351. Mother dies after refusing blood

Comment #85736 by scottishgeologist on November 7, 2007 at 1:05 am

Goldy,

That BBC link is horrifying:

"Like Ms Gough, Ms Underhill had said "no" to receiving blood while giving birth to twins because of rules on transfusions laid down by their religion.

Having been brought up as a Jehovah's Witness, Ms Underhill, now 32, from Peacehaven, near Brighton, says she believed she had no choice but to sign a form refusing blood treatment which had been handed to her by religious elders.

She says she feared being "disfellowshipped", or being rejected by the religion if she declined to sign. "

It is hard to find words strong enough to describe ones feelings of anger about this sort of cultishness.

352. Jesus Camp: A scary movie that should frighten us all

Comment #85614 by scottishgeologist on November 6, 2007 at 12:22 pm

Philip

Relax! Dont do it! Landover is a spoof site. Honest! Mind you, it is so brilliantly done (Chris Harper has to be one of the funniest guys around) that you really have to blink twice. Whenever I go to it , I ALWAYS come away grinning. It is the ultimate tonic and shows how humo(u)r is one of the most powerful of rationalist weapons. Oh yes and ridicule.

Be sure to check out the "Baptist sexuality" section and for a real hoot, try the "Hackers for Jesus" link:

http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0201/hackers.html

It is quite simply pant-wettingly funny....

353. Mother dies after refusing blood

Comment #85525 by scottishgeologist on November 6, 2007 at 4:10 am

Quetz said:

I suspect that the husband will cling ever more tightly to his faith

This is the crazy thing about it - it'll just be "god's will" or "his ways above our ways" and all that BS

I remember a shocking thing that I saw during my faith head years - in a small church north of Fort William in a very scenic part of Scotland, there is a plaque on the wall, which is a memorial to 7 children who died in infancy (I *think* they may have been a clan chiefs children) There was the quote:

"My son, despise not thou the chastening of the Lord" (from Hebrews) written underneath.

So thats it. God is screwing you up big time. And dont complain. Just stick to your "faith" Its for your own good.

What a crock of s***

354. Mother dies after refusing blood

Comment #85470 by scottishgeologist on November 6, 2007 at 1:32 am

This story reminds me of another one involving another form of religious lunacy which can leave kids without parents. The story of Punkin Brown and his family. They were into "snake handling"

http://www.freeminds.org/legal/divide.htm

Heres part of it:

Evangelist John Wayne "Punkin" Brown picked up the three‑foot yellow timber rattlesnake while delivering one of his raucous sermons in Alabama in 1998.



"They say it won't bite," Brown bellowed as the rattler twisted itself into the shape of a V. "If it won't bite, there ain't no sense in being scared." But he had been bitten 22 times during his 18‑year career as a "snake‑handling" pastor of Southern Pentecostal churches.



"The Lord told me it was all right," Brown continued. "The Lord said it would be all right." But he knew things didn't always turn out "all right." His wife, Melinda, had been fatally bitten by a rattlesnake at a revival three years earlier.



Then, as the preacher hopped across the stage, history repeated itself. The rattler struck, biting Brown on his left middle finger. The ‑preacher paid little attention to the bite, and it took a while for the congregation to grasp the sad situation unfolding before them.



"God's still God, no matter what comes," said Brown, his voice fading. A woman in the congregation screamed, and other members anxiously mopped the dying preacher's forehead. "No matter what else, God's still God." Ten minutes later Brown was dead, and his five young children had become orphans.

Absolute f*cking lunacy in the name of "pentecostal" religion. But note carefully an important point in this instance: the bible "proof" for this behaviour comes from the gospel of mark, the New Testament, not the old. ie post-Jesus , not pre-Jesus.

Religion poisons everything . Hitchins is right. And in this case the word poison is hideously accurate.

355. '55 'Origin of Life' Paper Is Retracted

Comment #82615 by scottishgeologist on October 27, 2007 at 1:24 am

Another example of the Scientific Method and how science is ultimately self-correcting and self-refining.

Well worth considering what Dawkins wrote, quoting Douglas Adams on the SM:

Now, the invention of the scientific method is, I'm sure we'll all agree, the most powerful intellectual idea, the most powerful framework for thinking and investigating and understanding and challenging the world around us that there is, and it rests on the premise that any idea is there to be attacked. If it withstands the attack then it lives to fight another day and if it doesn't withstand the attack then down it goes. Religion doesn't seem to work like that. It has certain ideas at the heart of it which we call sacred or holy or whatever. What it means is, "Here is an idea or a notion that you're not allowed to say anything bad about; you're just not. Why not? — because you're not!" If somebody votes for a party that you don't agree with, you're free to argue about it as much as you like; everybody will have an argument but nobody feels aggrieved by it. If somebody thinks taxes should go up or down you are free to have an argument about it. But on the other hand if somebody says "I mustn't move a light switch on a Saturday," you say, "I respect that."

From:

http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/WorldOfDawkins-archive/Dawkins/Work/Articles/2001-09time_to_stand_up.shtml

(BTW, This is the article in which RD, (quoting someone else) refers to "God not giving a flying f*ck about the WTC")

Wonderful stuff!! :-)

SG

356. American kids, dumber than dirt: Warning: The next generation might just be the biggest pile of idiots in U.S. history

Comment #81632 by scottishgeologist on October 25, 2007 at 1:37 am

Philip

Yes, youre right I think. In Scotland we call the chavs "neds" and there are whole communities that are full of them.

But there is another side as well. Standards in written English have plummeted - and it is made worse by that hideous "dumb text speak" crap that appears in places where it is totally unnecessary. U no what I mean? Gr8 innit, 2 B so k3wl?

I was talking to a teacher about this recently and she said she has lost count of the number of essays that she has had to return to pupils because of this crap

By way of an illustration of what we may be up against:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/education/6589301.stm

SG

357. Prejudicial concerns

Comment #80934 by scottishgeologist on October 23, 2007 at 3:05 pm

Duff:

I'm waiting with bated breath for the first bloviating religiousite to actually come out and proclaim himself (it will be man) a literal believer in the old testament and advocate stoning of those wicked gays.

That lot that called themselves theonomists believe in just that! There is a theonomy FAQ here:

http://www.forerunner.com/theofaq.html

Note this beauty:

8. We want civil government to punish evil doers according to biblical sanctions. We want all moral laws of the Old Testament to be enforced according to biblical standards.

Some may object: Isn't this harsh? Isn't this barbaric? No, in fact it will lead to greater liberty for the godly. We want the ungodly punished according to God's Law-Word because it is what God prescribes. We have been conditioned according to a humanistic worldview to reject Old Testament law as "barbaric" or "outdated." God's law is not harsh, barbaric nor antiquated, because God is neither harsh, barbaric nor antiquated!


Chilling stuff!

SG

358. Make Richard Dawkins a Knight

Comment #80759 by scottishgeologist on October 23, 2007 at 1:49 am

Roberty_Obrien wrote:

the Queen of England

She's actually the queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The last time England had a queen was some time ago....

So if you are going to make snide remarks, at least try to be accurate...

Anyway, whats wrong with Elton John? He has brought a lot of good music to a lot of people, he's a great entertainer, and he has lasted the pace.

Oh of course, silly me, he's gay....... cant possibly be of any worth at all now can he? Except maybe as hell-fuel? Is that it?

359. Debate between Richard Dawkins and John Lennox

Comment #79762 by scottishgeologist on October 18, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Steven Carr posted:

Those of you who want to hear more of Lennox debate atheists can tune into

http://www.premier.org.uk/engine.cfm?i=1266&launched=y&ItemID=846

Well, the presenters introduction to that was interesting "....And I can tell you, you'll need to engage your brain for this afternoons discussion...."

So does that mean that for most of Premier (christian) Radio's programs, you can keep your brain switched off? I've heard the mind -numbing stuff they produce, full of that hideous, cloying, mawkish, syrupy "contemporary worship music", so on reflection, having your brain turned off is probably a good idea....

360. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Alister McGrath

Comment #79710 by scottishgeologist on October 18, 2007 at 9:36 am

Donald, ditto. Good post. That line from the Wee Flea:

I don't really think he [Hitchens] said all that much or made any real incisive in depth argument.

Classic Wee Flea stuff that. Roughly translated, "Oh no, Hitchens has got a good one there - I cant counteract it, so I'll just say its shallow and doesnt "engage" properly..."

When the Free Church had a proper web forum as opposed to the "cyber-Dawkins-obsession" that it is now, Wee Flea used to hand this sort of treatment to fellow believers he didnt agree with. Regularly. And usually with a huge dollop of patronising sarcasm.

361. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Alister McGrath

Comment #79693 by scottishgeologist on October 18, 2007 at 7:19 am

Keith:

Or perhaps you think you have a particularly strong debater up there in Scotland, someone the rest of the world hasn't heard of. If so, who is he?

Wouldnt be the Wee Flea himself? :-))) Actually, to be fair, the Wee Flea is probably the highest profile apologist north of the border - the only other piece I have actually seen written about this whole atheism / religion debate was an article in the Church of Scotlands magazine - an article singing the praises of Alister McGrath.

Written by a total 'tard.... I am sure AM himself was embarassed by it.

Of course , the Flea on the other hand has managed to turn his church website forum into his own personal battleground and no doubt as the newly appointed editor of his CHurch Magazine, will do the same there.

Actually, I'll tell you someone who would make for an interesting evening with RD (dont know about Hitch) and that is Richard Holloway. Renowned for his liberalism and very popular and influential.

362. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Alister McGrath

Comment #79394 by scottishgeologist on October 17, 2007 at 6:51 am

phasmagigas has a good point there - Let the Hitch get right into these mega church leaders and publicly destroy them. Like really take them apart and make sure that their followers know it.

McGrath I am sure is a nice chap, but debating someone like him is all very ivory-towers-ish, leather chair study, pipe and a brandy type of thing. All very late night BBC2

What is needed is the sort of earth shattering exchange that people talk about for years. And not just academics.

SG

363. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #79372 by scottishgeologist on October 17, 2007 at 5:05 am

Philip:

I would imagine Darth Benedict XVI would say something fantastically irrelevant and religious in Italian or German! :)

ROFLMAO!!! Good one!

Actually, it might come out in Latin.... just like the HUGELY funny Latin joke:

Dico, dico, dico,
Canis meum nasem non habet.
Quod? Nasem non habet?
In quod mondo scentium?
Horribilum!!!

(I say, I say, I say, my dog has no nose. What, no nose, how does he smell? Horrible!)


Actually, that Latin joke probably makes more sense than all that religious pish these guys come out with...

:-))))

SG

364. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #79345 by scottishgeologist on October 17, 2007 at 2:20 am

Veronique

Not surprised you are flummoxed by all this stuff - To quote Gunnery Sargeant Hartmann in "Full Metal Jacket" "I didnt know they could stack shit that high!"

Cos thats what it is - all these ridiculous ceremonies, titles, robes, acoutrements, procedures, all the "bells and smells"....

Know what, ask these people where in the words and actions attributed to Jesus in the New Testament do you find any of that crap? Nowhere. Its all made up quasi-mediaeval BS.

And these titles "Reverand" "Most Reverend" " his holiness" "right revereand " "the venerable" (sounds like hes got STD that one).

F*ck, it just goes on and on.....

At least in Science, if someone is a "Reader" or a "prof" or "prof emeritus" you knwo that tey have worked their backsides off and actually done something worthwhile, to earn these titles.

Not just pranced around waving a wand like a mongrel cross between Darth Vader and Gandalf (no disrespect to either of these fine fellows!)

Uncork another bottle , V, I'll join you!

Cheers!

SG

PS: More good Gunnery Sargeant Hartmann quotes here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093058/quotes

365. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #79331 by scottishgeologist on October 17, 2007 at 1:09 am

Hugh Caldwell posted:

http://www.swan.ac.uk/news_centre/Releases/071004archbishopvisit/

The Archbishop's speech as been posted at the University of Swansea site.

Is the text itself available anywhere? I'd prefer to read it as I really cant stand listening to that guy - he looks like some sort of mad wizard....

366. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #79330 by scottishgeologist on October 17, 2007 at 1:03 am

Good point Shuggy, and another blow to those who claimed that Dawkins only interviewed extremist nutjobs. If they are not prepared to stand heir ground (after all dont they have THE TRUTH on their side?) then they have absolutely no reason to complain.

Thing is, I think a lot of them KNOW they cant defend it. They are actually prisoners of their own delusion.

SG

367. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #78825 by scottishgeologist on October 15, 2007 at 2:53 am

Steve:

I suspect he is one of those people who 'believe in belief'.

A lot of truth in that I think, and I think it applies to a lot of others as well.

There is also the fact that even if he DID have doubts (after all he did refer to the "faith shaking tsunami" in 2004) and did start to think, hang on, maybe these atheists have a point, then he would have to admit that his lifes work was useless. That he had been deluded. A failure.

And its not as if he could say, "well, OK, that was a bit of a blind alleyway, but the research, the methodology used, the papers written, the networking with others, can all help in the refining of knowledge"

You could possibly as a scientist get away with that - and besides, if you are researching some great problem and find that you were going in the wrong direction, well, at least others can build on it. Or a t the very least avoid that blind alleyway.

Not so with religion. These people have invested too much in it - to try to back away from it now smacks of abject failure. And would also be devastating for other faith heads. No, they are stuck with it. Stuck with bullshit. And they think its a good thing.....

368. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #78680 by scottishgeologist on October 14, 2007 at 9:19 am

Hey!!!! Have a look at this will ya! Made me laugh anyway:

"Primates to star on top of Christmas trees"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=YSJZERIOI1TSTQFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/news/2007/10/14/nfaith314.xml

I dont know what it is about that Rowan Williams that p*sses me off so much - its either that irritating voice of his or that ridiculous beard that wouldnt look out of place on a Muzzie fundie....

Either way, he's a twat. And now he'll be a twat up a tree....

369. Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams criticizes popular atheist writers

Comment #78651 by scottishgeologist on October 14, 2007 at 5:00 am

PaulJ

Yes, that Craig article is pretty grim. But regarding mass destruction, there are still plenty of faith heads who would have no qualms about it today.

Check out Franklin Graham (Billy Grahams son) on CNN:

http://cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lt.01.html

In particular:

GRAHAM: This is different, this is for the sake and security of this nation. And this may sound rough, Judy, but we need to use every weapon in our arsenal that need be to defeat this enemy. And I don't think we should hold back. And we'll make a great mistake if we hold back our technology and hold back our weapons and put young men and women in there and sacrifice them because we're scared to use some of our major weapons. And I think we're going to have to use every -- and I hate to say it, hellish weapon in our inventory, if need be, to defeat these people.


AND

But let's use the weapons we have, the weapons of mass destruction if need be and destroy the enemy.

Chilling stuff.

SG

370. Muslims tell Christians: 'Make peace with us or survival of world is at stake'

Comment #78460 by scottishgeologist on October 13, 2007 at 1:37 am

Just a point -look at the end of the article and you will see a key phrase "inter-faith" The concept of inter-faith amongst Christians, at any rate is only found amongst the most tolerant, the most liberal and the least fundy.

I would think that the same is true of islam as well. Your average jihadi is going to think of anyone who supports "inter-faith" as some sort of traitor.

Just like the fundies and conservatives on the christian side consider "inter-faithers" as not real christians.

For example, from John MacArthur's web site:

"Jesus Himself affirmed the utter exclusivity of Christianity. He said, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me" (John 14:6). "Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved" (Acts 4:12). That sort of exclusivity is utterly incompatible with post-modern notions of "tolerance."

I suspect that this islamo-christian "love-in" letter is only going to appeal to the extreme liberals on both sides, who some would consider crypto-atheists anyway - people like Richard Holloway or John Spong fall into this category.

371. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #77803 by scottishgeologist on October 10, 2007 at 4:15 pm

Veronique

There was a similar inciden several years ago when a UK politician died due to "auto-erotic asphyxia" BBC report here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/8/newsid_2538000/2538165.stm

MPs you can expect getting up to this sort of stuff, but "men of the cloth"? Surely not, how could a "man of God" become so base?

;-)))

SG

372. Ban teachers from religious dress, Quebec group says

Comment #77733 by scottishgeologist on October 10, 2007 at 10:47 am

The business of women covering their heads isnt just a Muslim thing. If you were to go to a church in places like the Western Isles of Scotland you would see a lot of women wearing hats.

And before the Wee Flea says anything, yes , it applies to his church as well. Very much so.

And the reason for all this covering the (female) head - well, you can read about it in the New Testament - Bible says so, therefore it must be absolutely right.

373. Ban teachers from religious dress, Quebec group says

Comment #77663 by scottishgeologist on October 10, 2007 at 3:24 am

Goldy, LOL!

Quite right, have a good swear -its quite cathartic. I agree that fish symbol pisses me off big time. I know a guy who has one not just on the back of his car, but the front as well.

So when you see him coming you can think "fannybaws" (see footnote) as well as when you are stuck behind him.

And OF COURSE the car is a very nice expensive SUV complete with personalised number plates. Guy is loaded. Waste of a good SUV I reckon. Apparently he has a reputation for being terribly, awfully evangelical.....

SG

Fannybaws -a wonderful Scottish expression of contempt, beautifully use by Ford Keirnan, the "Big Man" in "Chewin the Fat" Look here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5JwPFVUsbw

374. Ban teachers from religious dress, Quebec group says

Comment #77640 by scottishgeologist on October 10, 2007 at 1:04 am

Religious dress and symbols actually serve a useful purpose. They make the delusionists and nutjobs easy to spot and identify. And then avoid like the plague.

Whenever I see that irritating, pathetic fish symbol on the back of a car or some sort of similar badge, I think "whoops, avoid....."


SG

375. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #76843 by scottishgeologist on October 7, 2007 at 1:03 pm

GBG said:

But it's the first time i have heard of a female christian doing it. SHOCKING!

Ahh, but cast your mind back to the mid 70s, does anyone remember Joyce Mckinney? From wikipedia:

"In 1977 a divorced former American Southern belle turned Mormon turned kidnapper, Ms Joyce McKinney, pursued her ex-lover Kirk Anderson to England where she and a male accomplice (Keith May) forced him at gunpoint into a car, took him to a remote cottage and tied him to a bed where she made love to Mr Anderson over the course of 3 days. She was arrested, but fled the UK after arraignment at Epsom Magistrates' Court, subsequently beccoming a tabloid sensation.

" I loved Kirk so much, I would have skied down Mount Everest in the nude with a carnation up my nose. "
— Joyce McKinney, Cassell Companion to Quotations: P. 271 Section 1 "

And absolutely TONS of luris detail and stuff here:

http://www.trashfiction.co.uk/mckinney.html


You simply CANNOT make that sort of stuff up. It is so amazing, it just HAS to be real. I reckon this is the "gold standard" of religious scandal. An absolute beauty.

And I have just realised that was 30 years ago. FFS, 30 years?! Why no celebration? Deserves to be much better known!

:-)))))))))))

SG

376. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #76831 by scottishgeologist on October 7, 2007 at 12:15 pm

NorthernBright

"The Joy of Calvinism".

'kin 'ell !!!!!

You know, I have often wondered if religiosity is actually a form of mental illness. Titles like this just confirm it.

What on earth is next, "Calvinism is cool" ? Or maybe that should be delivered by some goateee bearded, pony-tail wearing "youth worker" in a sort of leet-speak "C41v1n15m is k3wl, dude..." manner - can just see that one catching on.....

:-))

SG

377. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #76817 by scottishgeologist on October 7, 2007 at 11:20 am

Veronique,

Ah, Carlin, and that "religion" sketch. One of the funniest ever done. Really hits the nail on the head. And i love his facial expressions a he is doing it.

Going back to the article, I think the big issue with a lot of these fundie mega-preachers is that they have become almost "god like " in themselves. I remember reading about how Benny Hinn would appear on stage to the sound of "How Great Thou Art".

Of course this would happen after the audience had beeen worked up into an altered state of consciousness by the mind numbing, "praise band" led charismatic nursery rhymes that these tossers get off on.

So it is very much a case of, as Lord Acton, famously said:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

And in the case of these b*stards, power is a thing they have aplenty, and they certainly abuse it. And eventually they get caught with their paws in the cookie jar.

Interestingly, I decided to check up on old Lord Acton as he was one of those theological awkward characters who casued a ruction or two. There is a wikipedia article here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Dalberg-Acton,_1st_Baron_Acton#Famous_Sayings_of_Lord_Acton

Now the fascinating thing about this article is that it mentions how:

"He continued, however, to contribute articles to the North British Review, which, previously a Scottish Free Church organ"

!!!!!! Scottish Free Church!!!!!

You know, just when you are trying to erase such thoughts, along comes Wee Flea's church.

Actually, I shoudnt be in the least surprised - I was born and brought up in Scottish presbyterianism - it is , and remains, IMO, a classic example of "if you think you understand it, then you almost certainly dont!"

....Summertime... and the livin' is easy... fish are jumpin.....

Time to chill!

SG

378. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #76682 by scottishgeologist on October 6, 2007 at 5:05 pm

Veronique - dont worry - I am sure it'll be OK and I wont be thrown into the horrid depths of trolldom....

But back to preachers for a moment. I came across this news story a week ago - seems timely:

"Are Mega-Preachers Scandal-Prone?"

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1666552,00.html?imw=Y

Fascinating stuff!

SG

379. Norway flourishes as secular nation

Comment #76586 by scottishgeologist on October 6, 2007 at 11:28 am

Posiedon

Interesting, that about Shetland. I used to travel to it regularly, but then it was just a case of getting off a plane from Aberdeen at Sumburgh and then getting the "paraffin budgie" out to a rig.

And then repeating it a fortnight later in reverse! I never really saw very much of Shetland - looks like a great place - any Shetlanders I have ever met have been great people. So it would have been nice to have been able to stop and visit for a while.

Just think, working as a geologist (probably one of the least religious of the sciences)living in the least religious city and travelling to the least religious county.

Only platform I ever heard of that had a "chapel" on it was the Ekofisk complex. And that is a Norwegian operation!! So we're back to Norway!

Piccie of Ekofisk here:

http://www.npd.no/engelsk/cwi/pbl/field_jpgs/43506_Ekofisk.jpg

SG

380. Norway flourishes as secular nation

Comment #76522 by scottishgeologist on October 6, 2007 at 4:25 am

Pieter suggested that "Perhaps Norway is so secular because it is prosperous..."

Might be something in this and I have another example, from the UK.

I used to work in aberdeen, on the oil rigs. Aberdeen has always been wealthy - granite, fish and now oil (Oil of course being hugely beneficial to Norway)

Aberdeen must be one of the most secular, least religious cities in the UK. I dont have any figures, but the gut feeling is one of very low "church-going". All the time I worked there , ca 7 years, I dont think I personally knew anyone who went to church.

Used to have a great night life though!

SG

381. Scandal brewing at Oral Roberts U.

Comment #76491 by scottishgeologist on October 6, 2007 at 1:55 am

God appeared to him when he was reading a spy novel?! WTF?

Well, apparently, God spoke to Graham Kendrick (You know the one who was guilty of that vile charismaniac anthem "Shine Jesus Shine"... ) when he was brushing his teeth!

Hmmmmm... methinks there is a connection here.... "Oral hygiene?" Sorry, kids,....beeen a hard week....

Hey, Veronique "the goldfish are frisky" eh? Sounds like a line from Gerschwins "Summertime"

:-))))

SG

382. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75055 by scottishgeologist on October 1, 2007 at 1:42 pm

Further to Steven Carrs points there, a lot of so called christians havent a clue about theology. They do not know WHY they believe WHAT they believe.

I remember an Elder once telling me that "he was just a man of simple faith, didnt go too deeply into theology"

The fact that you can have so many different "-isms" in christianity shows how malleable the whole thing is.

If you compare a group like "sea of faith" (ultra-liberal) with an outfit like the Southern Baptist Convention (conservative) about the only point of commonality is the use of the word "christian"

And both would claim the "truth"

Theology? Its as much an academic subject as is agonising over the sweets in Woolworths: And both are Pick n Mix!

383. Letters: Theology has no place in a university

Comment #75048 by scottishgeologist on October 1, 2007 at 12:53 pm

The argument that RD should know something about theology is ridiculous. RD isnt arguing theology. His argument is that on the basis of the evidence, the existence of God is extremely unlikely.

If RD was to start arguing theology, how on earth woudl that pan out. "Let me see Prof Dawkins, are you amillenialist, pre-millenialist, post millenialist, calvinist, arminian, erastian, episcopalian, presbyterian, paedo-baptist, or believer-baptist? What is your favourite "-ism"? Are you a KJV / NEB / NIV / NLT / RSV / NRSV student? Are you a cessasionist or a charismaniac? Do you do tongues?

and so on and on and on....

And the moment, the exact moment that the RD engages with the merest HINT of any of that BS, his cause is lost.

Coz he has just TACITLY admitted the existence of God.

The theists know this. Its a trap. Avoid it! :-)

Theology has no place in our Universities? It has no place anywhere. None whatsoever.

The only other ology it should share a trash can with is astrology.

384. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74721 by scottishgeologist on September 30, 2007 at 6:03 am

Billy

"Peh eating fundies" !!!!!!!! ROFLMAO!!!!!!

"Aye, an ah'll hae an ingin ane an a'!"

Class.

SG

385. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74677 by scottishgeologist on September 30, 2007 at 12:33 am

V said:

Tectonic instability happened because of 'sin'! Does the Flea's church really propound this seriously???????????

If you can stand it , Veronique, go here:

http://www.freechurch.org/issues/2005/jan05.htm

and you'll see what I mean. In particular:

"The Bible's worldview and answer is both far more coherent and far more practical than the 'that is just the way it is' view of the Darwinianists, or the 'nice God, nice world' theology of much of theological liberalism. The world has been corrupted by sin. There is pollution of every kind. Human beings are polluted. "

Actually, to be fair, I have heard other preachers come out with this stuff. You know: God creates a nice perfect place, where no crap of any type happens, this talking snake tells the woman to eat the fruit, she gives it to her husband and as a consequence, earthquakes happen, mudslides slide, volcanoes erupt, animals become carniverous, oh yes, and thistles and thorns start to grow. And childbirth will hurt. And men will rule over women. (Genesis 3 for all the fun)


They even use the New Testament (Romans 8:22 We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time.) to back this up.

Bottom line: this is the best that the theists can come up with. They have no other explanation. They've just GOT to have their "spiritual" "superpernatural" view of things.

This brings us right back to the gist of the original article.

386. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74599 by scottishgeologist on September 29, 2007 at 4:38 pm

Wee Flea wrote:

Naturalism. The belief that only natural (as opposed to supernatural or spiritual) laws and forces work in the world

OK, lets say for a moment that there is such a thing as supernaturalism, and spiritualism. People who believe in such things make claims about them - and we know what they are:

1)Prophecy: "The Lord has given me a Word - such and such is going to happen"

2) Prayer: "Lets *just* pray about this - and God wil do something about it

3) Charismatic "gifts" .... no , lets not bother...

4) The supposed inspired inerrancy of the Bible

Taking these in turn

1) Prophecy doesnt work. Full stop - no more than one would expect statistically. People who "get a word from the Lord" have voices in their heads and are mentally ill.

2) Prayer: again a proven failure - no more than stats would predict. It doesnt work. End of story. Well not as the Bible claims it does

3) No, give this one a body swerve.... Lunacy on a heroic scale thats all it is. Even conservative theists think they are nuts

4) Theists dont even know what the Bible is. The NIV is full of footnotes saying "not in the earliest reliable manuscripts" and stuff like this. Whether its the Johannine Comma or the end of Marks Gospel, or many other small footnotes. Anyway, its full of contradictions and illogical nonsense. And besides, so called bible believers dont believe it - are women silent in your church?

Anyway, David, for what its worth, you know I tried, like really hard, to give the supernatural worldview a go. I kidded myself that it worked. I really wanted to believe. But ultimately it failed. The final straw (and this was after a long period of creeping doubts) was the Indian Ocean Tsunami of 2004. Not that "god sent destruction". No , the pathetic response of the churches (and that includes yours which claims that tectonic instability happened because of "sin") No church leader had ANY sort of good explanation. None whatsoever. They didnt because they couldnt. Their supernatural / spiritual paradgim was fouind lacking. Big time.

Why did so few animals die? Why so many children? Why did the tsunami happen in the first place? What casues earthquakes? The answer to it all is found in NATURALISM and SCIENCE not SUPERSTITION and IGNORANCE.

A young English girl who had learned about tsunamis just before going on holiday told her parents to clear the beach as she saw what was happening. Everyone there survived. Why? Education. Science, Reason.

Now think about it, they could have got down on their knees on the sand and "prayed"....

387. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74516 by scottishgeologist on September 29, 2007 at 8:12 am

While we've got these 'tards on the ropes, heres another beauty:

"Are Mega-Preachers Scandal-Prone?"

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1666552,00.html

388. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74509 by scottishgeologist on September 29, 2007 at 7:45 am

Wee Flea;

I was speaking at Dundee University last night to over 100 students and they were highly amused that some atheists think that their inability to disprove the elephant in their fridge, is somehow a reason for not believing in God.

Wouldnt be a talk to the Christian Union would it by any chance, given in this events page:

http://www.dundeecu.co.uk/events.html

Try talking to a group of students with brains rather than a bunch of god botherers....


Wea Flea:

ministering in a congregation for 21 years and being editor of my church's magazine

Ehmmm, you've been editor for what, 2 months? Big deal. And you call that experience (albeit small experience)

No doubt your magazine, like your web site will become your presonal fiefdom where you can carry on your Dawkins obsession, and of course stroke your own ego as the Great Aspiring Apologist. Just like the Free church message board has become Dawkins obsessed.

All I can say is that Dawkins must be landing some killer punches if this is the result.

389. Scientists Feel Miscast in Film on Life's Origin

Comment #74320 by scottishgeologist on September 28, 2007 at 5:41 am

Is Franklins UK organisation not "Samaritans Purse"? I first came across this a few years ago, when there was a shoebox collection in a local , wait for it , "evangelical" charismaniac church.

Franklin Graham is a dangerous nutjob. How about this quote from an interview - its available on CNN

http://cgi.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/14/lt.01.html

In particular:

And this may sound rough, Judy, but we need to use every weapon in our arsenal that need be to defeat this enemy. And I don't think we should hold back. And we'll make a great mistake if we hold back our technology and hold back our weapons and put young men and women in there and sacrifice them because we're scared to use some of our major weapons. And I think we're going to have to use every -- and I hate to say it, hellish weapon in our inventory, if need be, to defeat these people.

and later on:

But let's use the weapons we have, the weapons of mass destruction if need be and destroy the enemy.

Obviously a rapture ready, armageddonist.

390. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74261 by scottishgeologist on September 28, 2007 at 2:02 am

Billy mentioned:

I would include mathematics as a science.

I remember clearly, at school, in the back of my 6th year maths class, there was a book on the shelf, "Mathematics, the Queen and Servant of Science" by Eric Temple Bell

Somrthing of a classic and a title that always stuck with me.

And I think, says it all!

Mind you I have heard theology referred to as the Queen of sciences....

391. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74171 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 2:14 pm

ridelo

I had a look at some of the other Dave Allen vids on YouTube (that appear on the same page as the video you linked to) - some of them are seriously funny

As he used to say at the end of his programme "may your god go with you!" LOL!

And you're right, the comedy was much much better then - Python, Fawlty Towers, Porridge, brilliant. With the possible exception of Bill Bailey, it seems impossible now for a comic to get a laugh unless they say "shag" or "knob" or stuff like that evry 2nd sentence.

Speaking of Bailey and religion, try this (Acts of God):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tH2PkXLxGs

or Hinduism:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHDQ6B0disY

Brilliant!

or

392. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74140 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 11:39 am

ridelo

That Dave Allen sketch is fantastic. Kudos for finding that one! It really shows the absolute absurdity of religion. Someone pointed out on another thread that humour is a useful weapon. I actually reckon it is one of the most important and this sketch shows why.

And the South African sketch has its own little twist regarding a certain poster on this thread. There was a time not so long ago, although they probably would rather forget it now, that certain ministers in Wee Fleas church supported openly the "praying calvinists" of the apartheid regime.

393. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74087 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 7:39 am

Billy

the thought of a bunch of spaced out fundies getting up at 7 am and singing this with their arms raised and led by Cliff Richard makes me want to go to hell

LOL!! Was it not the late great Dave Allen who did a sketch about heaven and hell:

Along the lines of: "Heaven? sitting on a cloud all day, being good and playing a harp? No way! Now Hell, theres drinking, and fighting, dancing and fornicating in hell. Thats more like it!"

394. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74081 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 7:11 am

Billy

That John Mackay itinerary makes fascinating reading. Note the names of the vast majority of the venues are charismaniac "fellowships" and "christian centres" Very very few if any, C of E or C of S in that lot.

So it looks like that Mackay and his like are going round the evangie smaller churchs rather than the mainstream ones.

But it just shows, not that its needed, that there is a link between evangies and fundie-ism. The trend in recent years , according to surveys anyway is that churches are in decline in the UK, but that evangies are declining less than liberal ones.

Eventually all that will be left will be evangies, spouting their homophobic YEC BS and going on about how "their" god is "awesome" and singing pish like "shine jesus shine"

Dont know whether to laugh or cry at that prospect. At least valid targets will be easier to identify... and avoid like the plague.

395. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74058 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 6:09 am

Billy Sands wrote: "I even attended a wee free service recently where the "esteemed" invited speaker read out poems saying how evil such peopleare - isn't that right flea?"

Was that the lovely Ken Ham in Dowanvale Free Church by any chance?

Still waiting to see them distancing themselves form that incident. Yes, as Dawkins points out himself, the moderates are the enablers of the extremists. They provide cover for them. And in this case, a platform.

396. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #74045 by scottishgeologist on September 27, 2007 at 5:55 am

Wee Fleas condescending, sarcastic remarks regarding Northern Brights points are quite telling. NB has been extremely courteous and has IMO, bent over backwards NOT to be abusive and to give good points of argument in a nice manner.

This sort of behaviour from a so called christian is reprehensible - righteous anger, yes fair enough. Jesus used it after all. But this nasty, patronising sneering... not a good advert David.

However, I might point out , that if anyone had been following the OLD Free Church message board when it was unmoderated and quite a lively sort of place, would have seen this sort of behaviour from Wee Flea before. And lots of it, used against fellow christians

Unfortunately, the old FC message board is no more, and the postings are not available through archives like web.archive.org so you cant actually go and check. But take it from me, a lot of it wasnt too nice.

So it seems he makes a habit of this sort of thing online - maybe its the fact that it is interactive - you write something, you get a reply, and so on.

Unlike writing a book, where its all one way. And relatively impersonal.

Finally,
If Wee Flea can HONESTLY prove the non existence of anything, then he has solved a philosophical problem par excellence.

SG

397. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #73808 by scottishgeologist on September 26, 2007 at 8:36 am

Northern Bright

Spot on, absolutely spot on. best posting I have read for a while.

Keep them coming!

SG

398. Talking Action Figure Jesus

Comment #73420 by scottishgeologist on September 25, 2007 at 1:50 am

Talking of dolls, seen these ones? (an old news item but quite funny)

"Muslim dolls tackle 'wanton' Barbie"

Story at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1856558.stm

399. Teacher: I was fired, said Bible isn't literal

Comment #73404 by scottishgeologist on September 25, 2007 at 1:09 am

A community college instructor in Red Oak claims he was fired after he told his students that the biblical story of Adam and Eve should not be literally interpreted

Many christians dont believe that the story of Adam and Eve should be taken literally either. In my faith head days, I remember going along to a friends church, where the pastor referred to the "mythical story of Adam and Eve" As I was a fundie faith head in those days I was deeply offended. "Hell bound liberal" I thought.

The business of biblical literalism / allegory is a major issue for todays churches. Where exactly do they decide what is literal and what isnt? Of course they tear themselves apart over this sort of stuff.


David (Wee Flea) Tell us, What do YOU believe? Was there a time when there was only ONE man on the planet called Adam and that the first woman was created from his rib? Do you really believe that? If not why not?

400. 1996 Richard Dimbleby Lecture

Comment #73071 by scottishgeologist on September 24, 2007 at 3:26 am

Just noticed. David Dimbleby's tie bears a pattern not totally unlike the cover of David Robertson's book "The Dawkins Letters".........

Or have I totally lost it?

Cheers!

SG