ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 absolute rubbishjust in Wales, a recent study found that faith adds £100m net to the economy projecting across UK this would amount to about £2bn so if you atheists think faith is so harmful and want to get rid of it, explain where you will find the £2bn from? will the atheists be stumping up that bill? how much does atheism add to our economy? you guys are so brainwashed by the tripe of dawkins etc. that you are blinded by his articulate ignorance I'd imagine that Atheism adds quite a bit. I mean there's abortions, drugs, ******** sex manuals, copies of Dawkins' books etc. It's all got to add up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 They have an analysis of the biblical 'hell' and not surprisingly found there is not evidence to support the existence of a place called hell which is used for eternal torment (the notion we now tend to have of hell has been invented since the bible was written. I have come across 3 ideas of what hell really means. 1)"standard issue" hell = fire, torment, devils & so on. Relates closely to the text of the bible and has very graphic imagery and is just right for keeping people on the straight and narrow. Problem is - how could a God who loves mankind permit eternal torment?. Seems contradictory doesn't it ? 2)a place/state whereby the soul who has rejected God, experiences distress but nevertheless eventually comes back to be with God and enjoys eternal life with him. Remember the prodigal son story? Problem is - Free Will? 3)God's love underlies all creation, therefore without this love then the created wouldn't exist. With me? A soul that rejects Gods love will eventually cease to exist. Therefore, to reject God is really to reject existence itself. Obviously, 2 and 3 are very theological and wouldn't really inspire anybody much. I couldn't imagine an Ian Paisley figure having a good rant about 2 or 3. I am aware of the contradictions of 1 and it fits in very well with Roman Catholicism/Protestantism, so am doubtful whether this is the Truth. My vote would go for 2 - as it is closer to the idea of the Church' purpose being about forgiveness and closing the gap between mankind and God. It fits in better with Orthodox theology than the first idea. nonsense go and read David Pawson's "Road to hell" for an in-depth study on the topic of hell or find his video on youtube regarding the final facts about hell Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 absolute rubbishjust in Wales, a recent study found that faith adds £100m net to the economy projecting across UK this would amount to about £2bn so if you atheists think faith is so harmful and want to get rid of it, explain where you will find the £2bn from? will the atheists be stumping up that bill? how much does atheism add to our economy? you guys are so brainwashed by the tripe of dawkins etc. that you are blinded by his articulate ignorance The more I think about this arguement the more bizarre it sounds. I mean MEW adds billions into the UK economy every year. Is this a good thing now? I thought Christianity was supposed to be about more that material wealth as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 atheists ignore the evidence of +£2bn plus other huge benefits to our society from faith this is how atheists operate- they do not take a balanced approach to the evidence, as they want to spin it that faith is harmful, which the evidence does not support whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 nonsensego and read David Pawson's "Road to hell" for an in-depth study on the topic of hell or find his video on youtube regarding the final facts about hell Could you summerise the book's findings for us? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 atheists ignore the evidence of +£2bn plus other huge benefits to our society from faiththis is how atheists operate- they do not take a balanced approach to the evidence, as they want to spin it that faith is harmful, which the evidence does not support whatsoever. Scarlets, I'd be willing to bet that porn contributes more to annual GDP than this. Alcahol certainly does. Are porn and alcahol good things now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 The more I think about this arguement the more bizarre it sounds. I mean MEW adds billions into the UK economy every year. Is this a good thing now? I thought Christianity was supposed to be about more that material wealth as well. it's an argument you don't want to hear as it destroys the myths and lies you guys perpetuate that religion is a harmful virus on our society it is not, neither fiscally or otherwise. It is a good thing for our society, it encourages the improvement of man and society. It also helps to keep us free from atheistic governments who would give us no freedom. if people/society took more notice of God's commandments we would save billions, since people would be more law-abiding and have better morals hence massive savings from security, criminal justice system, social workers etc. the more I think about it, the more bizarre and stupid the atheist arguments that society woudl be better off without faith are, their naive and selfish ideas fly in the face of the evidence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Scarlets, I'd be willing to bet that porn contributes more to annual GDP than this. Alcahol certainly does. Are porn and alcahol good things now? you just can't accept that your arguments have been quashed, can you? you're not advocating the removal of porn or alcohol, you want the removal of faith, so stop being a hypocrit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 it's an argument you don't want to hear as it destroys the myths and lies you guys perpetuate that religion is a harmful virus on our societyit is not, neither fiscally or otherwise. It is a good thing for our society, it encourages the improvement of man and society. It also helps to keep us free from atheistic governments who would give us no freedom. if people/society took more notice of God's commandments we would save billions, since people would be more law-abiding and have better morals hence massive savings from security, criminal justice system, social workers etc. the more I think about it, the more bizarre and stupid the atheist arguments that society woudl be better off without faith are, their naive and selfish ideas fly in the face of the evidence Scarlets, I'm not an atheist. You do know that, don't you? The point I was trying to make is that contribution to GDP is not necessarily a useful indicator of something's beneficial effects. Would you agree with this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 you just can't accept that your arguments have been quashed, can you?you're not advocating the removal of porn or alcohol, you want the removal of faith, so stop being a hypocrit Oh my goodness no. People can have faith in whatever they like as far as I'm concerned. If you come onto a forum and start trying to start debates about your faith then don't expect me to agree with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 absolute rubbishjust in Wales, a recent study found that faith adds £100m net to the economy projecting across UK this would amount to about £2bn so if you atheists think faith is so harmful and want to get rid of it, explain where you will find the £2bn from? will the atheists be stumping up that bill? how much does atheism add to our economy? you guys are so brainwashed by the tripe of dawkins etc. that you are blinded by his articulate ignorance WTF are you on about??? Please provide links and details as to how it adds £100m net to the economy. And is this money just being diverted from elsewhere? And why should atheists suddenly have to find £2bn? But I agree that xtianity should be seen as a business. It sells hope of an after life in the same way that the lottery sells the hope of getting rich one day. The odds of either coming true are negligable. The church should be taxed like any other business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Scarlets, I'm not an atheist. You do know that, don't you?The point I was trying to make is that contribution to GDP is not necessarily a useful indicator of something's beneficial effects. Would you agree with this? which is why no one is arguing that faith is only good for contribution to GDP, it benefits society in so many ways including GDP, yet ignorant dawkins fans want it removed so they can live their selfish immoral life with no guilt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 Could you summerise the book's findings for us? Hah! I've been trying to get scarlets to fairly summarise any one person's argument on here for ages as evidence that he / she / it understands what is being said. All scarlets can do is copy and paste material from other websites. I have yet to see any understanding of what has been said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 Hah! I've been trying to get scarlets to fairly summarise any one person's argument on here for ages as evidence that he / she / it understands what is being said. All scarlets can do is copy and paste material from other websites.I have yet to see any understanding of what has been said. what an arrogant request you can't win the argument so you must resort to these stupid ways you are making a good case for keeping academics skint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 which is why no one is arguing that faith is only good for contribution to GDP, it benefits society in so many ways including GDP, yet ignorant dawkins fans want it removed so they can live their selfish immoral life with no guilt Is that aimed at me? I've never actually read any of Dawkins' books you know. Why would fans of Richard Dawkins feel guilty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 what an arrogant request you can't win the argument so you must resort to these stupid ways you are making a good case for keeping academics skint Scarlets, a serious question for you. Why do you keep coming onto forums like this and posting this stuff? I've never seen a single person actualloy agree with you and you certainly don't seem to be winning any converts to Christianity. Why do you bother? Do you enjoy the abuse or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 what an arrogant request you can't win the argument so you must resort to these stupid ways you are making a good case for keeping academics skint So why don't you just humour me and shut me up for good? Go on, fairly summarise one person's argument in any of these religious threads to show that you understand what has been said. Any person except yourself, any thread. It's not hard if you understand what has been said. What do you have to lose? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 So why don't you just humour me and shut me up for good? Go on, fairly summarise one person's argument in any of these religious threads to show that you understand what has been said.Any person except yourself, any thread. It's not hard if you understand what has been said. What do you have to lose? there is no need for me to summarise anyone else's arguments at all, clearly you have no idea about debate and this is an ad hominem attack because you decide to show zero respect for anyone who disagrees and exposes the rubbish you believe in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImA20SomethingGetMeOutOfHere Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 there is no need for me to summarise anyone else's arguments at all, clearly you have no idea about debate and this is an ad hominem attack because you decide to show zero respect for anyone who disagrees and exposes the rubbish you believe in Could you summarise David Pawson's "Road to hell" for me instead then? I'd really like to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 there is no need for me to summarise anyone else's arguments at all, But why not humour me? You spend all this time and effort saying why you don't need to, yet it would be far less hassle to just humour me and shut me up. You would also show people that you do understand what is being said and then you would not have to worry about any ad hominem attacks. By continuing on as you are we can only be left with the conclusion that you do not understand what people are trying to say to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 But why not humour me? You spend all this time and effort saying why you don't need to, yet it would be far less hassle to just humour me and shut me up. You would also show people that you do understand what is being said and then you would not have to worry about any ad hominem attacks.By continuing on as you are we can only be left with the conclusion that you do not understand what people are trying to say to you. you are playing these ad hominem games because that's all you've got, you've been shown wanting and out of your depth each time the debate kicks off Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 you are playing these ad hominem games because that's all you've got, you've been shown wanting and out of your depth each time the debate kicks off No I am playing ad hominem games because they are fun and you are an obnoxious gimp-troll that keeps coming back for more abuse. But you didn't answer my question as to why you don't just humour me and shut me up. Do you actually understand people's arguments? If not, why should we both talking to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest anorthosite Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 A gimp-troll chat-bot? Sounds like it could be someone's PhD project! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scarlets79 Posted March 17, 2008 Author Share Posted March 17, 2008 No I am playing ad hominem games because they are fun and you are an obnoxious gimp-troll that keeps coming back for more abuse. But you didn't answer my question as to why you don't just humour me and shut me up.Do you actually understand people's arguments? If not, why should we both talking to you? ok so you admit ad hominem, you are indeed shameless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Skint Academic Posted March 17, 2008 Share Posted March 17, 2008 ok so you admit ad hominem, you are indeed shameless Yes, I know, I should be ashamed of making fun of the afflicted ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.