fact it doesn’t work relates in part to some statements made here are not for the religious reasons they pose, but because they are otherwise motivated.

    An example, that occurs here time to time, usually begins –
    Good moaning Kiwibloggers, have you seen this?

    It then purports to be an alert to an issue of corruption. local affairs dishonesty, or the elite oppressing the poor of Auckland, especially if they use water.

    But it is really about “look at how important and invaluable I am” and then the perpetrating magpie flits on to shit in another nest.
    No matter how derogatory any response may be, the initial commenter
    usually concludes –

    You have no idea how much you have made my day :-)

    In fact the shittier any derogatory response is, the greater is her day made, because being noticed is the payoff.

    And so to any religious ‘general’ debate – many comments on religion have so little to do with religion, such a religious debate falls flat on its face, just as a whistle-blowers anti-crusaders ‘general’ debate would also die on the spot.

    So have a nice day, you have really made mine :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  105. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Harriet (3,317 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 2:34 pm
    All scientists look at the universe from the creation point of view.
    Not one scientist looks at it from the view that it has always existed.
    Everyone here would agree on that I would think Richard.

    The fact that the universe did not always exist in its current form is not the creation point of view
    The creation point of view is that it was created by an entity such as a creator
    The give away is the word creation

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  106. MH (558 comments) says:

    Another DHB smoke screen..
    I could give the above response a tick but then that would be affirmation that has to be ignored for the good of ones own ego and we don’t dare to look at this post again,not even to check spelling. All comments are submitted anyway by a submitter.
    Click boots to Edit

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  107. Andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    Lol Chuck – from your link

    Women smokers are being offered vouchers for up to $300 if they quit while pregnant, because of the damage a mother’s tobacco use can do to an unborn baby.

    How many fetuses unborn babies does that self same DHB damage by dismembering them in their own mothers womb?

    But then again “progressives” are not noted for rational thinking – in fact they are nuts

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  108. Zapper (843 comments) says:

    It’s not just a racist programme Chuck, it’s sexist too. We all know how much damage a father can do by smoking around his pregnant wife.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  109. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,576 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 2:33 pm
    Wat can read the bible and it backs his assertion
    No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

    I haven’t listened to your specific video but will later if time allows
    It comes down to the individual’s interpretation of a copy of a translation of a translation of a copy of an ancient text
    Or will you assert that your interpretation is the only true and correct way to interpret what is written?

    No wonder the various sects of Christians cannot get their story straight on what it all means

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  110. prinCamLot (12 comments) says:

    New Thread

    Could we also have a Political Islam thread since this is highly likely to be the next big – and continuing – thing in the New Zealand – we do not escape Islam because we’re ‘down under’ (and I can’t wait for David to delete this post! :) ).

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  111. MH (558 comments) says:

    God was procurred by the National Party back in 67 based on a 51% moral shareholding,however a CIR initiated by labour meant that it had to be devolved into SOE’s in the great schism of 86. Maori were consulted and ratafied the deal. Most churches are now occupied by bingo operators. They are now operating at a false prophet although some are down on their knees led by the dual atheist and CCP agnostic Colin Craig.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  112. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Or will you assert that your interpretation is the only true and correct way to interpret what is written?

    I haven’t given you an interpretation so how do you know what “my interpretation” is?

    No wonder the various sects of Christians atheists cannot get their story straight on what it all means…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  113. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,577 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 3:55 pm

    I haven’t given you an interpretation so how do you know what “my interpretation” is?

    I don’t care what your interpretation is
    Is it the only true & correct one?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  114. Andrei (2,429 comments) says:

    More hand wringing from the ardent secular – do progressives actually believe the utter tosh they write?

    Christianity dominates the United Nations and more diversity is needed to increase non-Christian representation in world peacemaking, according to a study.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  115. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    Reid, see what you think of this: The meaning of life.

    If it doesn’t play first time keep trying until it works. As per your suggestion at 2.33 don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  116. edhunter (434 comments) says:

    Maybe it’s just me but I’m yet to meet the atheist/christian who upon being told they were wrong by the otherside suddenly said “You know you’re right, I was blind but now can see. Thank Kiwiblog for showing me the errors of my way” Yet time & time again it’s the usual suspects peddling the’re brand of the truth.
    Christians if you want to change someone go do the door knocking thing, I hear it works really well.
    Atheists don’t be so bloody smug, you don’t have all the answers & neither does science.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  117. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    Sigh
    Without Kea and Big Blouse I would have thought the religous hate pieces totally unneccessary. We all have freedom of choice and don’t need condemenation for it, i.e. hate columns from atheists or bible bashing from christians.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  118. SGA (515 comments) says:

    edhunter at 4:21 pm

    you don’t have all the answers & neither does science.

    The neat thing about science is that not only does it not have all the answers, but it also keeps finding new questions.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  119. edhunter (434 comments) says:

    I agree SGA, but then I just watched a document about some “scientists” searching Mt Ararat (again) for the ark. So just because you’re a scientist doesn’t mean you can’t have faith.
    If Mt Ararat is the answer what was the bloody question?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  120. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Is it the only true & correct one?

    I have no confidence that it is, since the Bible is so nuanced and complex that every time you read it you uncover new layers of meaning. Why do you ask? Do you hallucinate that being dogmatic about the bible is a typical Christian trait? If so I have to tell you I’ve never met a Christian who claims their interpretation is “the only true and correct one” but I’ve a lot of people who know nothing whatsoever about Christianity or about Christians who hallucinate they’re all like that, to a man. You’re not one of those, are you Richard?

    The neat thing about science is that not only does it not have all the answers, but it also keeps finding new questions.

    So does Christianity. Ever heard of theology?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  121. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    ed,

    I think you’ll find that a central point of atheism is that science certainly doesn’t have all the answers, but that inventing magical animals in such cases explains precisely nothing.

    And if anyone’s being smug here it’s you with your I’m-above-all-this twattery.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  122. SGA (515 comments) says:

    Don’t know, I didn’t see the documentary. More important, yes, scientists are hindu, jewish, muslim, christian, non-religious, and buddhist (I assume, never met one first hand, but I don’t see why not). That’s way I find the science is a religion schtick that appears from time to time a bit silly.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  123. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,578 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 4:38 pm
    Is it the only true & correct one?
    I have no confidence that it is, since the Bible is so nuanced and complex that every time you read it you uncover new layers of meaning. Why do you ask? Do you hallucinate that being dogmatic about the bible is a typical Christian trait? If so I have to tell you I’ve never met a Christian who claims their interpretation is “the only true and correct one” but I’ve a lot of people who know nothing whatsoever about Christianity or about Christians who hallucinate they’re like that. You’re not one of those, are you Richard?

    We have already established that you think I hallucinate and I think you are delusional
    I just wanted to know if you are unsure of the true interpretation, how you can claim my more literal reading is wrong

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  124. edhunter (434 comments) says:

    Snap! consider my level of smugness reduced by a couple of notches.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  125. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    I just wanted to know if you are unsure of the true interpretation, how you can claim my more literal reading is wrong

    Because, duh, understanding is not a binary concept. You have a road to understanding not an on-off switch. And if I’m further along the road to accurate understanding than you are, it stands to reason I’m more likely to be accurate in my current interpretation than you are in yours, doesn’t it.

    It’s not rocket science, is it.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  126. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Sofia @ 2.39

    A religious thread would be nice.

    This has been suggested several times since when it was actually tried, and that was may be four years or so ago.

    The fact it doesn’t work relates in part to some statements made here are not for the religious reasons they pose, but because they are otherwise motivated.

    An example, that occurs here time to time, usually begins –
    Good moaning Kiwibloggers, have you seen this?

    It then purports to be an alert to an issue of corruption. local affairs dishonesty, or the elite oppressing the poor of Auckland, especially if they use water.

    But it is really about “look at how important and invaluable I am” and then the perpetrating magpie flits on to shit in another nest.
    No matter how derogatory any response may be, the initial commenter
    usually concludes –

    You have no idea how much you have made my day

    In fact the shittier any derogatory response is, the greater is her day made, because being noticed is the payoff.

    And so to any religious ‘general’ debate – many comments on religion have so little to do with religion, such a religious debate falls flat on its face, just as a whistle-blowers anti-crusaders ‘general’ debate would also die on the spot.

    So have a nice day, you have really made mine

    Seems many are afraid of losing their virtual audience. Us HEATHENS just scroll through so we don’t read the content.
    It is a mini religious circle jerk with the same few trying to outdo each other – pathetic

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  127. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    Excellent piece on Afghanistan by Max Hastings…….

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2525463/Afghanistan-war-Max-Hastings-Mr-Cameron-deluded-The-tragic-truth-Britain-accomplished-NOTHING-Afghanistan.html

    MT Ararat…….

    interesting how our secular world is so fond of using biblical symbolism…..the dove and the olive branch….almost universally a symbol for peace ,following a disaster……nice!

    ….yet the Wats and nasskas are full of bitterness ,hatred and bile and take only the negative from these great texts…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  128. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Even Pete George @ 4.05 is instructing people what to do.
    “As per your suggestion at 2.33 don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.”
    Who the fuck are you Pete George? to tell someone they must listen before replying?
    You are as bad as the devil dodgers – fuck off to your own blog if you want control

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6 You need to be logged in to vote
  129. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    Rain or shine, cold or hot, AGW is responsible for all:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10546128/Worlds-climate-warming-faster-than-feared-scientists-say.html

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  130. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Now, just for something different, has anyone seen or heard from Len Brown?
    What is he up to, what is he doing? Who’s money is he spending?

    Sorry, wrong Blog

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  131. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    Irony alert
    Steve North Shore bemoans PG telling people what to do ……and then concludes by,yep, telling him what to do!!!!

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  132. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    I’m good eh kowtow lol.
    At least I don’t do it all day, every day

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  133. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,579 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 4:53 pm
    Because, duh, understanding is not a binary concept. You have a road to understanding not an on-off switch. And if I’m further along the road to accurate understanding than you are, it stands to reason I’m more likely to be accurate in my current interpretation than you are in yours, doesn’t it.
    It’s not rocket science, is it.

    It could be argued that understanding is a binary concept. Either you understand something or you don’t but in one thing you are correct. It is not rocket science
    In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion

    Apologies to the rest of the kiwibloggers
    I do find it interesting to try to understand what people believe and why and fully accept that no amount of evidence or reasoned argument will change an individuals belief
    I’m afraid the second comment of the day had a religious bent to it and things went downhill from there

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  134. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion

    Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is. So it’s only opinion if you want to claim it is for your own purposes.

    I’d suggest Richard given my journey of understanding started where you are currently at, with a literal interpretation, then on any “scientific” basis my understanding is almost certainly more accurate than yours.

    I realise that’s inconvenient, but nevertheless that’s really where it lies, in the real world, where facts and science lives.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  135. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    And I was taking the piss, reid has a habit of instructing not to comment until reading or listening to something.

    No one is supposed to comment on the Bible unless they’ve read it more than a hundred times. We could make that a blog rule, it might help.

    “the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is” – so you can make up your own mind anyway.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  136. Gulag1917 (425 comments) says:

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  137. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Tahi, Rua, Toru, Wha.
    On the fence again
    Just can’t wait to get on the fence again
    The life I love is bullshiting with my friends
    And I can’t wait to get on the fence again

    Read more: Willie Nelson – On The Fence Again Lyrics | MetroLyrics

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  138. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    reid has a habit of instructing not to comment until reading or listening to something

    No I do it occasionally normally when religion is under discussion by someone clearly ignorant. Perhaps I say it to Pete more often than I do to others. Go figure.

    “the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is”

    Which it is, Pete. All 774,000 words of it. I realise you find that confusing. Rest assured, others won’t.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  139. Pete George (21,798 comments) says:

    Sounds like Steve is caught in barbed wire.

    Reid – no, I don’t find it confusing knowing that people get 774,000 interpretations out of the 774,000 words.

    If they get something out of it for themselves, good for them. If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  140. Dean Papa (614 comments) says:

    “If they get something out of it for themselves, good for them. If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.”

    More than that, it is arrogant.

    Discussion question for the Christian fundies: Is arrogance a sin?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  141. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.

    And who does that, Pete? Or do you hallucinate a discussion of religious accuracy is “claiming superior knowledge” and if so, do you also hallucinate that when someone explains, say, the theory of relativity and if so, why?

    Discussion question for the Christian fundies: Is arrogance a sin?,

    Of course. It’s called pride. Why?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  142. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    kowtow,

    yet the Wats and nasskas are full of bitterness ,hatred and bile and take only the negative from these great texts…

    That you admit the Bible contains what you euphemistically call “negatives” is to concede the entire case. If every word of it is not the height of moral goodness then it has no authority whatsoever; at which point you are left to pick the good bits out of it just like any other book. In which case you are no longer taking guidance from the Bible, since you are applying your own judgement to decide what is good in it and what is bad.

    Finally you get the point.

    (For the moment we’ll ignore the fact that what you quaintly term “negatives” in reality is untrammeled barbarity, cruelty, merciless ethnic cleansing and the murder of just about everone in the whole world.)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  143. Dean Papa (614 comments) says:

    Bible course at Yale, there’s also one for New Testament

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  144. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,580 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 5:25 pm
    In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion
    Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is. So it’s only opinion if you want to claim it is for your own purposes.
    I’d suggest Richard given my journey of understanding started where you are currently at, with a literal interpretation, then on any “scientific” basis my understanding is almost certainly more accurate than yours.
    I realise that’s inconvenient, but nevertheless that’s really where it lies, in the real world, where facts and science

    A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.
    To paraphrase, you only claim your understanding is any more accurate for your own purposes and it is an unprovable statement for which you are unable to provide evidence or proof
    I am not inconvenienced by the fact that in the real world of maths and science, evidence and proof are important and all you have been able to provide are your assertions
    To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  145. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    Faaark ,for people who claim to not want religion on GD you boys do a great job of filling GD with religion…..

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  146. RF (1,128 comments) says:

    Might pay to Lock up your children in the West Auckland area. An attempted abduction with a lucky break for the child. Dare I ask if the Police have any idea who the offender might be. I.e. Age, race etc…. I now wait for the do gooders and hand wringers to give me the thumbs down.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  147. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    Bongiorno bambino: http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/01/news/companies/fiat-chrysler/

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  148. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.

    Actually, your understanding of maths grows over time as each concept builds on the other.

    Same with Shakespeare.

    Same with the Bible.

    Same with everything else whether it’s a scientific paper, a novel or the Bible.

    To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion

    Only in your mind Richard, and you might want to ask yourself what it is inside you that makes you so resist simple logic on this one particular book and not on others. For example would you deny Shakespeare follows the same process? A literal reading of Shakespeare yields no understanding whatsoever but the more you understand human nature the more it reveals in each and every sentence. Perhaps I used a confusing analogy with maths, given that math really is binary, but it still has steps along which your understanding progresses. And lets face it, a literal reading is always the first step, no matter what you’re looking at.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  149. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    wart

    Among other things, I take the OT to be a history of the Jewish people .Being a history it will be full of the whole expanse of human existence……good bad and in between…..Even the NT has much such in terms of the human experience.

    You sir, are as fundamentalist in your hatred and negative interpretation of the Bible as the most recalcitrant fundamentalist Christian you are so quick,and happy , to condemn.

    In other words you are also a bigot,only a secular one.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  150. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    A clown, a very rich clown, who should be deported:
    http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9570148/Fireworks-and-Dotcom-a-good-mix

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  151. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    Alas poor Wat….condemned as a secular bigot for bringing much needed balance to these forums.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  152. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,583 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 6:20 pm
    A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.
    Actually, your understanding of maths grows over time as each concept builds on the other.
    Same with Shakespeare.
    Same with the Bible.
    Same with everything else whether it’s a scientific paper, a novel or the Bible.
    To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion
    Only in your mind Richard, and you might want to ask yourself what it is inside you that makes you so resist simple logic on this one particular book and not on others. For example would you deny Shakespeare follows the same process? A literal reading of Shakespeare yields no understanding whatsoever but the more you understand human nature the more it reveals in each and every sentence. Perhaps I used a confusing analogy with maths, given that math really is binary, but it still has steps along which your understanding progresses. And lets face it, a literal reading is always the first step, no matter what you’re looking at.

    Now you have changed your argument
    Maths was not a confusing analogy but an inaccurate one
    8 different mathematicians will not give you 8 different interpretations of the same theory or principle
    8 different scientists will not give you 8 different interpretations of the theory of relativity
    As you have agreed, 8 different theologians or even everyday Christians can give you 8 different interpretation of the same passage

    I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs. I resist your logic because it is flawed

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  153. Manolo (12,617 comments) says:

    What a beast! Will she be on the DPB?
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news/article.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=11180346

    A woman arrested for drink-driving with two small children in the car had one of the highest breath-alcohol levels recorded in New Zealand – and might have consumed the equivalent of 25 drinks or more.

    The 29-year-old was described by police as an “incredibly dangerous driver”. She blew 1568 micrograms per litre of breath – nearly four times the 400mcg legal limit for adults.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  154. wat dabney (3,429 comments) says:

    In other words you are also a bigot

    A “bigot” apparently is someone who condemns barbaric acts of cruelty, mass murder, numerous forms of brutality, ethnic cleansing etc.

    Who knew?

    What, then, do we call someone who doesn’t condemn such evil acts.

    A “Christian”, apparently.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  155. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Now you have changed your argument

    How?

    I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs.

    Our discussion got started by your hallucinating the Bible says “x” and my response was, no, it doesn’t, it says “y.” That’s not telling people how to live, that’s an academic discussion to which you still haven’t made a response.

    And what’s wrong with that?

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  156. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Dotcom should be deported on his BMI alone Manolo!

    In fact he should never have been given entry in the first place!

    Unless he pays for a new hospital of course! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  157. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Everyone has their price and Godzones seems to be very cheap! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  158. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,584 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 6:41 pm
    Now you have changed your argument
    How?
    I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs.
    Our discussion got started by your hallucinating the Bible says “x” and my response was, no, it doesn’t, it says “y.” That’s not telling people how to live, that’s an academic discussion to which you still haven’t made a response.
    And what’s wrong with that?

    The bible specifically states X, you delusionally claim this to be interpreted as Y
    You have nothing but your assertion that your interpretation is correct
    We disposed of the logically flawed maths and science equivalency and we are back at the starting point that all works of fiction can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret them
    The problem with different interpretations of the bible is that the impact of different interpretations is far greater than any other book
    No one has; killed anyone, started a war, imposed their will on others, made judgements on lifestyle choices, etc, etc because they interpreted Shakespeare in a different manner

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  159. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    JK and Bill set this one…..so come in boy’s and tell us how you would have done it differently with hindsight? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  160. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Jesus …..RichardX is morphing into a quadratic equation! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  161. Steve (North Shore) (4,317 comments) says:

    Hey Johnboy,
    those virtual sheep you mentioned the other day; do the have a ‘mute’ button?
    Like the neighbours around here are a bit strange (middle earth north shore)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  162. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    The mute button is also virtual and entirely contained and operated in your own mind Steve(NS)! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  163. Lucia Maria (1,983 comments) says:

    The problem with different interpretations of the bible is that the impact of different interpretations is far greater than any other book
    No one has; killed anyone, started a war, imposed their will on others, made judgements on lifestyle choices, etc, etc because they interpreted Shakespeare in a different manner

    Oh, I don’t know. Plenty of contenders for that one, such as these guys: A smile… then a kiss of the Koran: Lee Rigby’s distraught family leave court in tears after his Muslim killers show no remorse as they are found GUILTY of hacking him to death in London street

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  164. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    How is your Mum doing Lucia?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  165. slijmbal (1,133 comments) says:

    My tolerance gland has died

    Reid says in response to Richard’s comment that

    “To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion

    “Only in your mind Richard”

    That is one of the most ignorant comments in relation to science I have ever seen.

    Relativity leads to predictions that can be measured – it is probably the most tested two theorems in history and its huge number of consequential and highly measurable predictions have been bashed to death and never, ever disproved.

    The bible is a book that depending on your faith system backs up your religious beliefs, is an interesting summary of some prophecies or an example of silly religious beliefs. I have never, ever heard of anything it allowed to be proven.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  166. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    For their next move Reid and slijmbal will resolve the quotations of the bible, the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics!

    After that has been resolved Reid and slijmbal will answer the one question that you have all being asking. “Where does the Higgs Boson fit into Old Testament Teachings” ! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  167. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    Women believe if a pet cat strays, it’s because
    of a lack of affection at home.

    Women believe if a pet dog strays, it’s because of a
    lack of affection at home.

    Women believe if a woman strays, it’s because of a
    lack of affection at home.

    Women believe if a man strays, it’s because men are arseholes.

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  168. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Did you become an arsehole this year or 2 days ago nasska? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  169. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    It could have happened JB, but the flesh was weak. My ball & chain is looking after one set of grandkids in town & I’m baching until Sunday.

    I’m just not used to living without constant supervision. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  170. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    Looks like your downtick monster has been cloned JB. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  171. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    If you get really desperate nasska go for the ugly ewe with the gammy leg. She’ll be easier to catch and very grateful! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  172. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    All the downtick folk are playing to a tune conducted by me nasska! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  173. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    I don’t worry about catching or holding them JB….what the Hell do you think a man’s got dogs for? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  174. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Shitting on his lawn? :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  175. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    Whatever your religous status it all comes down to faith at the end of the day. For a practising atheist how much faith do you have that there is “absolutely no God” and how much faith do you have that the earth was created by a big bang that occured out of nothing creating the universe and all its complexities.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  176. nasska (9,479 comments) says:

    That too JB. :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  177. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Just about everything I have ever enjoyed Rowan involved a big bang! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  178. Johnboy (13,342 comments) says:

    Night all…….. Minder has just started on Jones followed by Jack Regan! :)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  179. kowtow (6,690 comments) says:

    Rowan

    It’s not just faith ,its also culture,history and tradition.

    When these fuckers attack Christianity ,they attack western history,culture and tradition.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  180. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    My tolerance gland has died

    Well I’m glad something has. Bible discussion isn’t any fun, otherwise.

    That is one of the most ignorant comments in relation to science I have ever seen.

    Why? If you’ll bother to read the context, you’ll discover that all I’ve been saying is the elementary fact that the Bible is like any other book, in that there are layers of meaning in it, and as you read it more, you get closer to what it is really saying. Which is precisely, I was saying, is how maths works because that builds on concepts as you go, as does Shakespeare and everything else.

    Poor Richard probably got a discombobulation in his logic circuits because in his rage he hallucinated I was alleging the Bible is LIKE maths, but I wasn’t. Shame that, for Richard, but I shall deal with him in my next post.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  181. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Rowan (1,347 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 8:22 pm
    Whatever your religous status it all comes down to faith at the end of the day. For a practising atheist how much faith do you have that there is “absolutely no God” and how much faith do you have that the earth was created by a big bang that occured out of nothing creating the universe and all its complexities.

    There is a problem with your terminology and understanding
    There is no such thing as a “practicing atheist”
    I have never stated there is “absolutely no God”
    Atheism is the rejection of the claim of the existence of god as such a claim has not met the burden of proof
    Faith in a religious context is defined by http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/faith as being

    strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof:

    and as such is not required to believe what science tells us

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  182. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid (14,585 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 6:01 pm
    And who does that, Pete? Or do you hallucinate a discussion of religious accuracy is “claiming superior knowledge” and if so, do you also hallucinate that when someone explains, say, the theory of relativity and if so, why?

    Reid (14,585 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 5:25 pm
    Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  183. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “….There is no such thing as a “practicing atheist”….”

    I would seriously doubt that.

    Atheists have a Church.

    What on earth do they do there I wonder…………..maybe EVERYTHING that they do there – isn’t then related to Atheism but to Christianity.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4 You need to be logged in to vote
  184. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    Richard
    Atheist/Agnostic/non believer whatever you want to call yourself.
    All your ‘beliefs’ are based around faith, i.e. you have faith in what science ‘tells’ you or call it belief if you’d rather.
    Evolution is a load of bollocks, I strongly believe that I am not descended from monkeys or ‘evolved’ from some other species, although I haven’t meet all my ancestors there is still no proof (or credible scientific explanation) that they weren’t human.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  185. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    The bible specifically states X, you delusionally claim this to be interpreted as Y

    No I haven’t, actually. Nowhere above have I discussed anything at all relating to an actual Biblical quote nor have I even suggested what a particular book says or a verse or a chapter. Disappointingly, but it hasn’t happened. So not sure where you delusionally claim I claim a “Y” interpretation because I haven’t claimed a thing.

    You have nothing but your assertion that your interpretation is correct
    We disposed of the logically flawed maths and science equivalency and we are back at the starting point that all works of fiction can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret them,

    No, we’re currently at the point where Shakespeare’s a better analogy for the elementary proposition I was making, that’s why I introduced it, because Shakespeare is easier to see the proposition in, because unlike maths, it’s not binary. But as for your hallucination I was comparing the Bible to a binary discipline, go ahead and tell me where I said that above, because the only place you’ll find that is in your own imagination.

    So because you’ve obviously completely missed the point, I’ll repeat it. A complex book like the Bible has layers of meaning. Thus a literal interpretation exposes only the most superficial layer. The more you read it the more layers are uncovered. You can see the same in Shakespeare, which also has layers of meaning, where also the literal reading yields only the topmost layer.

    I mistakenly used the analogy of maths because when I thought of it I was thinking of the fact that when you learn math you learn one concept after another and it’s like building blocks. However I failed to recognise the obfuscatory factor of its binary nature plus your immense emotion over this whole subject which in combination have led you quite down the garden path over that analogy. If I’d thought more carefully this afternoon I would have simply used Shakespeare since it’s much more accurate and analogous.

    But notice Richard we have not been discussing anything in the Bible, but rather how it’s read. And your point was a literal interpretation was as good as any other. My point has always been, no, it’s not, because the literal interpretation uncovers only the most superficial detail. Simple, isn’t it. Hopefully you’ll calm down eventually and not start a war over it. That would be ironic, wouldn’t it. An atheist starting a war over the Bible.

    Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is.

    x+2y=f

    is the same as the writing in the Bible. That’s what I was saying there Rich. Next?

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  186. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Rowan (1,348 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 9:33 pm
    Richard
    Atheist/Agnostic/non believer whatever you want to call yourself.
    All your ‘beliefs’ are based around faith, i.e. you have faith in what science ‘tells’ you or call it belief if you’d rather.
    Evolution is a load of bollocks, I strongly believe that I am not descended from monkeys or ‘evolved’ from some other species, although I haven’t meet all my ancestors there is still no proof t(or credible scientific explanation) that they weren’t human.

    You are welcome to hold whatever belief you choose but do not attempt to justify it as science or denigrate the science that supports evolutionary theory.
    I suggest you need to do more research
    Do you believe that the attempts to teach Intelligent Design in America are of benefit to their competitive advantage when it comes to education?
    You could try looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epLhaGGjfRw

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  187. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    Very well put Reid.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  188. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    Cheers Harriet, but who knows what hallucinations will arise next let’s hope he gets it, this time.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  189. Harriet (4,008 comments) says:

    “…..Do you believe that the attempts to teach Intelligent Design in America are of benefit to their competitive advantage when it comes to education?…”

    What has competitive advantage got to do with it?

    They are still going to teach more practical areas of science. They haven’t said they’ed no longer teach maths or physics.

    And as I understand it the uni’s will still be teaching evolutionary science.

    And it does give them another perspective if they do teach intelligent design —– So yes, it could be seen as a competitive advantage.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  190. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    Richard
    I am not attempting to justify my beliefs as anything. I wouldn’t go as far as trying to teach intelligent design in schools but I don’t really know a lot about it, I skim read the article.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  191. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Reid
    There is nothing new in your 9.36
    It is still your claim that interpretation is required to understand the bible
    I agree that works of fiction require interpretation
    You agree that christians have different interpretations of the bible, some literal, some not so much but
    Remember this discussion started with your assertion that

    No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

    The assertion of this was that without spending the time and methods of studying the bible as espoused by Pawson an individual is ignorant
    Nothing you have written justifies that position but feel free to justify your personal interpretation in any way you want

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  192. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Rowan (1,349 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 10:06 pm
    Richard
    I am not attempting to justify my beliefs as anything. I wouldn’t go as far as trying to teach intelligent design in schools but I don’t really know a lot about it, I skim read the article.

    Surely if you reject evolution you must be aware of the alternatives and the fact that creationism and intelligent design are not science

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  193. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    Richard

    Yes they are not science, did I ever claim they were?
    The scientific argument is a load of rubbish and is just unhelpful on trying to explain anything.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  194. Reid (15,507 comments) says:

    The assertion of this was that without spending the time and methods of studying the bible as espoused by Pawson an individual is ignorant

    Pawson gives you the context, the structure, the cross-references and the intent of the author of Leviticus. He doesn’t tell you what it says because he assumes you can read it for yourself. But unless you have that knowledge you’re most unlikely to understand it, same as every other book in the Bible because, like I said, it’s a complex book.

    And to return to maths, E=MC2 makes no sense whatsoever to a mathematician without the equations that led up to that solution. If you’re a mathematician, WTF does Energy = mass times the square of the speed of light mean? So what if you know what the symbols say? No, if you’re a mathematician, you’d naturally go to the source equations and work them back.

    So how pray tell do you expect to learn anything substantial about Leviticus if you’re not even willing to do that but rather prefer to hallucinate that the way to go is simply open at random and read about say, how to cure leprosy?

    Simple fact is, you just don’t appear to want to understand it, Richard. Which is peculiar, given you just spent so much time discussing it. You might want to ask yourself why that is.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  195. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    This explain your ancestry Richard?
    http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/01/general_debate_1_january_2014.html#comment-1254794

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  196. RichardX (288 comments) says:

    Rowan (1,351 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 10:23 pm
    Richard
    Yes they are not science, did I ever claim they were?
    The scientific argument is a load of rubbish and is just unhelpful on trying to explain anything.

    Reid (14,588 comments) says:
    January 2nd, 2014 at 10:31 pm
    Which is peculiar, given you just spent so much time discussing it. You might want to ask yourself why that is.

    I feel pity for those that are willfully ignorant yet project superiority for their unjustified beliefs

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  197. Rowan (1,728 comments) says:

    I pity those who ‘know’ they are always right and express their ‘factual’ opinions while calling anyone who doesn’t agree with them ‘ignorant’. Or is this just arrogance?

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  198. SPC (4,624 comments) says:

    Reid, this is the 21st C.

    The issue for many is no longer based on acceptance that the bible is the word of God revealed to man, and how best to understand it. But instead whether the concept of a Creator God is valid, and if so, whether revealed religion actually has anything to do with it or whether it is an invention by men.

    In the absence of an affirmative to both questions – hardly relevant to an atheist – study of religious works is a field for those interested in learning about the way those of the religious traditions in the world see their life in the world.

    People can examine meaning and depth of meaning in any written work, the question is why should they should bother to do so.

    Most people do not bother to investigate evolutionary theory or relativity or quantum mechanics – they accept there is expertise in the area and they can read about it, but little more. But no amount of expertise on the presumption of Creator God existence and the supposition that God is revealed by the written works of men in the faith traditions is going to provide supporting evidence to convince the doubters – unlike in science.

    Some make the case that religion forms character and without it, secular society would decline – others that with the absence of some religious characters secular society might have a chance. The question is to balance inclusion of all with a commonality of values. Yet the Jewish, Moslems and Christian religions themselves are divided and the commonality is difficult to present to each other let alone outsiders.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  199. Azeraph (597 comments) says:

    III Love you guys.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  200. Azeraph (597 comments) says:

    There’s talk out there that parasitic life has in many ways completely stopped evolution, i can’t remember where i read this but it was compelling to read.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.