Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Methinkshe

Members
  • Posts

    5,315
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Methinkshe

  1. That was always and ever the case, wasn't it? At least, that was why I have always considered inflation to be the inevitable outcome. Governments will ALWAYS opt for expediency and rarely, if ever, for what is right and required.
  2. As far as I recall, the thread went off at a tangent in response to Steve Cook's overpopulation claims. However, my memory could be wrong and, tbh, I cannot be bothered to retrace a dozen or more pages to discover exactly whose post about what caused the thread to end up as a discussion about the existence of God. Nevertheless, in recognising that the thread had gone off-topic, out of courtesy to the OP I declined to continue the sub-debate about the existence of God. That was my sole motive, whatever else you care to believe.
  3. Hey, have you joined the inflationistas? I thought you were a confirmed deflationist.
  4. We've had several threads on this topic over the past 12 months or so, but it is such an important topic that imo it easily bears another thread. It is a total infringement of liberty and I've no idea what our representatives in parliament were thinking of when they passed such an illiberal bill. And couple it to the recent proposal to farm out tax collection to private companies and you have a recipe for rebellion - I mean, since when did the Inland Revenue ever manage to get tax returns/tax owed correct? One is forever hearing about IR mistakes that take years to put right - if ever. Can you imagine bailiffs forcing entry to collect tax that is deemed to be owed only because of an IR mistake? And private companies will act first and think later - driven as they are by profit and commission.
  5. I'll offer just one example. Because God has given me His spirit of love (Christ-in-me, which is true Christianity) so that I find I no longer desire to repay evil with evil but to bless those who curse me and to show love to those who show me hatred and persecute me, just as did Jesus. But that's only the beginning........................ Now, I said that out of courtesy for the OP, I would retire from the discussion about God which is rather off-topic. I do not want to be drawn back into the general debate about the existence of God, but thought I should just answer your question. So back to the topic in hand..............
  6. Dunno. Sky is running with it and Times online has picked it up. Jacqui Smith 'to resign as Home Secretary' I thought she'd done it to spite Gordon - take the initiative from him in the reshuffle.
  7. Breaking news: Jacqui Smith to resign. Well, she was going to be fired anyway. Home Secretary to leave Cabinet
  8. To use an analogy. My father died ten years ago. Now, suppose for the sake of this argument, you wanted to find out what sort of a man he was. You could look up public records, possibly discover a family tree, and maybe even find letters he had written to a newspaper, or discover that he was a member of this or that club or group, that he had built this house, sold that one etc etc. But if you wanted to know what he was like as a man, to understand his character, what motivated him, why he bought and sold this or that house, then you would come to me, or my siblings, or my mother or to someone else who knew him. You wouldn't go to others who also only had available to them the same limited information available to you. It's not a great analogy and only illustrates how best to go about knowing God. The final step, knowing God for oneself, has to be experiential. Moreover, it is difficult to impossible for me, a mere finite mortal, to explain the immortal and infinite. It seems to me that you are a bit like a tribesman in a remote corner of the Amazon Forest who, when an explorer comes by and says that by using his satellite phone he can communicate with people thousands of miles away, refuses to even try the phone and insists that it is just not possible. I cannot dictate to God the way He has chosen to communicate with humanity. He calls the shots. And the way He has chosen is spirit to spirit on a one-to-one experiential basis. But you will never know unless or until you try to know God whether the experience exists. To that extent it is testable and falsifiable as far as you, individually, are concerned. But even if you were to prove to yourself the existence of God, and were to come to know God for yourself, you would still run into the same problem that I am having now - convincing others of the validity of your experience. And many, many people can testify to calling out to God at a point of crisis in their lives - if there is a God, show yourself to me - and discovering that He does indeed exist and is the rewarder of those who diligently seek Him. Anyway, I can't remember how we managed to get into this debate and I think I have done more than my fair share of taking this thread off-topic, so out of consideration for the OP, I think I should retire from this particular argument.
  9. I see you have edited this post which appears in its original form in my reply at post #525. But to answer your edited response: My original post concerned the nature of God and not a "version of religion" as you put it. God is spirit and can only be known in spirit. We can learn about God but He can only be known experientially, and on an individual spirit to spirit basis. If you refuse on principle even to try to know God the way He has determined that He will be known, how can you possibly claim that there is no such experience, especially when not just I, but millions and millions across the globe and throughout history testify to the experience? I know that won't fit your materialistic philosophy but that's just the way it is.
  10. You've fallen for the Rockefeller et al propaganda - the Kenya Human Time Bomb (and other population scare stories) are fiction and vehicles for the eugenicist movement. The myth of over-population is perpetuated by the likes of John D Rockefeller 3rd through donations to population control movements to ensure "quality over quantity" as Sanger, another eugenicist, put it. The myth of over-population is a cover-story invented to sanitise a diabolical eugenicist movement. Read the following link for the background to the population bomb myth. The Malthusian Delusion and the Origins of Population Control This is the REALITY of what is going on in Kenya. Population Control - The Kenyan Perspective Population Control - The Kenyan Perspective Written by Dr. Stephen K. Karanja, M.B.CH.B.M.MED O/G - Consultant Obstetrician/Gynaecologist Edited for typo.
  11. Yes, it's an interesting story. Nevertheless, if bears and not humans were at the top of an animal/human hierarchy, bears would be dictating the terms of human existence. As it is, we have "save the polar bear" campaigns because it is within the remit of humans to dictate the ongoing existence of bears and prevent any threatened extinction according to the value they put on the continuing existence of polar bears.
  12. DOW up 200.....who the hec knows who will win?
  13. Don't go running ahead. No-one is talking of religion or higher truths. All I'm doing is establishing some kind of foundation for a debate. Truth is nothing more or less than a 100% accurate accounts of all existence and all events. If nothing happens, there is no truth to be had about it. If nothing is, there is no truth to be had about it. Thus, truth is concerned with existence and events and their total accuracy in the recitation thereof. You agreed with me when I asked whether truth is singular and unchanging. That was the basis on which I continued the debate. If you have now changed your mind, then the debate is discontinued as far as I'm concerned. If you want to debate on the basis that "truth is a journey" then you have changed the terms and I withdraw. The search for truth may be likened to a journey, but truth itself exists apart from you or I and our efforts to discover it. It cannot be subject to change or otherwise it is not the truth.
  14. A non-level playing-field of your choosing does not constitute a hierarchy nor allow a setting for a man/animal hierarchy. It is an imposed condition. A human/animal hierarchy must be naturally established or otherwise it is a social hierarchy imposed by man. So you accept, then, that the theory of evolution has changed over the years since it was first proposed by Darwin and that it is still in flux. Thus, it is not THE truth about origins, it is just a STAB at the truth which changes from decade to decade, year to year, month to month according to the latest research and/or interpretation of evidence. If it were THE truth, it would not have changed. Yes/no?
  15. Again, all you display is your ignorance. What you write is not even worthy of being called parody. It is out and out lies. If you want to debate the nature of God with one who knows Him, you might at least take the trouble to properly inform yourself concerning his revealed nature. Since you have not, I decline from any further debate with you on this subject. It would be pointless.
  16. Sadly, you speak from a total lack of knowledge of God. May I recommend you read the following book? It is fiction and sometimes I hesitate to recommend it because some think it exposits doctrine (it makes no such claims) but it does go a long way to revealing the character of God to those who, for whatever reason, have a misconception about His nature. The Shack
  17. Again, you have dictated a non-level playing field. Edited to add: A level playing field would be: put one man and one tiger on the earth and see who survives the longer. Who knows; they could even make friends! No. Why do you ask? Let me make myself plain. As far as our origins are concerned, we are here and we got here in a specific and particular way. That particular way is factual and is the truth. Because we are here, we know it occurred. And because it occurred it happened in a specific manner. Now, we can have many guesses at how we got here, but guesses do not constitute the truth. So, are we trying to discern the one and only truth about how we arrived at this point where you and I are debating over the internet, or do you want to argue about the best stab at truth according to current knowledge/fashion/personal opinion? It is for this reason that I want first to establish that you accept that truth is singular and unchanging. Edited as above.
  18. Why? Let me conjecture. Because man, being only an animal, will just lie there helplessly and wait to be crunched by the jaws of a polar bear. Or he will run, but not run fast enough. He will not use his brain and creativity to fashion a trap or a defence or anything else. He will simply succumb. And polar bears will thenceforth rule the earth. Now I have an inkling as to why you say..........
  19. Then, as I said before, let the playing field be made level inasmuch as penguins are adapted to the climate so allow humans to be artificially adapted via warm clothing and whatever it takes, and then establish hierarchy vis a vis who or what will eat whom or what. First establish the singularity and unchangeability of truth. Edited for bad formatting.
  20. Are you contesting my claim that truth is, by definition, singular? If not, what exactly are you contesting?
  21. It was not meant as an ad hom. I have often instructed my children that if they find themselves condemning another, look first to themselves to see that they are not projecting on others their own deficiencies - along the lines of; it takes one to know one. I'm sorry if my maternal instructive mode overrode the common courtesy required on an internet forum. I "go for" truth. That which is unchanging regardless of fashion or philosophy or the limited knowledge of the day. Truth is peculiar in that it is, by definition, singular (against an infinity of untruths) and unchanging (against infinitely changeable stabs at truth.)
  22. Why does the human have to be naked? You have cited the penguin, an animal adapted to its climate, so why not allow the human to be equally (if artificially) adapted? Given that level playing field I would argue, show me the penguin that catches and eats the human for dinner. I am sorry that you have such a low opinion of yourself that you feel compelled to project it onto others. Edited for clarity and typos.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.