Fuddam, A Few Moments Of Your Time Please.

[TeePee]

said it before, will say it again: I can provide PLENTY of evidence, but no proof. Not trying to provide proof.

Then why haven't you? So far your evidence has amounted to exactly one poor video of shoes, and one unrepeatable study.

[fuddam]

Also, I've now managed to see that video on Youtube and, for someone who has just received a miracle cure granting a freedom from walking funny, Franny Finn seems remarkably nonplussed.

which means....? If God raises someone from the dead, I am extremely grateful, but not freaked out / amazed / gob smacked. Why would I be? God makes an entire universe, so what's the big deal about being able to raise a single individual?

What really really really confuses me is, if faith healing is so successful, why doesn't it happen more often? After all, roughly 70% of the UK's population claims to be christian.

good choice of words, 'claim'. Excellent choice. Of course it's not up to me to say who is or isn't a Christian, BUT if the individual who claims to be a Christian does not have a living, personal relationship with God, then I'd argue they've missed the boat. I'd argue they were probably born into a Christian context, and have followed it like anyone follows any tradition. It is not any more real to them than Santa or the FSM.

Why is there nothing more than scattered, circumstantial evidence that faith healing may work (as opposed to, e.g., the well-funded, repeatable studies showing thousands of drugs each year work, or not, very often, but still the results are repeatable and indeed repeated)? Evidence that we apparently will have to go and dig for ourselves, rather than it lying on a plate for us showing us god's true majesty?

Follows from the above, AND we're living in a very safe, comfortable country. Why would there be much need for miracles when people can easily get most of their problems sorted through conventional means?

If my child is sick, my first port of call is always prayer, but that doesn't mean I ignore modern medicine. By submitting the problem to Christ, I can get His intercession - He opens the doors, removes obstacles, puts the right person into my situation. Can testify to that many times in my life, but you'd dismiss such events as coincidence, so I won't bother.

Also, if so many people truly are christian, and christian faith healing is so successful, why is the average christian church barely half-full of old, semi-decrepit people, rather than full to bursting with sprightly and energetic people? Or is this because born-again christianity is the only true faith and that the others in their RC, CofE, Methodist etc. churches are simply deluding themselves and will never feel the true energy of god's love?

because, as mentioned above, the average Christian church is more than likely filled with tradition followers, OR because even though they believe in Christ, and His divinity, they don't practice what is preached. Simple example: one of my kids had a severe problem as a child. Although it was terrible to experience, it shook me out of the comfort zone I was in at an 'orthodox' church, and prompted me to get real. I left that church, and went looking for one that practiced the gifts of the spirit. Acts if full of illustrations of the power of the Spirit, but many Christians believe that such things only happened back then, not today. Rubbish, of course, since that is not what Christ preached. He said we would do greater things than He did while He was here.

So, to see miracles, healings, prophesying etc, one has to be in a church that believes in and practices such gifts. I left my old church, went to a new one, and voila.

Christianity is growing faster than ever, in all the major cities in the world (i.e. not just in 3rd world deprived countries). People are hungry, and meeting in non-orthodox settings - schools, clubs, pubs, prisons, etc. Official church figures only reflect the orthodox churches, and do there is this myth of a decline. The old is making way for the new.

BTW, there is only one kind of Christianity, and it requires one to be born again. To say otherwise is to refute countless scriptures. It can be in a catholic church, methodist, presbyterian etc. Denomination has no claim. It does not have to be in a 'happy clappy' environment.

[fuddam]

Yes I do have a problem with collective responsibility. I find it very difficult to accept punishment of an individual for transgressions or crimes or sins or whatever one wishes to label them, when they are committed by another person. Doubly so when people are paying for such transgressions that are far, far back in history. <snip for brevity>

Pope and paedophilia, Japan and treatment of prisoners, Britain and her colonialisation, the US govt and slavery, etc etc.

You are implying that we all sin or transgress, however, it seems that some people pay more for that sin than others even when they have not sinned themselves, but are simply born.

Here's an interesting situation. Michael Ramsden, a noted Christian scholar, noted that

"For a while now, at least in the Western world, the existence of any form of pain, suffering or evil has been regarded as evidence for the non-existence of God. If a good God existed, people say, these things wouldn't. But they do and, therefore, He doesn't.

My job takes me around many different parts of the world in order to answer people's questions about the Christian faith. I find it fascinating that I have never been asked this question in India, which I have visited on many occasions and which certainly knows a lot more about suffering than we do. I find it even more intriguing that Christians who write books in situations where they have known unspeakable torment because of the Gospel also do not normally raise this as an issue for themselves. Why?

On top of that quote, I'd like to mention that this year alone it is estimated 160,000 Christians will be killed for their faith. That's 438 per day, on average. And yet, despite the pain and anguish, it is not a cry against the injustice of Christ that is heard from the Christians, but that it is a privilege to suffer as Christ did, in order to bring glory to Him. After all, Christ has expected no more from us than He himself experienced while on earth. He knows the physical pain, the loneliness, being ostracised, being convicted of a sin of which He was innocent, etc.

Pain / suffering serves many purposes, and one of them is to remind us of our weakness, our reliance on God. Some will no doubt consider that perverse, but that is to miss the point above.

To quote MR again:

I said earlier that I have never been asked questions about God and suffering when I am travelling in countries riddled with the realities of it. In fact, when I visit churches in parts of the world where they are faced daily with the horrific realities of suffering, I normally leave inspired. They trust God in everything, even when things are going well. When times are hard, they cling on to Him because they have already learnt to trust Him. God hasn't changed, even though the circumstances have.

Maybe we struggle with suffering so much in the West because we are so comfortable most of the time that we feel we don't need God. We don't rely on Him on a daily basis, and so we don't really know Him as we should. When suffering comes along, therefore, it is not so much that it takes us away from God, but that it reveals to us that we haven't really been close to Him in the first place.

your story of the girl suffering is tragic, but that does not mean her life was without meaning. Would you demand of the Christian God, if He were real to you, that He remove all suffering from the world? If so, why? If not, at what age would it be permissable? He has already promised us an eternity devoid of any suffering.

Joni Eareckson is a famous Christian. She broke her neck at the age of 19 IIRC. Afterwards, after the rage, anger, denial etc she became a Christian.
After MANY years of her Christian walk, she said she'd rather be in her wheelchair, a quadraplegic, and know Christ, than to have not broken her neck and be without Him. Why? Because it was through her suffering and pain, she came to know Him, and was of infinite more use to bringing other people to know His love than if she'd remained 'normal'.

The Catholic church was not dismissive because they were shown, they were dismissive because it didn't tally with scripture. Are you suggesting that modern scientific method should be changed to put people on trial with a real possibility of death just because they propose an Hypothesis backed with data that challenges the orthodox theory?

my reference to the inquisition was to illustrate people who vehemently oppose a proposition because either they don't believe it, or have an agenda. Please don't let's take the thread along the lines of arguing about Catholic history.

Yes I agree that a response of "there may be a soul, but we have no scientific proof of it" is valid, however, it does indeed depend upon the description of the word "soul". I asked you to quantify such a notion; whether it was material, immaterial, part of the conscious/personality, but you declined to do so. Once again I'd ask you (and I appreciate time constraints etc).

I'd go with dictionary.com on this one, for simplicity:

1) the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.
2. the spiritual part of humans regarded in its moral aspect, or as believed to survive death and be subject to happiness or misery in a life to come: arguing the immortality of the soul.

You are playing semantics with the words talent and skill. I'm well aware of the natural aspect, which ultimately dismisses any notion of the supernatural by definition.

no, I'd argue that a talent is something innate, while skill is something learned. One may have a talent for music but it amounts to nothing without practice. One develops the skill. Anyway, whatever.

You may well have a degree and I'll take your word at that, however, how can one go against all that one has been taught. The brain is everything, without it we are nothing. I wonder how your co-eds and lecturers reacted to your belief and notion of a soul. Did they ask questions? Did your final examination papers include such notions?

multiple degrees, actually, but again whatever. University encouraged me to think for myself, to not follow the party line simply because it was the party line. The university was secular. More than anything, uni encouraged a search for Truth. An existential search. No contradiction with Christianity at all.

Radiation is a completely random decay and yet we are able to measure that. Why can we not measure the occurrence of healed amputees assuming a completely random function? After all this would simulate god's will.

who would be focussed on collating this data, of healings? Christians? I doubt it, especially amongst the populations who have greatest need (ie. no other resource, to surgery etc). Christians don't have to prove to themselves the existence of God. And since no-one can prove God's existence anyway, what is the point? All they/I can show is that many people claim to have been healed, many doctors have been confounded by 'miracles', and a skeptic can always come up with a reason not to believe.

And you know this? If so, how so? This is a nonsensical and quite frankly, childish statement.

read scripture.

You were chastising me for being presumptuous about knowing god's intention for the lives of people ( 1043 yesterday) yet you are now sticking up for god and telling me that he does not need to prove anything and that if he does it's for his own reasons. How are you any different from me in that respect?

I have a relationship to Him. Two-way. You don't.

Secondly you seem to know an awful lot about how god works yet you seem unwilling to simply let him speak for himself. Surely he does not need defending and secondly if he did; would he not do it himself?

I don't post on these forums because He NEEDS me. I post because there is a spiritual battle going on, of which you are not privvy, and when lies/distortions are spread about Him, it is up to every Christian to stand up for Him. Like it or not, He usually communicates THROUGH people, rather than directly.

Just because a lot of people claim something does not mean it's true. You only have to look at things like mass "UFO" sightings etc to see how people are wildly off the truth. If we took your criteria for proof we'd believe allsorts of nonsense from crystal healing to who knows what. If you are claiming divine intervention upon those who experience headaches then there really is no hope for you.

agreed, truth is not a popularity contest. Again, am not proving God's existence. Am simply hoping some people will be open to the possibility, i.e. open their minds, when the rest of the world is telling them not to do so.

You claim objectivity and you question other's objectivity and yet you expect us to somehow come to your conclusion.

No, I don't. I claim a subjective experience of objective truth (God), and know that others can ONLY come to share that perception through His intervention, not mine. It is a divine event, not human. There is a popular saying I agree with: no-one has ever been argued into becoming a Christian.

Well, for a start videoing, seeing and speaking to such recipients would not gather any valuable data, in the same way that eye witnesses prove to be particularly poor. The general gist maybe there, but the detail isn't. Again science gets around this problem via multiple experiments - after all it's very difficult to hoodwink lots of people when they are repeating your experiment.

For that sort of thing we'd need such a church to provide people who were willing to undergo full diagnostics and testing before and after such a healing took place.

maybe, but I doubt many churches would want to. Why? Because it would be presumptious, and again for who's benefit? Not God's.

Firstly you think that I'm livid over god's injustice. I'd like to address that. I do not believe in the Christian God. Therefore such injustice is non-nonsensical and I cannot by definition be livid. When I talk about "god" in that context, I am looking upon the argument from your definitions and qualities for a god. Once more, when I do that I am talking from a point of view of "if" and I'm associating your qualities and definitions as you have alluded to in this thread.

let me rephrase it to make myself clear: "livid over the idea of a God as perpetuated by Christians, as exemplified by the Bible etc." I didn't think you were livid with Him since you do not accept Him as real. Of course.

Are you seriously advocating a Johhny Vegas documentary as some kind of proof? He may well have a degree in quaffing the black stuff but in what way is he able to give an objective view to what he was witnessing? Again pie in the sky. I mean come on Fuddam, you're not exactly one of the brain dead numpties that expouse such things, far from it, so why chuck that in?

Was not about proof. At all. Read it again. Was saying I admired his openness. Completely different kettle of fish.

[fuddam]

wow. that was a long post. time to be briefer, methinks.

[schmunk]

He always responds to sincere prayer. Always.

Even the sincere prayers of the good old boys in Alabammy, who want the jews and negroes out, killed, disappeared, whatever? The sincere prayers of the people hunting and murdering so called 'witches'? The sincere prayers of the crusaders, who waged the most murderous war of all time?

Even the prayers of Robert Mugabe? Adolf Hitler? Mel Gibson?


No wriggling out, if these people believe themselves to be christian, to which they have all professed, then they are christian. There is no objective test, as far as I am aware, so there is no reasonable argument against their christianity or the sincerity of their beliefs. So if after their sincere prayers god allowed them to go on to commit their various atrocities, surely this is his response and one may conclude that he makes an irresponsible use of his absolute power. Or alternatively one may conclude that he did nothing at all.

[schmunk]

which means....? If God raises someone from the dead, I am extremely grateful, but not freaked out / amazed / gob smacked. Why would I be? God makes an entire universe, so what's the big deal about being able to raise a single individual?

Zombies don't freak you out?

good choice of words, 'claim'. Excellent choice. Of course it's not up to me to say who is or isn't a Christian, BUT if the individual who claims to be a Christian does not have a living, personal relationship with God, then I'd argue they've missed the boat. I'd argue they were probably born into a Christian context, and have followed it like anyone follows any tradition. It is not any more real to them than Santa or the FSM.

I think you have just shown the arrogance of your position

because people claim to have been healed and I would argue you are assuming them to be stupid, deluded or liars, and further more, because I assumed you were interested in getting to the truth of the matter. Instead, you have just shown the arrogance of your position.

Follows from the above, AND we're living in a very safe, comfortable country. Why would there be much need for miracles when people can easily get most of their problems sorted through conventional means?

So, if you are diagnosed with a disease incurable by current medicine, you should move to Africa to play the odds?

If my child is sick, my first port of call is always prayer, but that doesn't mean I ignore modern medicine. By submitting the problem to Christ, I can get His intercession - He opens the doors, removes obstacles, puts the right person into my situation. Can testify to that many times in my life, but you'd dismiss such events as coincidence, so I won't bother.

You don't trust christ to actually heal your child, but he's more like a concierge? Does he even book the doctor's appointment for you?

because, as mentioned above, the average Christian church is more than likely filled with tradition followers, OR because even though they believe in Christ, and His divinity, they don't practice what is preached. Simple example: one of my kids had a severe problem as a child. Although it was terrible to experience, it shook me out of the comfort zone I was in at an 'orthodox' church, and prompted me to get real. I left that church, and went looking for one that practiced the gifts of the spirit. Acts if full of illustrations of the power of the Spirit, but many Christians believe that such things only happened back then, not today. Rubbish, of course, since that is not what Christ preached. He said we would do greater things than He did while He was here.

So, to see miracles, healings, prophesying etc, one has to be in a church that believes in and practices such gifts. I left my old church, went to a new one, and voila.

How can you deny these other people's faith? Are you saying that they are less deserving/expecting of christ's attentions?

Christianity is growing faster than ever, in all the major cities in the world (i.e. not just in 3rd world deprived countries). People are hungry, and meeting in non-orthodox settings - schools, clubs, pubs, prisons, etc. Official church figures only reflect the orthodox churches, and do there is this myth of a decline. The old is making way for the new.

Who collects the unofficial statistics? Could you point me to some data? Perhaps just the major cities of Western Europe?

BTW, there is only one kind of Christianity, and it requires one to be born again. To say otherwise is to refute countless scriptures. It can be in a catholic church, methodist, presbyterian etc. Denomination has no claim. It does not have to be in a 'happy clappy' environment.

It just so often is, eh?

[Stewart]

Hold the phone... God cured someone by making their leg grow back and its not the biggest world wide news sensation in human history?

Wow. Its almost as if the reason for that is it never happened, and apart from a few truly gullible Christians, who believe because they want to believe, everyone who was sane dismissed it.

Almost...

But it must be true, Fuddam posted a quote from the Bible to back it up... and the Bible is a book written by unknown, pre-scientific peoples, containing various far fetched nonsense such as a talking snake and a virgin birth.

So who are we to doubt it?

Fuddam, I'll be retiring from the thread now, for the most part, and I'll say this - you have a genuine faith, and that is something commendable, even the fact that you blindly and stubbornly argue for it, despite being obviously and completely wrong, is also, in a way, something to commend. Boy, are you gullible though. Is there anything, any random story, told to you by some bible thumper that you don't just accept at face value?

Jeez. Its almost like madness with you. Do you ever read back some of the mush you put forward as real and truthful? Its 2008 mate, not the middle ages.

The 'fuddam-mental' (sorry) problem with your Christian faith is that you can never grow beyond worshiping the moon and shouting praise the Lord everytime something happens you don't understand. Your mind (despite you obviously being an intelligent man if you have multiple degrees) is like that of an overactive toddler.

Its full of star dust and magic. Gods, heaven, miracles, supernatural forces. You live in a Star Wars movie. And the reason for all this? All the prayer, all the worship, the faith, everything... because you are scared of death.

Scared of death? Become a Chrstian and you wont die, you'll float up to heaven to play an endless game of ping-pong with Carrey Grant! I swear, no lie! Of course, I can't let you in until you are actually dead... and no, its not a simplistic control method to keep the terminally gulible quiet while they are alive.

Anyway, despite being wrong and seemingly prepared to accept any old nonsense, no matter how far fetched - may your God go with you.

... Next time Gadget...

[fuddam]

Even the sincere prayers of the good old boys in Alabammy, who want the jews and negroes out, killed, disappeared, whatever? The sincere prayers of the people hunting and murdering so called 'witches'? The sincere prayers of the crusaders, who waged the most murderous war of all time?

lol. pay attention, young padawan. I never said He always GRANTS the prayers of the sincere, but that He answers them. See the difference? Same thing a parent does with any kid.

Even the prayers of Robert Mugabe? Adolf Hitler? Mel Gibson?

Why do you mention them? Do you think you're better than them, more deserving of goodness? while you're not responsible for the deaths of thousands, that doesn't mean you can judge them. You're still a sinner. And using Mel Gibson is an example is *lmao* stuff.

No wriggling out, if these people believe themselves to be christian, to which they have all professed, then they are christian. There is no objective test, as far as I am aware, so there is no reasonable argument against their christianity or the sincerity of their beliefs.

agreed

So if after their sincere prayers god allowed them to go on to commit their various atrocities, surely this is his response and one may conclude that he makes an irresponsible use of his absolute power. Or alternatively one may conclude that he did nothing at all.

He has absolute power. He can control anyone/anything. He CHOOSES to give us free will, and does so for entire race, all the time (i.e. no mixed measures). Those people do bad things - that is their choice.

Does that mean God blessed their actions? Nope. Does He bless prayers to murder people? Nope. That would be inconsistent with the commandments. He is not inconsistent, despite what anyone on a Hexus forum in 2008 may claim.

[fuddam]

I think you have just shown the arrogance of your position

Nope, I don't think so... Granted, I could have been more subtle in my choice of words, but my point was that Christianity is about a two-way relationship to the Living God. If there isn't this relationship, then it isn't real.

e.g. I may believe Beyonce and I are hot for each other, and profess to all and sundry that we are a couple, but if I have never communicated with her, what does that make of my claims?

So, if you are diagnosed with a disease incurable by current medicine, you should move to Africa to play the odds?

not at all. One should work on one's relationship with Him here. You're suggesting He responds more to geography - lol.

You don't trust christ to actually heal your child, but he's more like a concierge? Does he even book the doctor's appointment for you?

Christ may heal my child through one of his agents (i.e. another human being, like a doctor) or He may do it miraculously.

You reminded of that story of a person drifting in a lifeboat/in danger of drowning somewhere, who prays for God's intervention to save him. He rejects all the people who subsequently come to rescue him, saying that he is waiting for God to intervene - lol.

How can you deny these other people's faith? Are you saying that they are less deserving/expecting of christ's attentions?

I would never deny their faith. I CAN deny that they are living according to scripture, which is what that 'orthodox' church was doing. God says we can move mountains if we have the faith of a mustard seed - the point is that we have to a) know the scripture and b) exercise the faith.

Who collects the unofficial statistics? Could you point me to some data? Perhaps just the major cities of Western Europe?

www.lausanneworldpulse.com is one.
specific example for Holland here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilit...3110&R=EF26165

can provide many others, if req.

It just so often is, eh?

What's wrong with that? Christ said we should shout and make a noise for Him, so doens't worry me. Ever been to a Christian rock concert? I assume not. Anything wrong with the noise? Nope.

I was illustrating the fact that one can't separate *Christianity* into different churches, only that people do so, and institutionalise their differences.

[Blitzen]

Leviticus 18:22

'Do not lie with a man as one lies with a woman; that is detestable.'

The word of God? Something you would shout from the rooftops? Something you are forced to ignore?

I don't know, I'm not a Christian. You are, Fuddam is. When you read that, you take it to mean what?

"Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children. But do not touch anyone with the mark. Begin your task right here at the Temple." So they began by killing the seventy leaders. "Defile the Temple!" the LORD commanded. "Fill its courtyards with the bodies of those you kill! Go!" So they went throughout the city and did as they were told." (Ezekiel 9:5-7 NLT)

You worship this God?

"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives."
(Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

The gays again! I'm no bible expert, but I reckon God has a 'thing' about them.

Now, I can live and let live, I'm an athiest, I can make up my own mind. Can you be a good Chrstian and just ignore these statements?

Tell me.

I never agree with Steve but he has a great point here.

Regardless whether Christianity is based on fact or fluffy fairytales (which i believe), we have people VERY high in the church that are gays or like the choirboys. (There has just been a bishop that has openly said he's a bandit).
These people are regarded as following the bible to the letter of the law. If they did, they wouldnt be touching other blokes bottoms now would they

God makes an entire universe, so what's the big deal about being able to raise a single individual?

No....a book claims he did.

Just like a book claims Jack climbed a giant beanstalk and slapped a giant.

Let me know........how is the bible more credible than Jack and the Beanstalk. You believing in it gives no eveidence of fact or proof whatsoever.

If you believe in the big fella living in the clouds then thats great. If you take solice and peace from that then even better.
To try and justify it though with a few fairytales is way off the mark.

[fuddam]

Its full of star dust and magic. Gods, heaven, miracles, supernatural forces. You live in a Star Wars movie. And the reason for all this? All the prayer, all the worship, the faith, everything... because you are scared of death.

nope, the opposite. I am not scared of death because He has saved me from it. I hear your point, of course, that I am a Christian to try avoid death, and you are completely right. It's that simple: God says we will die unless we accept His forgiveness, and so I accept it. Makes sense to me. If I was starving and was going to die of starvation, I'd accept food from someone.

But more than that, I claim Him to be lord and saviour BECAUSE HE IS. Ultimately, as a Christian, I simply stand in awe. Whether I exist or not, is not the point. He IS. He is the great I AM.

The whole star wars analogy is pretty apt. It *can* seem almost fairytale-like, but that is not to dismiss it. Cultures across the globe, across time, have always pointed to there being more to existence than the material. That is not about wishful thinking; that is about an inner knowledge / awareness that God has implanted within us, to seek Him. A purely material life is like a body without a shadow (as someone said).

finally, an illustration: we have met online, we have talked. we have debated. we have heard both of each other, and from each other. BUT do we really know each other? Nope. The same with Christ. You will not KNOW Him until you sincerely ask to meet Him -that is a fundamentally different experience from reading/hearing/debating about Him. If and when that happens with you, it will become clear. Simple. But it's in your hands.

Anyway, despite being wrong and seemingly prepared to accept any old nonsense, no matter how far fetched - may your God go with you.

... Next time Gadget...

thanks for your frankness and good will, squire Respect.

[fuddam]

Regardless whether Christianity is based on fact or fluffy fairytales (which i believe), we have people VERY high in the church that are gays or like the choirboys. (There has just been a bishop that has openly said he's a bandit).
These people are regarded as following the bible to the letter of the law. If they did, they wouldnt be touching other blokes bottoms now would they

Sex outside the marriage is regarded as a sin. Marriage, in the bible, is between a man and a woman. Therefore a practicing homosexual is a sinner. And being a gay minister is different from being a gay minister who openly espouses homosexuality.

Let me know........how is the bible more credible than Jack and the Beanstalk. You believing in it gives no eveidence of fact or proof whatsoever.

see my response to Stewart, at the end. If you *meet* with God, it kinda becomes clear
There is no grey area. We are on different sides of the fence. Until you have been on my side, it naturally appears to be little more than Jack & his beanstalk.

[schmunk]

specific example for Holland here: http://www.weeklystandard.com/Utilit...3110&R=EF26165

The reason the Christian population of Holland has stopped shrinking and is likely to avoid further decline is a phenomenon that until now has been largely overlooked by commentators on Dutch politics and society: Christian immigration. Analysts usually focus on the one million Muslim immigrants and their offspring who have made the Netherlands their home since the early 1950s. But in the past decade, Muslim immigration has been overtaken by a larger stream of immigrants, namely Christians from Africa, Asia, the Americas, and Europe. An SCP estimate puts the number of Christian immigrants in Holland at around 700,000-- and rising fast. Recent immigration reports suggest that for every new Muslim moving to Holland, there are at least two new Christian immigrants.

So, in reality Christianity amongst the incumbent population is static, at best, and growth is only due to Christian incomers? Try again, fuddam.

[schmunk]

http://anselmic.wordpress.com/2008/0...ch-of-england/ makes for interesting reading, and also correlates well with my understanding of the great decline in churchgoing in the UK.

Fuddam, I'm sure you'll now respond with something along the lines of 'this only represents the Church of England and actually there is huge growth amongst evangelical churches and those who follow gnostic chiropractic.' However, CofE is the big one, making up around half of the UK's christian population and dwarfing any other denomination. If CofE is losing 10,000 bums on seats a year (and likely similar shinkage in other denominations), the happier, clappier churches will need to grow massively to even maintain stasis. And they're not growing massively, despite any protestations you may give to the contrary.

[mediaboy]

Decided to come back after seeing Stewart post this... time for another 20K character post

Hold the phone... God cured someone by making their leg grow back and its not the biggest world wide news sensation in human history?

Wow. Its almost as if the reason for that is it never happened, and apart from a few truly gullible Christians, who believe because they want to believe, everyone who was sane dismissed it.

Almost...

Okay, lets do the opposite... prove to me that God DOESN'T exist and that this DIDN'T happen. Using totally reliable evidence that I will agree with. I'll play devil's advocate here, as I'm atheist myself (polyatheist), so ensure that your arguments are totally reliable.

I'll wait on your (or someone elses) posting before I venture further into philosophy.

But it must be true, Fuddam posted a quote from the Bible to back it up... and the Bible is a book written by unknown, pre-scientific peoples, containing various far fetched nonsense such as a talking snake and a virgin birth.

We've already agreed that the virgin birth was a mistranslation. Around page 8 or 9 I think. You'd have to read through it though. As we've already dealt with most of these things in previous posts I'm sure, as an attentive OP you know the answers to all these points and are bringing them back to irritate us?

So who are we to doubt it?

Fuddam, I'll be retiring from the thread now, for the most part, and I'll say this - you have a genuine faith, and that is something commendable, even the fact that you blindly and stubbornly argue for it, despite being obviously and completely wrong, is also, in a way, something to commend. Boy, are you gullible though. Is there anything, any random story, told to you by some bible thumper that you don't just accept at face value?

Prove to me, here and now, that fuddam is totally and obviously wrong.

Yes, I am an atheist, to those that are simplistically minded and I normally call myself that to avoid confusion, but my beliefs are totally different to most people I have met so far. I'm sure that if I mentioned them someone would start callin me an idiot, or blind, or stubborn, as my views on this topic and most other religous topics go well past the points of common sense and what most people consider normal.

As for blindness and stubborness, I feel that I should congratulate you, and not just Fuddam, as you came into this thread with the attitude of a teenager, that you know what is right, and you know what it is you believe, and anything outside of those beliefs is wrong.

Just like the rest of the world at a good time.

And guillibility? A matter of opinion, so I'd be interested to see the logic behind your opinions, such as all the arguments on this thread (after counter-arguments/points have corrected them) compiled in your own words with your own anecdotes and questions to show that Fuddam is guillible.

And bible thumping? Isn't that a contradiction in terms?

Jeez. Its almost like madness with you. Do you ever read back some of the mush you put forward as real and truthful? Its 2008 mate, not the middle ages.

The line between madness and faith is similar to that of a knife blade. If you try to have a foot on both sides you end up in great agony.

Which is why both sides view the other side as madness, and their own side as faith.... and why I sit on the fence - till a post like this comes along and I'm tired and bored of people resorting to old techniques... as even though I'll frequently do it, I at least TRY to avoid the old arguments that have been worn out.

As for faith... if Fuddam has faith, then - logically - so of his "mush" IS what he believes as real and truthful, or at least, the "mush" is interpreted into something which is percieved as real and truthful.

Once more, a topic covered on this thread.

And actually, until the moment at which you conclusively prove to me it is 2008, I will not say it is 2008, but actually NE1 (New Era 1) as it seems to me YOU are having some sort of faith... or should it be madness?

The 'fuddam-mental' (sorry) problem with your Christian faith is that you can never grow beyond worshiping the moon and shouting praise the Lord everytime something happens you don't understand. Your mind (despite you obviously being an intelligent man if you have multiple degrees) is like that of an overactive toddler.

I differ here. The problem with Christian faith is that it is subject to intense scrutiny, and intense historical pressures, and therefore fails. I don't see a similar thread addresed at the Quakers, questioning their faith or one at the Fundamental Muslims. Of course, I'm willing to concede that it's because you don't know anything ABOUT those faiths, but I'm also entirely willing to point out that you seem to know very little about the Christian faith in the today instead of the yesterday.

Not that Christians seem to be very good at that either mind, but at least you - as an Atheist - should know what you AREN'T beliving in, as not belieiving in "God" is an extremely wide spectrum of disbelief.

And, once again, this thread seems to be falling under the title of "throw the most insults at each other." An intelligent overactive toddler seems a little insulting.

Fuddam merely has faith, and trusts in his faith. Is that the behaviour of a toddler? Or is it the behaviour of an adult, having read through the proofs and disproofs (although only from a few limited websites), decided upon a course of action - which you tend to disagree with?

Its full of star dust and magic. Gods, heaven, miracles, supernatural forces. You live in a Star Wars movie. And the reason for all this? All the prayer, all the worship, the faith, everything... because you are scared of death.

Read the bible?
Studied the bible?
Interpreted the bible?
Found out the other interpretations of the bible?
Watched Star Wars?
Gone and read about supernatural forces?
Looked at the explanations behind magic and miracles?
Looked at the mistranslations known about in the bible?
Considered the different possibilites?

Maybe thought about your OWN fears... Fear is perfectly normal when dealing with something you don't understand. Which is why Christians are feared.

Scared of death? Become a Chrstian and you wont die, you'll float up to heaven to play an endless game of ping-pong with Carrey Grant! I swear, no lie! Of course, I can't let you in until you are actually dead... and no, its not a simplistic control method to keep the terminally gulible quiet while they are alive.

Prove it.

Anyway, despite being wrong and seemingly prepared to accept any old nonsense, no matter how far fetched - may your God go with you.

... Next time Gadget...

So does this God exist or not? Hypocritical as well it would seem.. and you're not even playing Devil's Advocate...

[fuddam]

hey, whatever you say.