Kay,

Re: Intolerance - Once you will know the truth you will understand how I feel. Don’t judge me by ‘how’ I come across on these pages bur “what” my message is.

Faustino,

Thailand is a nice peaceful country sadly drifting away into oblivion, compliments of the Selfish Buddhism.

I was overwhelmed to note the contrast between the opulent riches of the temples and the ruins and rat-infested surrounding tin huts people live in.

Drugs and prostitution is rife. I have seen (with tears in my eyes) 7 year-old girls and boys going with old men for less than a dollar.

Unwanted babies are found in rubbish bins. Aids is rampant. Blank faces everywhere. Beggars crawling in market places.

The Islamic revolt is bubbling in the south. Mosque minarets already share Bangkok’s city backdrop. (no surprises there).

Good Christian work is being done in the Slums. Lives are being transformed.

I agree with BD, Jesus is what Thai people desperately need.

Mhoram,

“Coach: Do U really think U are entitled to force yr religious views on others? Such strategies have never worked (cf. USSR, Roman Empire, both tried this against Christians; English tried against RCs, etc etc).”

Have you heard of freedom of expression?

I am not forcing anything. I am just exposing the One and Only Truth. It’s up to people like you to sift through the facts and discover (it) for yourselves.

The Alchemist,

Your lack of understanding of spiritual matters has pushed you in your comfortable little intellectual box.

Like some others here you use the words Christianity and Religion interchangeably (conveniently and/or out of ignorance), lumping it all in one religious sack, therefore reinforcing your narrow view of life.

What you are lacking is the spiritual dimension needed to express your lack of. You cannot possess that lingo without being in touch with your supreme creator (God). To do that you need Faith of course. Faith will only be awarded to you if you drop your puffed up ego and submit to your Lord and ask Him for faith.

Until then all communication will remain gibberish.

PK what would you have David do? Argue for the truth but don't mention Jesus. Argue for the truth but not for one religion as more true than another. Argue for the truth but "don't use your annoying Bible because I prefer my sacred texts to yours".

I get the feeling Christian positions on things you take as a kind of propaganda. David knows what he is saying but often non-Christians in here don't realise their own assumptions, don't realise they begin from a scientifically unprovable first premise too. The difference is David knows what he is saying but for otheres their beliefs have been taken for granted so long that they don't know that what they say sounds like propaganda to a Christian. (Who hasn't the benefit of a sympathetic surrounding culture that allows our world view to go unchallenged)

I'd find David hypocritical if he didn't cite scripture to support his arguments. Or even use the Word of God as a stand alone when necessary. Most know what Christ stood for (I hope) and can easily access his words.

If David is pontificating why not confront him with Jesus' words?

Martin, your post is nonsense. You are saying in effect that I can only argue with David (and by extension, other christians) by using bible quotes. That is not so. My position is that all this Christian proselytising from David, you and others is boring and often, as observed by others in this thread and elsewhere, degenerates into an intolerant anti-Muslim stance. I don't see it as propaganda, it is just transparent intolerance. It doesn't matter whether Christians quote the Bible in their posts or not as far as I am concerned. Such quotes can only ever be regarded as selective, and that is a big part of the problem. I would like to see some refreshing new insights whether from Christians or others. Judging from your post, you are probably not capable of questioning your own views, or those of fellow Christians such as David, so all that we will ever hear is more of the same. And by the way, Boaz-David must be the most prolific poster on matters in any way connected with religion, he doesn't need your clumsy attempts to argue on his behalf.

From Coach's 13 March post, it seems that the faith-less might be in some sort of a quandry regarding choice.
Of those currently ready to run in the faith stakes, which horse should they back in this betting-ring of life?
The one bred-and-trained by the delightful Taoists - galloping under the colours of absolute sincerity and honesty?
Perhaps the one ridden by a jockey wearing Buddhist saffron, and bearing the slogan " harm not your fellow creatures" might appeal.
Should they put their money of the rider with the Atheist slogan "do good, for good is good to do, spurn bribe of heaven and threat of hell".
Ah, there are several that might appeal to those in need of faith; an apeal relevant to those who would seek a more civilised world for themselves and their descendants.
For the more warlike, the choice becomes wider: "There is but one God, and Allah is his prophet"; "Onward Christian soldiers, marching as to war"; and others of equal intolernce.

Martin, unlike PK I very much appreciate your posts, all the way from america? Your positions are well researched and well thought out, unlike those of your detractors. I am sure radio national does not regularly have any of these posters on their programs!

"Judging from your post, you are probably not capable of questioning your own views" PK, the fool, seems unaware that you have questioned Islam (your original religion) and found it wanting to a ridiculous degree, whereas you have found the truth in Christianity. The posters here often presume extremely strange things regarding the Christian posters, an example is that they are unable to see that some religionists are not brought up that way and have turned to religion to fill something missing in the wider intelectual culture. These religionists are condemned as brainwashed from birth, despite the fact that many have claimed, usually on other threads but do we need to spell it out at the beginning of every post, that they have found secular culture stultifying and inane. The most laughable postition of all, in my view, is the common assertion that all religions are the same, based on superstition, and unreasonable.

One has to wonder at the lack of basic understanding not only of religion but of history and philosophy, that these posts illistrate. Posters often seem unaware that their own views are as faith bound as those of the religionist. It is amusing to note that despite science admitting that science is faith bound, as all knowledge must be, the great unwashed continue to believe that knowledge based in science is based in truth. The one thing that I have found in this forum is that the terminology 'great unwashed' is truly alive and well, so many in our cultures seem unaware of their ignorance, and if aware, proud of it (anti-intelectual thread just started).

Faith Stakes

Perhaps the one ridden by a jockey wearing Buddhist saffron, and bearing the slogan " harm not your fellow creatures" might appeal. This option is also essentially atheist and if enforced at a government level would end in similar tragic losses for the 'greater good' as did/does communism. What is the bigger problem, deaths of insects, or death and poverty for humans? both are the same on this understanding.

Should they put their money of the rider with the Atheist slogan "do good, for good is good to do, spurn bribe of heaven and threat of hell". And become, logically, communists who support sacrifice for 'the greater good' - what value is there in one human life in this system? None, only the community matters.

For the more warlike, the choice becomes wider: "There is but one God, and Allah is his prophet"; agreed, if you choose this you threaten all western traditions, most expecially democracy

"Onward Christian soldiers, marching as (off) to war"; and prevent the disolution of our democratic way of life, which evolved from Christian morality.