Or d'you reckon we're stuck with them?

a certain percentage of ozzies are wrapped in the comforting arms of religion. they may be boring, and illogical, but they work, raise kids and contribute to the human story- let em have their say, and maybe they'll let you speak too.

i skim bd, and skip gibo entirely, as that's my estimation of how interesting they will be. easy to do, and i keep in mind any number of people have said my contributions have negative value, so why should i, or you, canvass an alternate reality where only smart people like us pat one another on the back?

Botheration,

This is only a guess but the short answer seems to be "yes."

However, mostly it's only one God botherer and he's easily ignored.

Yikes.. Stephen... is that me ?

Actually... why does the mention of our Creator or Christ.. have to automatically mean a thread is 'sidetracked' ? Is it not possible to look at what one says.. or to ignore it altogether and just get on with the subject ?

DEMOS... I'll take that as a challenge "skim" :) and see if I can reach 'rivetted attention' for my posts with you.

I totally fail to see how you can get 'illogical' from what I say, I'd love to see an example and then see just how illogical it is.

I see most things in very simple terms. But not simplistic.

If we are talking about politics.. I see 'people'....and in them I see the fallen human race. Until I see evidence to the contrary that will continue to be my position.

I absolutely assert that the ills we are all discussing are a result of alienation from God... and people can disagree about that, no drama..but it sure is my view.

The ironic thing about this topic.. is that it only exists to fuel the very thing it criticizes :)

On a more serious note..... re the topic.

There are some assumptions in the very title which concern me.

1/ It is suggestive that 'godbotherers' are less valid human beings.
2/ It implies they have nothing useful to contribute.
3/ It suggests that 'non' God-botherers are by default 'correct'.
4/ It suggests non Godbotherers are normal and GB's are subnormal.
5/ Its arrogant.
6/ Its rude.
7/ Its bigoted. "It doesn't matter what you say.. its stupid"

If you want a GB to criticize...by all means look closely at the posts (one in particular) of Webby our new catholic friend... who stated re the Catholic Church "It is the ONE TRUE church" (his emphasis)

Let me leave you all with the words of Jesus on that matter.

Matt 18:20 "For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst."

The only pre-requisite for them gathering in His name is that they know Him, believe in Him and have repented. "Brand"...does not matter.

Botheration, as Boazy has so kindly demonstrated, the answer is probably "yes", unless the rest of us managed somehow to ignore them totally by not responding to their irrelevant drivel. It's an unfortunate aspect of free speech that the idiots have as much right to express their delusions as the rest of us have to express our informed opinions.

I agree that it does get annoying and tiresome when the religious nutters try and hijack virtually every discussion in order to promote their particular brands of mythology or bigotry - particularly when this involves the dissemination of hatred, as with the whack-a-Mozzie brigade. However, I can't see how we could stop them without being as guilty of intolerance as they are.

My response to them is usually either to lampoon them mercilessly, or to ignore them altogether. On reflection, the latter strategy is probably better in terms of staying on topic, but the former is quite fun sometimes.

Botheration, yes they are bothersome but just imagine how bothered god would be by their antics if she existed.

The good side is that having those views on a discussion forum like this where rebuttal (and the much valued lampooning) can occur has it's good points. The thoughtful can see where the messages of hate lead, they can see what happens when people start to get desperate for the supernatural and take it all to seriously.

You never know, some who have been sucked into that stuff may start to question when they see how much of what they are told about non-believers and their values is marketting spin.

R0bert

I don't have a problem with people having belief systems that run their lives.

But the reality is that their god-related opinions make little sense to the rest of us, filtered as they are through the lens of their religion. This is a form of holier-than-thou exclusion, and is so often accompanied by a painful self-righteousness that it is unsurprising that non-GBs become exasperated.

On the occasions when they feel they can contribute without surrounding their pronouncements in the mysterious fog of their belief systems, their opinions are of course as valid as anyone else's.

What does distress me, and causes me to react in print, is when they use their particular religious code as the basis from which to attack other religious codes. For some reason, they tend to do this intemperately, without recourse to logic, and - most often - with malice aforethought.

Even then it isn't the religious bit that hacks me off, but the vitriol with which they attack other belief systems. Without the "protection" they feel their religion provides, they are nothing but foul-mouthed stirrers and trouble-makers.

And Boaz, your protestations are rather disingenuous, to say the least.

>>1/ It is suggestive that 'godbotherers' are less valid human beings.
2/ It implies they have nothing useful to contribute.
3/ It suggests that 'non' God-botherers are by default 'correct'.
4/ It suggests non Godbotherers are normal and GB's are subnormal.
5/ Its arrogant.
6/ Its rude.
7/ Its bigoted. "It doesn't matter what you say.. its stupid"<<

You very carefully, and probably deliberately, miss the point, as always.

None of these objections is valid, except to your own personal paranoia.

What the author points out - and the rest of us readily recognize - is that it doesn't matter where a topic begins, as often as not it will descend into an argument over scriptural interpretation. You yourself cannot resist plonking in irrelevant extracts from the Bible at every turn.

As indeed, you just did.

And since this habit renders the thread of interest only to other godbotherers, we view it as "hijacking", or "sidetracking".

Capeesh?

Not only on this Forum.

I was halfway through reading the first post when there was a knock on the front door.

Opened it and there was the local Jehovah's Witness bloke with their magazine.

Well said Perecles....can't add much to that except..

This is a political and current affairs forum. Religious types constantly assert that they have no part or interest in political affairs, (like The Bretheren) because their persons (and their souls) will be taken care of both in this life, and the next life. Uh huh. By that argument, I can't understand why they bother with this forum. But its a free country....or so I'm constantly told by the pollies. But lets not go into whether we are truly free - I'll get sidetracked into Orwellianism.

Is there an "ignore" button on this forum? If not, why not?

*goes to check it out*

Boaz asks:

"Yikes.. Stephen... is that me ?"

Yep BOAZY, that's you.

But take heart, you are not the only opinionated ignoramus posting here. There are the so-called "progressives" like CJ MORGAN who can be relied upon to hijack any discussion of ISLAM with their screams of "racist" and who dismiss any critic of that IMPERIAL AUTHORITARIAN IDEOLOGY as members of the "WHACK-A-MOZZIE BRIGADE."

We have self-proclaimed atheists who still worship at the altar of the GREAT GOD MARX and whose true religion is simply ANTI-AMERICANISM. Anybody who is agin America must be good they believe. In previous era they would have allied themselves with STALIN but now they're stuck with MUHAMMED.

Then there are the reflexive ISRAEL HATERS and the almost equally obnoxious ISRAEL DEFENDERS.

Come to think of it BOAZY, compared to some of the people here you're ALMOST SANE. I mean I've never seen you post anything quite as OUTRAGEOUSLY DECEITFUL as IRFAN YUSUF'S efforts.

BOAZ_David asks,

"Yikes.. Stephen... is that me ?"

Yep, it's you BOAZY.

But, take heart, you are not the only opinionated jackass posting here. Look at so-called "progressives" like CJ MORGAN. They can be relied upon to hijack any discussion of ISLAM with their screams of "RACIST" and to dismiss critics of that AUTHORITARIAN IMPERIAL IDEOLOGY as members of "the WHACK-A-MOZZIE BRIGADE."

Then we have all the self-proclaimed atheists who still worship at the altar of the GREAT GOD MARX and whose true religion is ANTI-AMERICANISM. If you're agin America you must be good. In a bygone era they would have allied themselves with STALIN. Now they're stuck with the modern trinity of MUHAMMED, FIDEL and CHAVEZ.

There are also the REFLEXIVE ISRAEL HATERS and the almost as obnoxious COMPULSIVE ISRAEL DEFENDERS. Almost any discussion can be hijacked for that agenda.

Come to think of it BOAZY, compared to some of the people posting here you're almost sane.

Poor old Steven's obviously lost it - he's acquired Boazy's intellectual disability to the extent that his textual symptoms are almost indistinguishable. If he'd thrown in a few biblical quotations who could tell the difference?

As a wandering Jew who's had to leave the comforts of Apartheid-era South Africa, only to find that his latest adopted country welcomes all kinds of 'coloured' people, some of whom include his hated Muslims, it's hardly surprising that he'd pop up on a thread such as this.

I don't hijack discussions about Islam and Muslims - however, I often point out obvious xenophobia and bigotry when they raise their ugly heads, as is all too common in this forum. Ditto with racism.

Funny how most of the xenophobes and bigots in this forum are affiliated with religions that just happen to compete directly with Islam, though.

As usual the irreligious nutters show the most intolerance. They are usually tolerant of evil and very intolerant of anything good!

and......CJ Morgan heads the list of reasons why my last post was so accurate.

GBs
-Irrelevant drivel.
-Delusions.
-religious nutters
-hijack every discussion
-mythology or bigotry
-dissemination of hatred.

Well...blow me down... I tawt I saw a puddytat GB hater there in CJ......based on his words.. which are much stronger than those of his despised 'whack-a-mozzie' brigade...and have nothing to do with any argument put forward by we 'GBs' yet he has the gaul and hypocrisy to declare himself as one who holds 'informed opinions' :)

CJ.. you really are totally blind...arn't u ? :).. u just don't see how far gone you really are... next you will be lining we GB's up for the Gulag.. perhaps that pet tiger you are training in that little room with effigys will come in handy soon ? (yep... in this case I am attacking 'you' and quite justified too)

I can actually see how my comments at times would be offensive,... but you ? good grief mate.. you are so wrapped up in your blanky of self righteousness.. up there on Cloud "no contradiction" that you are completely oblvious of your own condition.

You see.. here is the difference. A Christian gives informed opinion... and is condemned for it. Another (you) spews out froth and unending bile which dribbles onto other posters rather than their argument... do you see it ? (where is Pericles' FINGER when I need it?)

If a Muslim or a Hindu or a Socialist or a Green can offer dogmatic opinions.. why not Christians ?

BOAZ_David,

My hat! Here's a first. I find myself more in favour of than against one of your posts.

You posted seven propositions and I found myself agreeing with 4 out of the 7.

Scary.

Yes, I find the godbotherers a big distraction to serious discussion. Their whole belief system is premised on blind faith and there is no way you can conduct a rational discourse with anyone like that.

The sheer hatred and hypocrisy of comments made by BD and others at times is really quite amazing. How they can reconcile that bile with anything that a man called Jesus might have once said is beyond me. And to think they honestly believe that that sort of hatred helps them shore up a place in so-called heaven.

And BD and crew if you think I'm going to get into a debate over anything I've said here you're wrong. I wouldn't waste my time.

As the original poster, I must say I'm totally pumped by how this is going. Despie rumours to the contrary, I love free speech and robust opinions, and I thought my contribution amply demonstrated that.

To address your ideas about the assumptions in my OP Boaz:
1/ It is suggestive that 'godbotherers' are less valid human beings.
No it isn't. Where on earth d'ja get that from?
2/ It implies they have nothing useful to contribute.
Hmm. It doesn't, but it does imply that on this board they often contribute on topics other than that suggested by the original poster.
3/ It suggests that 'non' God-botherers are by default 'correct'.
Huh?
4/ It suggests non Godbotherers are normal and GB's are subnormal.
Okay. This is getting ridiculous.
5/ Its arrogant.
Finally, a bulls eye. It is arrogant.
6/ Its rude.
Again, true. But free speech often is.
7/ Its bigoted. "It doesn't matter what you say.. its stupid"
Wrong. It matters very much what you say. What you say is *everything*. I'm not bigotted against religious types - some of my best friends and all that – but I prefer the reasoned, intelligent vareity. Honestly, I rarely see that on this board, which seems to be a magnet for nutters. That was my observation, as a newbie here, made after I saw one thread too many lost to irrelevancies.

No doubt you will tell me to bugger off if I don't like them apples, and perhaps I will, but just thought it was worth pointing out why I'd be buggering off.

Quite so, Frank!

It occurs to me that Boazy and runner didn't notice that I was actually arguing for their right to dribble in public - thus of course demonstrating tolerance in practice :)

Boazy seems a tad sensitive today. What was it I said about a pill and some quiet time with his imaginary friend?

LOL

I think that CJ Morgan's last outburst about me tells us all we need to know about him.

No, steven. You did in fact, react with your own kind of venom. You even managed to throw in an attack on Irfan Yusuf, despite not being part of the thread at all.
Now there's intolerance. Plus, your shriekings at anyone who would have the temerity to defend islamic moderates kind of seems a little over the top. It's interesting, because while I sometimes disagree with Irfan's posts, they seem to be pretty calmly stated, whereas your objectionable post is up there with the best of them.
It would seem that anyone who disagrees with you is to be shouted down.

Boaz - the point is, you see god as being relevant to everything so you're happy to go off on religious tangents, because to you, it is relevant.

How would you feel for instance, if I took every thread into a discussion about the Easter Bunny, and how it impacts on the topic at hand.
I'm not comparing the easter bunny to god or something like that, just trying to give you an idea that many don't share your belief in god's all encompassing importance.
Thus, when a discussion about something else entirely gets interrupted with biblical passages and religious rhetoric, you may as well just be interrupting each thread with lines from a car manual. It's of about as much relevance and interest to the others here, which is the point another poster made earlier - you can argue that there are others interested in god, fine - but there are plenty who aren't, and those people are having their discussions hijacked.

As for runner's post - it's yet another example of a simple attack on anything that isn't religious, without any substantiation.
Nice illustration.

Christian fundamentalists are part of our society and have a right to their say. Having said that, they seem to be over represented here. Why they've chosen to colonise this place is anyone's guess, but anyone who's been around OLO for a while must have noticed that as the fundies have moved in, others have moved out.

Boazy, you've been here forever. You're part of the furniture. You've seen people come and go over the years so I wonder whether you've noticed the same thing?

Well I dont necessarily think that numbers-wise they are over-represented, but certainly as far as the actual numbers of posts are concerned, then you have a point. TRTL makes a good point about the fact that these people dont think that they are being irrelevent because to them everything is relevant to their religion. But I dont think that this excuses them from quoting bible passages on just about every topic.

Still Gibo is great for a laugh if you are ever feeling a bit questioning about your own sanity, BD has a few reasonable things to say, though I admit to now skim reading to get past most of the religious rot, and runner whilst appearing fairly fundy, doesnt bring every topic he comments on back to God, which is good to see. BD if you have trouble understanding how annoying this can be to most posters, think back a month or more to when PALEIF turned every topic into an animals rights debate (well I am exaggerating on EVERY topic, but I think you'll get my drift).

On line opinion should and does include god botherers ( if you are not bothered now you will be on judgement day). We have the usual fundamental atheist who are happy to demonize everyone who disagrees with them. Somehow they forget and fail to give credit to the fact that most great learning centres in the Western world were started by Christians, many of the great inventions were invented by Christians and countries that adopted Christian principles have prospered much more than any others. The bile coming from these fundamentalist atheist who post on every moral topic surpasses anything ever thrown at them. They quote the likes of the dishonest Dawkins and make up the rules as they go along.

"Irrelevant drivel?" My goodness (or is it Godness or both?).

Speaking of drivel - what makes one sort more relevant than the other?

I suppose the mere mention of the word "God" brings out the "devil" in some people.

But enough of the jokes ... (I was just kidding).

The only way to avoid stepping on toes is to stand still. Religious convictions, if they are convictions, can't be pulled on and off like a pair of boots.

I'm an optimist, who worries a lot. And, I suppose I do look at the world through rose-coloured glasses, but isn't that better than having blinkers on and only seeing what's in front of my own nose?

I've seen enough examples of altruism and sacrifice to live in astonishment at what humans are willing to do for each other, and enough examples of cruelty to despair at what we are capable of doing to each other. The contradictions within human nature are inescapable.

I accept that God's will be done without professing to understand it.
I reject the suggestion that we pray for God to be on our side,
praying instead that we're on the side of God.

The "Godbotherers" don't bother me. I suppose because they argue that the "most acceptable service of God is doing good to man."
We cannot I suppose be certain of that. But we can at least make an informed guess that we've been given a conscience for a reason...

But is prosperity grace, runner? Is it virtue?

Rich man? Eye of needle?

In the 17/10 topic "Two bars in control", CJMorgans sole contribution was a snide attack on another poster. He did not have a single positive thing to say.

The thread was about great songs of the past 25 years, surely an opportunity for something positive from Morgan.

Sums up his contribution to OLO, snide and abusive. Had you tagged months ago Morgan, a hater.

As far as I'm aware, palimpsest, I don't hate anybody or anything. In fact, I don't personally understand that emotion.

However, I do confess to be unenthused by the Wiggles, and thought it absurd to see them mentioned in the context of "great songs of the past 25 years". I'm not sure that constitutes hatred.

And what on earth does it have to do with the issue of godbotherers?

"most great learning centres in the Western world were started by Christians"
Runner, given that all of the western world is Christian, that's not much of a point. Christians have in the past though been responsible for much destruction of learning (and ignorance of it).

"many of the great inventions were invented by Christians" - not necessarily going to argue with you here, as I'm not sure which great inventions you are referring to, but instead make the point that many scientists whose theories allowed these inventions to occur were actually church outcasts (think Newton et al).

"countries that adopted Christian principles have prospered much more than any others" - what about much of Africa (mainly catholic), South America (catholic), Ethiopia (Coptic)? How about you rethink this one

There is something inside us all that causes us to seek the ideals of human character above the fallen state of humanity. From that something we are able to make judgments on others on what we perceive as that perfect image of humanity.

However we all fail to see ourselves as others perceive us. We all prefer to not be classed in the imperfect bunch. Only the honest will confes their shortfall. The fact is we are all among the imperfect.

There is only one who is perfect, but when we met him we consider him also imperfect. Why? Because He does not match us in character and attitude and therefore he does not measure up to how I really want to view the World. The fact is we prefer a little bit of rebellion, rather than conformity to idealism. The fact is God is too pure for how most of us want to live our lives. God Himself bothers us!

FASCINATING......

I read all the posts from my last to this one. I have to underline the thrill of (as one said) a robust discussion. Pity some (un-named) tend to make 'snide and abusive' comments about others rather than address actual issues though 0_-

Botheration. Glad u started the thread.

FRANK.... the crazy thing is.. we actually AGREE on the issue of a more blended Australia.. I express it in rather confrontational terms against the 'MC'ers, because I see 'the emphasizing of difference' as a source of human conflict, and the drawing together of various groups through intermarriage as a good thing...reducing those differences. You said as much in your observation about 3rd gen spouses. All monarchs have married into other royal families to strengthen ties. It's a self evidenct fact of life. I'm thinking you just cannot see past my faith, and then.. in your own mind, connect or associate 'my faith' with a whole stack of negative media generated images. The result being you 'think' you disagree when in reality you don't :)

BRONWYN.. passion...does not equate with 'hate'. Passionate disagreement on issues.. doctrine.. faith.. are part of life. My incontrovertable evidence for LACK of 'hate' toward those I disagree with is found in the thread 'BD and FH meet at maccas' perhaps you didn't see that ? Now.. I offer this as actual evidence...because it was a physical event in the real world. You can stonewall any debate about that as a waste of time, but I strongggggly suggest you are living in a cocoon in doing so :)

WHY DO WE MENTION GOD ?

In terms of solutions to human problems, it is the contention of Christians, (and Muslims by the way) that the source of such problems are found in our alienation from God.

You may confidently interpret ALL we say on the basis of that ONE premise.

OTHER SOLUTIONS. Given the 'glowing' record of human history, and the clear abundance of evidence that most of what happens is of a 'machiavellian' nature, grasping for power etc... it should come as no surprise that we 'G/B's have little confidence in the solutions offered by the natural man.

BUT THEN..... when we mention God...the Almighty, Jesus the Messiah, we do not do so simply as a 'solution to human problems'.
We do it to proclaim the redemption in Christ through repentance and forgiveness that God has offered mankind. "Reconciliation".

IRRATIONAL ?
Contrary to the bigotry of those who claim our faith is irrational, the opposite is the case. If one can find 'irrational' in Pauls 1st letter to the Corinthians chapter 15, please let me know, because it is one of the best argued cases for 'rational' faith I know of.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=53&chapter=15&version=31

PAUL.. went about after his dramatic conversion, "Proving/Proclaiming that Jesus was the Son of God".... in so doing, he met up with the Pericles's and CJ Morgans of his day....There were even the FrankGols :) but Frank is closer to the kingdom than many, because in spite of his determination to disagree...he speaks from a sincere heart from what I can observe.

I hope no-one suggests this thread is being 'hijacked' :)

David

One major difference between us is that I don't think reducing the differences needs to be mandated as public policy. Just let people get on with their lives and they will make contact and negotiate mutually satisfying relationships. The policy of multiculturalism encourages people to explore points in common. That's why I can't understand the virulent opposition to it. The idea that multiculturalism emphasises points of difference is a distortion.

As for me associating your faith with 'a whole stack of negative media generated images', you are now making false assumptions about how I have developed my understanding of 'Christianity' as it is practised. Don't discount my personal experiences and those of the people I associate with, many of whom were violated by priests, clergy and (in one case) nuns.

BOAZ_David

When I referred to hatred in your posts I didn't mean hatred toward other posters, as you know full well, I meant hatred toward specific groups of people. Muslims and refugees come to mind and I'm sure there would be many other examples if I was prepared to trawl through your posts which I most certainly am not.

I was not stonewalling debate in general as this post clearly demonstrates. I was only stating that I wasn't going to enter a debate with you or any other religious fanatic about the veracity or otherwise of any religious claims. You always defend your narrow position from a fundamentalist faith-based perspective that defies all rational argument and I just won't get involved in it.

I will always attack religious zealotry and the misery it causes though at every opportunity. I certainly am not living in a cocoon. That description is far more suited to someone who shields himself in every debate by trotting out extraneous quotes from an irrelevant and antiquated tome. That's stonewalling and cocooning if ever I saw it.

DB, given the "glowing" record of ecclesiastical history, and the clear abundance of evidence that most of what happens is of a 'machiavellian' nature, grasping for power etc... it should come as no surprise that we atheists have little confidence in the solutions offered by religious people.

Nevertheless, us atheists do not attempt to link every topic to the absense of god, or even to the great humanist values of altruism and virtue. I'm sure you find your own religious rhetoric fascinating, but its irrelevance and the way it is occassionally used in the service of mean-spiritedness (see: <http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=1174&page=0#20823>) is driving at least one poster away. Now, I know my absense isn't going to cause general dismay, and driving posters away may in fact be your intention, in which case well done you. (Clearly you're not trying to convert anyone.) But, personally, I think the constant religious intrusions detract from the intellectual integrity of and the search for truth on this board.

I would always, of course, fight for your right to intrude at your will.

God and religion are purely a human invention.............Unless I suppose, you are under the illusion your god talks & listens to you.

runner, I find it interesting you see so many posts as the product of atheists attacking christianity, and you make the point that the western world has arisen from christian tradition.

Nobody is disputing that this is true - but it doesn't need to be proclaimed in every post. Although I'm a secular person, that doesn't mean I'm ungrateful to the christian tradition, I just don't think we need that superstition anymore, and I don't see why we need to proclaim it's greatness at every turn, simply because we arose from it.
By the same token, Christianity was a product of the jewish faith, but I don't insist you proclaim its glory at every opportunity.
I don't actually see as many posts glorying atheism (except from West) as I do extolling the virtues of christianity.

The issue boils down to this - OLO is about discussing a wide variety of topics, but so many end up being about religion, simply because some people can't set their religious aspect aside to discuss other matters. In some cases it may be that their religion infuses every element of their life and they can't separate it, in other cases it may be simple preaching or proselytising. Either way, it interrupts discussion of other matters.

GOOD.... we are actually making some progress here.

Frank... you said:

[The policy of multiculturalism encourages people to explore points in common.]
Then:
[The policy of multiculturalism encourages people to explore points in common. That's why I can't understand the virulent opposition to it. The idea that multiculturalism emphasises points of difference is a distortion.]

Now here is the exact point at which we diverge. I totally accept that MC "SHOULD" be about finding points in common, but that in itself is not adequate. Based on our history we do actually have an identity. But rather than harp on that.. let me just say my primary objective is that we attain an 'Australian' identity.

When you say the MC we are usually attacking is in your understanding a distortion of the real thing, I both agree and disagree. In some cases yes, but there are some principles which irritate the stuffing out of me. I fail to see why in a country where we do have a primary language, and a primary culture (and we do) that our police have to have a book which tells them how to operate differently for each and every culture inhabiting our land. This to me is plain stupidity and is also denying that there is any kind of prevailing culture here.

On the issue of how you formed your views on Christianity.. Frank.. I can see an inkling of where ur coming from there, and thanx for sharing what you did. My standard response is.. don't re-crucify Jesus because of the sins of those naming him as their Lord. Saying 'Jesus is Lord' and living it.. are 2 different things. Thats also the reason I refer and point to scripture as I do.. to get back to the real deal :)

BRONWYN.....
I feel sad that you believe I 'hate' refugees..and Muslims. I've demonstrated in my interaction with FH that I don't hate Muslims and regarding refugees.. what I hate is stupid POLICY which gets us into the mess.. The refugees will take the line of least resistance.. and I admit.. I don't have a lot of sympathy for those who were in Jakarta having a big mac one day and then struggling in a leaking boat the next saying "Oh look at me.. how awful is this". Whats awful is country shopping. But 'hate' ? thats way too strong to attribute to me.

RATIONAL... now..before I finish with you Brony... lets re-visit just for a brief moment your continued assertion that our faith is 'irrational'......
I'd love you to provide actual 'evidence' of this apart from actually 'asserting' it.

A good starting point would be the veracity of Pauls letters and Lukes Gospel and Acts, and the internal and external witness to them in terms of admissable evidence in a court of law.

I've referred to Simon Greenleaf a giant among the legal fraternity, and while I didn't get his background completely correct in a previous post, he nevertheless had the absolute respect of his peers in the Harvard Law school. He (even as a Christian) subjected the New Testament documents to the rules of evidence, and concluded that they were a very strong case. Now..had he simply 'confirmed what he already believed' he would have been ridiculed and become a laughing stock. That he did not....is testimony to his integrity.

So..in the face of the actual evidence (rather than ideological dogma which seems to be where ur coming from)... it is entirely rational and reasonable to believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Now... I don't expect to engage with you in a running battle over this, I simply make the point and leave it with you :)

Until someone can show REAL irrationality in our foundation, I see no reason to adopt a different course.

TRTL

I appreciate that OLO discusses a wide variety of topics. I have been guilty of diverting as have others. Everyone however does come from a viewpoint whether it is biblical, socialism, athieism, communism, feminism, capitalism etc etc. I realise that some have a mixture of world views however the responses from the likes of CJ Morgan, Frankgol and others are just as predictable as myself or others who share a biblical view. I am not ashamed to say that I desire all people to come to salvation in Christ. Rudeness or interrupting others opinions was and never will never my intention.

Boazy: "...I simply make the point and leave..."

If only you would. Then we could get back to talking about intrusive godbotherers, rather than to them :)

Actually, if they just made their point and then left, we wouldn't need to be having this discussion.

BD, I notice you haven't responded to my question. Maybe you missed it so I'll ask again.

Having been around OLO for so long you're in a good position to comment on the commenting community here. I've noticed that as commenters who view everything through a religious lens have moved in to OLO, others have moved out.

You must have noticed that many of your old sparring partners have gone and that there's generally less comment than there used to be. I would like to know whether you've noticed this and what you have to say about the suggestion that it could be because every topic ends up being about religion?

I'm not suggesting that it's the only reason, but I do think it is a factor. What say you?

Hmmm, the multicultural nature of Australian society means that there is no single national identity but a gathering of many cultures, and this is one of the most unique and rewarding aspects of living in Australia. The nature of being Australian is to be part of this diversity. The wide and varied gathering of 'idendities' is in keeping with the sense of potential and openess so many people enjoyed on coming here. My grandparents and parents felt privileged not only to have been able to make a home here but also to have found their own sense of belonging.

As for religion - well, I am reminded of a good Catholic - the friend of a friend - whose chosen epitaph was 'I leave the world as I entered it: bewildered.' I am a hopeful Christian but also an inadequate one, with doubts. I respect other religions because I think they are reaching for the same truth, though from a different angle. But as the Protestant theologian Paul Tillich wrote, "Doubt is not the opposite of faith; it is an element of faith." I like the sound of that.

Foxy

Beautifully put. You are the very reason that, in my original post, I wrote "godbotherers" rather than Christians. Your humble, generous, hopeful version of faith is what I understand as the best of Christianity, because it aspires to be ever better, ever more generous, ever more forgiving, ever less judgmental, ever more humble. It's the "what would Jesus do" version.

So thanks. I'm reminded that not all Christians clearly suspect that other people's world view is less profound than their own.

Wow....:) botheration and foxy... quite a lot to work with there.

FOXY....

>>Hmmm, the multicultural nature of Australian society means that there is no single national identity but a gathering of many cultures,<<

Really ? I'm not sure what you base this on mate..truly. The sense of identity has been evolving.. yes, but there is still a very real sense of being 'Australian' and if you ask many migrants who have been back to the 'old country' that they had idealized ....unTIL they went back to the reality, you would see it.

Approx 70% of Aussies are of the same background (Anglo/Scott/Irish='British') and the rest are a patchwork of small minorities. You don't see any 'single' national identity there?
So, ur statement might apply to the 30% but not the 70%.

After a few generations.. do you really expect people to call themselves Irish or Scottish, or Chinese or Greek ...?... No mate.... they have the same aussie accent as me and possibly you. The only thing indicating their ethnic background might be their surname.
I don't celebrate diversity..I tolerate it. I've lived 'diversity' and it sucks...specially during 'shortages of stapels'. Ever had your water cut off just because you were 'not' of the same ethnicity or religion as the village 200 meters away and thus were 'expendable'?

Ever looked for a job at Siemens and missed because the ethnically controlled Union wanted that job for 'one of them' ?

BOTHERATION. I find it intriquing how people 'project' onto Jesus a personality and behavior that they have decided suits 'them' more than it suited Jesus himself. YES...he was 'gentle and lowly'.. true..but he was ALSO 'passionate' and 'judgmental'... see what he said about the legal fraternity and the religious leaders ?

"you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inside you are full of hypocrisy and lawlessness" (Mat 23:28).

Sounds pretty 'judgmental' to me.... and very rightly so.

BOAZ: "Ever had your water cut off just because you were 'not' of the same ethnicity or religion as the village 200 meters away and thus were 'expendable'? Ever looked for a job at Siemens and missed because the ethnically controlled Union wanted that job for 'one of them' ?"

These situations are in fact more likely to happen to minorities than majorities in any culture. Wasn't it the fact that the "ethnics" had the power at the union that meant they could overlook you? Surely if you have been treated badly by others because of your ethnicity you would learn to empathise with the lot of people who seek to honour their motherland while embracing their adopted home? And if you think believe they should not honour their motherland, but abandon it, are you so sure that if I dropped you in Laos tomorrow you would immediately stop speaking English, abandon all your customs, and intergrate. And if so, why?

About Jesus, you misunderstand me - I don't project a personality onto him. I project it onto the different herds of Christians, whose belief systems are a chimera with no personality but what they bring to it.

Your Jesus, I gather, isn't much fussed by ethnics or refugees (how conincidental that the great man shares your own prejudices!); a white male who feels a bit hard done by, quite frankly. You can keep him. I will still admire Christians like Foxy, but I believe the reality is that Foxy is just a good egg.

I know I'm being rude, and I'm sorry. I know you really believe it's all true, and that your Jesus is flawed because you, like all of us, are flawed. I find my original question has been answered in a profoundly depressing way. Perhaps I should just leave it here.

It seems to me that defining yourself as "informed" and God-botherers as ignorant is, in itself, misinformed.

The degree of God-botheration displayed by a person is only one aspect of their entirety. Some brilliant minds, including Nobel Prize winners, display varying degrees of God-bothering.

Hence, it would depend upon the specific thread that was at issue whether a God-botherer would even want to sidetrack it. On some threads God-botherers and "the rest of us" would concur.

It is our philosophy and thoughts that motivate us to act. Aren't Muslims God-botherers too?

Well said botheration and I tend to agree, though when every fundamentalist has different ideas of the faith, but they all honestly believe they know jesus intimately, how can you disagree?

Dear Boaz David,

It doesn't matter how long you have been here; it doesn't change where you come from. You've always got it in you. It's in the blood.
Can you bring an English bulldog out here and then say when it has pups that they're Australian terriers?

They'd have to be bulldogs.

So of course - we all have our heritage. However, we are all -
Australian - if that's what we feel in our hearts. And, that today -
dear Boaz is what this country is all about.

Oh, and by the way, I was born here - and my accent although not an ocker one - is definitely not a British one either - and I like you calling me 'mate' - that's a good start!

FOXY.. you first.. ur the easy one :)
the offspring of the British Bulldog.. was born in Australia... so he will be an "Aussie" bulldog... and his kids might be terriers or .. just plain terrors...
I want to direct your attention to the 2nd stanza of Dorothea McKella's poem "my country" and take the time to specifically contrast it with the first stanza. You can let me know what you find.

One important aspect of your post is that you DO recognize that people bring their baggage with them.
-Language. (English in 3 major varieties. 'English/Irish/Scottish'.
-Habits. (Shake hands when meet, (not rub noses) etc)

If such a 'cultural' texture takes hold... and without doubt it did, it is absolutely valid and correct to refer to the 'Australian' culture as reflecting those predominant ethno/cultural tributaries, but not any specific one. (But they are close enough to be regarded as one)

BOTHERATION.. ur the hard one :)

"My" Jesus ... is the one of Scripture mate. I'm afraid you cannot isolate particular segements of modern life and 'claim' Jesus for your side in regard to them.

Jesus of Scripture>> 'gave forgiveness to the repentant, and condemnation to the unrepentant'.

Examples:

A)'Woman caught in adultery' "Neither do I condemn you..go and sin NO MORE"

B) Religous leaders/scribes/lawyers

"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.

From this, I conclude that if Jesus were an Immigration officer, he would ask the simple question "How many countries did you passby in order to get to Australia,...and why"?

The answer would reveal if they were genininely seeking safety for their lives or ... a better economic opportunity.(the latter totally disqualifying them from any 'refugee' status)

The only refugees coming here, should be
a) From Indonesia, PNG.. and Tasmania :)
b) Those allocated through the official program.

BOTHERATION continued.

typo "genuinely"

When Jesus said "Give unto Caesar that which is Caesars" he was alluding to the due process of government.

Due process of government regarding 'migrants' of all types (including those seeking a better life and fleeing from political/ethnic/religious persecution) is primarily the peace and good order in Australia. Any deviation from such a policy would inevitably lead (over time) to a weakening of our social/cultural fabric and cohesian (these are the words Arthur Callwell used in his defense of the White Australia policy) to the point of eventual anarchy.
I support Calwells objective, but I don't support it in relation to 'skin color'. I support it in relation to 'values'. (My wife is Asian)

Having said that, I support it in regard to skin color 'to a limited degree' (in conjunction with values)....not because of any special quality that skin color indicates, but simply in terms of maintaining a substantial and observable majority of people who 'feel' they are a part of a particular nation. (they will 'feel' it because they see most people are like themselves)

I urgently suggest to you, that any view to the contrary comes from those who deep down desire the freedom to re-shape the country in terms of a particular racial or cultural flavor different from that which now exists.

IMPORTANT CONCLUSION. I believe the government is responsible to control the numbers of migrants SUCH that no one minority ever becomes a 'significant' and possibly competitive minority.
If you wish to see the result of NOT following such an enlightened policy, I invite you to talk to Malaysian Chinese, (35%) and ask how they are treated by Malays (50%)
Here is one example.. enjoy. (the people being harrassed are chinese Uni Students. the "Harassers" are Malays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0y__XwUi4Wo

Er, I don't suppose it's worth pointing out that our most recalcitrant godbotherer has just attempted to sidetrack this thread into another of his obsessions - i.e. his disdain for refugees. There's several other current threads discussing refugee-related issues, but Boaz wants to divert this thread into being another one - presumably as an effort to stop us talking about him.

Boazy, we're talking about the annoying habit that many godbotherers - particularly you - have of diverting any and every discussion into a venue for pushing their religious beliefs. If you can't stay on topic, please bugger off to the discussions where the topics you want to prattle on about are being discussed.

Dear Boaz David,

A bulldog is a bulldog, and a terrier is a terrier, is a terrier.
I won't argue with you anymore - we can agree to disagree. Each of us speaks from our own experiences, education, and point of view. Australia to you represents one thing, to me it represents something else. But that's the great thing about this country - we can think differently. And no matter what you or I think - things will take care of themselves with time. The only constant is afterall - change.

Thank you for drawing my attention to "My Country." (I studied Australian Literature at uni). That particular poem still manages to bring a lump to my throat - reading it.

Now, here's a little 'ditty' for you:

'Buying bread from a man in Brussels,
He was six foot four and full of muscles.
I said, "Do you speak-a my language?"
He just smiled and gave me a vegemite sandwich.'
Men at Work.

There is nothing more Australian than spending time in someone else's
country.

Dear Botheration,

I meant to thank you for your kind words and I apologise that we have side-tracked your thread a bit here. But, as you can see - it's really brought out a lot of different points of view. And that's a good thing.

Hi_Foxy...

In the light of your last 2_posts...I'm not sure that we are in disagreement... just (like the Gospels) different perspectives on the same issues?

Lump in the throat? me 2.. I had an interview with the AFP last year, (in connection with some not so veiled threats towards me) and when I mentioned that poem..I could not speak for a bit.. the 2 officers were also on the verge of the same thing.

But your post makes my point... that 'lump' in the throat/heart.. is about being 'Australian' as opposed to 'British/Irish/Scottish' (2 of those are my own background) its that point where it dawns on us...(like it did for Mckellar) that we are no longer 'Scottish' or 'English'.....but 'Australian'....
The sum total of my views can be seen in that thing alone.. and.. true to the topic :) and to keep Morgan happy.. I'll put on my GB mantle for a moment and express this thought Biblically.

Galatians 3:28
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Placing this sentiment in a nationalistic context.

For Australia.. there is neither Scot nor Greek, Jew nor Gentile... we are all one ..Australians.

Did you notice by the way..how Morgan completely skewed my post from 'controlled numbers' of refugees to "BOAZ has disdain for refugees"

It's worth observing that little habit of his. He also seeks to tag me with "Criticizing Islam=Hates all Muslims".

But.. God loves Morgan as much as anyone... and I pray that he will one day (as you all) come to know the forgiving grace in Christ.
In a perfect world...the Emperor would not need to bear the sword.. but in this real world.. he does need it... and the Bible recognizes this.

Discussing the "Emporer's" policy or recommending changes in it.. is part of the Christians life as well as for non Christians.
Sadly, there are those around us who will latch onto anything we say and try to twist it into some 'anti' Christian/God/Christ/Christian verbal convenience.

Boazy: "Did you notice by the way..how Morgan completely skewed my post from 'controlled numbers' of refugees to 'BOAZ has disdain for refugees' ".

I guess that's because earlier today, on a thread that's actually about refugees, he quite blatantly implied that refugees are likely to be paedophiles - and then scuttled off to this thread when called on it. Implying that someone is a paedophile counts as disdain in my book.

"But.. God loves Morgan as much as anyone..."

Oh bugger off, you insufferable godbotherer. We're talking *about* you in his thread, not *to* you.

CJ.... Its sunday morning... I will be heading off to a joyful fellowship.. and asking my brethren in Christ to pray for you :) (among others)

As I said.. I did not intend to imply 'refugees are paedophiles' that would be quite far from the usual tone and mood I bring to such discussions. Hence I apologised for apparently creating that impression.

Still.. it doesn't matter whay I say, you always 'see things differently' from many others... so.. all I can do is 'suffer' your insufferable anti godbothering rants :)

Hope your day is as pleasant as mine will be.. (including the rain right now)
cheers and peace

Boazy: "...that would be quite far from the usual tone and mood I bring to such discussions"

Yeah right, Boazy. I can't imagine you gratuitously vilifying anybody, ever.

Ooh look - there's those flying pigs again!

CJMorgan

I'm torn between laughing at your wit and crying at your stupidity!

Each post you direct towards our resident godbotherer seems to invite another stream of biblical quotes.

Ah well, I guess the laugh is a good antidote and I've always got the scroll down button.

Indeed Bronwyn. I guess it comes from having both a sense of humour and a masochistic streak :)

Galafreians 13.10
He who giveth Humour and also enjoys the Pain others giveth him is doubly blessed, and shall be the savior of the online Meeting Place, and shall battle with one who claimeth to know Me, but who does not know Me. For he (um, that's the on who claimeth to know Me) is a Botherer of God, and shall knoweth My wrath on Judgement Day, when I shalll dress him up in Ladies Clothes, and dunk him in Jelly.

If you guys want an example of what REAL God botherers are like download this:

http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/images/libimages/307.pdf

Quote from page 4:

"And if he apostatises after that, his head should be chopped off, according to the Hadith:

"'Whoever changes his religion, KILL HIM'[emphasis added].

"Fatawa Islamiyah - Islamic Verdicts, volume 5;

"Found at the East London Mosque; the London Central Mosque and Islamic Centre (the ‘Regent’s Park Mosque’)."


I've done a brief analysis on my experimental website. See:

http://www.stevenlmeyer.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=1

and

http://www.stevenlmeyer.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=1

I suppose that after reading this some apologist for Islam will jump up and say "Well the Christians used to burn heretics at the stake."

True, they did.

But they don't anymore.

Nor do they distribute literature calling for the execution of heretics.

You're obsessed, Steven.

Just what we need - a Jewish Boazy. Gawd help us.