I see.
So, in the last page or so, have you been discussing the heat death of the universe?
Yes
No
Religion, what's the point?
- Thread starter TheRedFlag
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
So, in the last page or so, have you been discussing the heat death of the universe?
Yes
No
Actually you asked about the Qur'an. That's only a part of my belief.
The challenge within it would be a starting point.
As for my belief overall. I reached it be researching and getting here with what I believe is evidence. For me to believe it's incorrect I would need evidence of why it's incorrect.
Yes, distorted maliciously by a Creationist. Did you not read the posts above referring to the specific interview from the film that you directly quoted from?Distorted maliciously by a creationist. Ok dickie.
I'm looking for another interview/discussion where he said similar. I'll post it if I find it.
You're unpersuadable. Entirely incapable of admitting that you're wrong. It's infuriating.
And Dickie? Ffs, you absolute child.
You would ignore evidence of why you're not correct, if your ridiculous behaviour regarding your claims about Dawkins is anything to go by.
Actually…
What I asked is pretty clear.
And I’m asking you what evidence would it take?
I've seen the film as have you. How exactly was it maliciously distorted? He could have said no, I don't know
And yes Dickie, fingeredmouse
If you find me an interview or video evidence of me saying it I promise I won't ignore it
I’ll let you guess how I take to posters trolling threads.
You've seen the film? The film that you just denied having quoted from?
It was maliciously distorted in precisely the way described in the two separate quotes that you've been provided.
And my responses were pretty clear. Islam to Christianity? Addressed
Rejection of Qur'an? Addressed
Gospels of Jesus? Addressed
You clearly do ignore such evidence. Repeatedly.
How is it trolling? I've engaged with everyone.
My initial post on the topic was clear. It's hard to have a discussion when different people jump in and make demands.
Not like I didn't set out the stall. I had two choices. Ignore everyone else and stick to the one person or engage with almost everyone. I chose the latter. I haven't been rude and abusive.
If this is you threatening with "authority" as a mod it won't work. Do what you got to.
You want to have a civil discussion then I will reply as I understand and choose to.
Edit: I am happy to set perimeters before a discussion but on the basis of quid pro quo
Last edited:
No I ignore interpretations people put on to what was clearly said in a video.
I also reject the backtracking after the event on social media.
As an intelligent educated man, used to discussions and debates you don't simply say maliciously distorted after the event. If the video was edited or tampered then fair enough. That's not the claim.
You never once answered the question. You’ve yet to tell me what evidence.
Engaging with everyone and offering complete non-answers and obfuscation. That’s being a troll.
As far as I'm concerned I answered your questions directly as I saw them posed. Even asking for clarification at least once when I didn't understand it.
So for example, and I will use my own words here. I can't return to Jesus when I don't deny Jesus. I deny some of the claims made about Jesus and I believe I have evidence to deny those claims.
I will happily denounce the Qur'an if it is proved wrong to me. I believe it is absolutely correct. I will even denounce it of the challenge it sets itself can be met.
There are different parts to my belief. As I have said often on here I am where I am through my research on different aspects of it. And I will be clear if my faith in one element is shaken it won't crumble the lot.
To give an example. My ultimate belief is in a creator. The rest stems from there. The books or persons in and of itself won't make me deny a creator. But it will move me from my current position on the books or the person's.
Can't get clearer than that.
Yet you can’t / refuse to / are in denial about, simply telling the forum what it would take to do that.
Truly remarkable.
And you wonder why you're accused of trolling?
Literal quotes, in context, dealing with every point you raised, including the one single out of context quote you supplied, in the actual words of the person who you are ascribing beliefs to and this is your response?
One video made by a bad actor (in both senses of the term, Stein was a speech writer for Nixon, I believe?) where Dawkins tries to respond charitably to the feasibility of something like intelligent design, is apparently more significant than a dozen references through his career on this point.
Count the hits, ignore the misses. I don’t know how people do it.
In your head this seems a simple question. For me it isn't. Or I simply don't get what you want here.
Having studied the Qur'an in detail in its original form, there are 7 conditions to it being accepted as the Qur'an. I studied these conditions before I opened it. That's the level of detail I went through before accepting it. To simply request/demand "what evidence" is ridiculous to me.
I also posted the direct quotes. The context is where I have issues. Especially those after the event or based on emotion.
What evidence would it take for you to believe that the tooth fairy is real?
The context is where you have issues? You're laughing as you type that, right?
Leaving aside the context and the screeds of writings, videos and articles contradicting your position, which would be ridiculous, the quote you posted from Dawkins still didn't support your assertions that he believes it's probable a cabal of alien super beings created life on Earth and therefore he's a polytheist creationist anyway within it's own text.
I don't believe in the tooth fairy. I believe its a changing of the tradition of tooth fee.
Can I just say @Roane has been an interesting addition to this thread, no point us lot shouting into an echo chamber.
But, @Roane , I asked you before, does the Quran contain the infinite knowledge of God?
If it doesn't, then you are only getting part of the story, so you don't have the answers. Or any answers. Just your interpretation.
If it does, then the only way a finite number of words contain the infinite knowledge of God, then every single word in the Quran has infinite meaning, which basically means can can deduce nothing from reading the words. Which means you get no answers, just your interpretation.
So, explain to me, how you think you have any answers???
But, @Roane , I asked you before, does the Quran contain the infinite knowledge of God?
If it doesn't, then you are only getting part of the story, so you don't have the answers. Or any answers. Just your interpretation.
If it does, then the only way a finite number of words contain the infinite knowledge of God, then every single word in the Quran has infinite meaning, which basically means can can deduce nothing from reading the words. Which means you get no answers, just your interpretation.
So, explain to me, how you think you have any answers???
He's not, I honestly believe he's genuine. He's just blinkered
Ok so let's say the Stein interview was just a one of thing and one of those days. A malicious creationist.
Yet the idea of aliens is one that has been presented before. We agree here right? As he has said this in other venues and discussions and QA sessions.
My proposition earlier was you have to look at what he has said elsewhere and not simply base it on emotions because one is a fan or his tweets etc after the event
Are we saying he has never mentioned similar ideas before, or alluded to them?
Because he said similar to Michael Powell. That God like creatures are plausible in the universe. He has said about his intrigue to people who have posed similar "theories" eg Dyson.
You've lost me then. You've asked what evidence I need to believe in a tooth fairy.
The evidence I have is that this entity is not real and somewhere tooth fee became tooth fairy.
To me that's like asking me what colour is my dab radio. I don't have a dab radio. Stop trolling and answer my question
Yep. You might be right.
This is why I wanted religious people in this thread!
I don’t believe in a creator either yet you asked me what evidence it would take for me to believe in one.
You’ve been lost by your own question ffs
Forget about the tooth fairy, what about the gremlin that keeps stealing odd socks from the washing???
Of course he's discussed aliens. No-one has ever denied that. Many times, most often around conjecture as to what they might be and whether they would be subject to natural selection.
The problem is not aliens. It's the fact you're claiming he said that it's probable aliens seeded life and therefore he's a polytheistic creationist. Which is nonsense.
And the only emotions I'm feeling are caused by this ridiculous argument with you. I don't follow his tweets. I am pretty familiar with his work, however. I'm not defending my beloved Dickie boy, I'm correcting you falsehoods. Why don't you follow your own proposition, ignore your emotions regarding Dawkins and look at all the vast amounts of evidence showing your wrong in your assertions?
Just like with all the silly myths in the various fairy tales, there is a tangible, objective reason for such phenomena.
No way. I put a pair of socks in the washing and only one comes out? Must be a sock gremlin
What would it take for you to not believe in said gremlins?
Two socks coming out of the washing machine every time
I get you now.
At the time you entered the discussion the focus was on me providing proof of a creator. Now we can get into all sorts of discussions on that. Metaphysical, ontological or cosmological.
My question was more focussed on what type of evidence you were looking for from me. Not for you to believe in a creator. If your response had been I want him to come down and say here I am. Then no I can't do that.
It would have been a lot easier just to say the above from the off instead of the round about way you went about it.