About
Contact
Advertise

Facebook
Twitter

January 2, 2014 8:00am by Kokila Patel

General Debate 2 January 2014

Email
Facebook
Twitter
Comment200

Uncategorized
General Debate

Comments (200)

Login to comment or vote

Chuck Bird

$300 ‘carrot’ to quit smoking

The Counties Manukau District Health Board is giving vouchers at one week, four, eight and 12 weeks after a woman’s quit-smoking date if she remains smokefree, verified by tests on a machine that measures carbon monoxide.

The vouchers are offered to Maori and Pacific women up to 28 weeks pregnant who live in Manurewa, where the DHB says there are around 370 “smoke-exposed” births a year.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/lifestyle/news/article.cfm?c_id=6&objectid=11180347

This racially discriminatory policy has been approved by the Counties Manukau District Health Board. The majority do not appear to be Maori or PI so I hope we do not comments condemning this policy can be directed and them and the government who appointed many of them rather than Maori in general. Why should races other than Maori and PI be discriminated against?
9 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 2:29pm
Reid

Wat can read the bible and it backs his assertion

No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FgtOIdswMXg
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 2:33pm
Harriet

Don’t be an imbecile Harriet
You are making up stuff again.

———————

All scientists look at the universe from the creation point of view.

Not one scientist looks at it from the view that it has always existed.

Everyone here would agree on that I would think Richard.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 2:34pm
Sofia

A religious thread would be nice.

This has been suggested several times since when it was actually tried, and that was may be four years or so ago.

The fact it doesn’t work relates in part to some statements made here are not for the religious reasons they pose, but because they are otherwise motivated.

An example, that occurs here time to time, usually begins –
Good moaning Kiwibloggers, have you seen this?

It then purports to be an alert to an issue of corruption. local affairs dishonesty, or the elite oppressing the poor of Auckland, especially if they use water.

But it is really about “look at how important and invaluable I am” and then the perpetrating magpie flits on to shit in another nest.
No matter how derogatory any response may be, the initial commenter
usually concludes –

You have no idea how much you have made my day 🙂

In fact the shittier any derogatory response is, the greater is her day made, because being noticed is the payoff.

And so to any religious ‘general’ debate – many comments on religion have so little to do with religion, such a religious debate falls flat on its face, just as a whistle-blowers anti-crusaders ‘general’ debate would also die on the spot.

So have a nice day, you have really made mine 🙂
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 2:39pm
RichardX

Harriet (3,317 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 2:34 pm
All scientists look at the universe from the creation point of view.
Not one scientist looks at it from the view that it has always existed.
Everyone here would agree on that I would think Richard.

The fact that the universe did not always exist in its current form is not the creation point of view
The creation point of view is that it was created by an entity such as a creator
The give away is the word creation
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:01pm
MH

Another DHB smoke screen..
I could give the above response a tick but then that would be affirmation that has to be ignored for the good of ones own ego and we don’t dare to look at this post again,not even to check spelling. All comments are submitted anyway by a submitter.
Click boots to Edit
0 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:03pm
Andrei

Lol Chuck – from your link

Women smokers are being offered vouchers for up to $300 if they quit while pregnant, because of the damage a mother’s tobacco use can do to an unborn baby.

How many ~~fetuses~~ unborn babies does that self same DHB damage by dismembering them in their own mothers womb?

But then again “progressives” are not noted for rational thinking – in fact they are nuts
4 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:10pm
Zapper

It’s not just a racist programme Chuck, it’s sexist too. We all know how much damage a father can do by smoking around his pregnant wife.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:15pm
RichardX

Reid (14,576 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 2:33 pm
Wat can read the bible and it backs his assertion
No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

I haven’t listened to your specific video but will later if time allows
It comes down to the individual’s interpretation of a copy of a translation of a translation of a copy of an ancient text
Or will you assert that your interpretation is the only true and correct way to interpret what is written?

No wonder the various sects of Christians cannot get their story straight on what it all means
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:25pm
prinCamLot

New Thread

Could we also have a Political Islam thread since this is highly likely to be the next big – and continuing – thing in the New Zealand – we do not escape Islam because we’re ‘down under’ (and I can’t wait for David to delete this post! 🙂 ).
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:34pm
MH

God was procurred by the National Party back in 67 based on a 51% moral shareholding,however a CIR initiated by labour meant that it had to be devolved into SOE’s in the great schism of 86. Maori were consulted and ratafied the deal. Most churches are now occupied by bingo operators. They are now operating at a false prophet although some are down on their knees led by the dual atheist and CCP agnostic Colin Craig.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:49pm
Reid

Or will you assert that your interpretation is the only true and correct way to interpret what is written?

I haven’t given you an interpretation so how do you know what “my interpretation” is?

No wonder the various sects of ~~Christians~~ atheists cannot get their story straight on what it all means…
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 3:55pm
RichardX

Reid (14,577 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 3:55 pm

I haven’t given you an interpretation so how do you know what “my interpretation” is?

I don’t care what your interpretation is
Is it the only true & correct one?
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:02pm
Andrei

More hand wringing from the ardent secular – do progressives actually believe the utter tosh they write?

Christianity dominates the United Nations and more diversity is needed to increase non-Christian representation in world peacemaking, according to a study.
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:03pm
Pete George

Reid, see what you think of this: The meaning of life.

If it doesn’t play first time keep trying until it works. As per your suggestion at 2.33 don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.
1 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:05pm
edhunter

Maybe it’s just me but I’m yet to meet the atheist/christian who upon being told they were wrong by the otherside suddenly said “You know you’re right, I was blind but now can see. Thank Kiwiblog for showing me the errors of my way” Yet time & time again it’s the usual suspects peddling the’re brand of the truth.
Christians if you want to change someone go do the door knocking thing, I hear it works really well.
Atheists don’t be so bloody smug, you don’t have all the answers & neither does science.
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:21pm
Rowan

Sigh
Without Kea and Big Blouse I would have thought the religous hate pieces totally unneccessary. We all have freedom of choice and don’t need condemenation for it, i.e. hate columns from atheists or bible bashing from christians.
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:26pm
SGA

edhunter at 4:21 pm

you don’t have all the answers & neither does science.

The neat thing about science is that not only does it not have all the answers, but it also keeps finding new questions.
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:28pm
edhunter

I agree SGA, but then I just watched a document about some “scientists” searching Mt Ararat (again) for the ark. So just because you’re a scientist doesn’t mean you can’t have faith.
If Mt Ararat is the answer what was the bloody question?
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:34pm
Reid

Is it the only true & correct one?

I have no confidence that it is, since the Bible is so nuanced and complex that every time you read it you uncover new layers of meaning. Why do you ask? Do you hallucinate that being dogmatic about the bible is a typical Christian trait? If so I have to tell you I’ve never met a Christian who claims their interpretation is “the only true and correct one” but I’ve a lot of people who know nothing whatsoever about Christianity or about Christians who hallucinate they’re all like that, to a man. You’re not one of those, are you Richard?

The neat thing about science is that not only does it not have all the answers, but it also keeps finding new questions.

So does Christianity. Ever heard of theology?
0 5
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:38pm
wat dabney

ed,

I think you’ll find that a central point of atheism is that science certainly doesn’t have all the answers, but that inventing magical animals in such cases explains precisely nothing.

And if anyone’s being smug here it’s you with your I’m-above-all-this twattery.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:38pm
SGA

Don’t know, I didn’t see the documentary. More important, yes, scientists are hindu, jewish, muslim, christian, non-religious, and buddhist (I assume, never met one first hand, but I don’t see why not). That’s way I find the science is a religion schtick that appears from time to time a bit silly.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:41pm
RichardX

Reid (14,578 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 4:38 pm
Is it the only true & correct one?
I have no confidence that it is, since the Bible is so nuanced and complex that every time you read it you uncover new layers of meaning. Why do you ask? Do you hallucinate that being dogmatic about the bible is a typical Christian trait? If so I have to tell you I’ve never met a Christian who claims their interpretation is “the only true and correct one” but I’ve a lot of people who know nothing whatsoever about Christianity or about Christians who hallucinate they’re like that. You’re not one of those, are you Richard?

We have already established that you think I hallucinate and I think you are delusional
I just wanted to know if you are unsure of the true interpretation, how you can claim my more literal reading is wrong
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:42pm
edhunter

Snap! consider my level of smugness reduced by a couple of notches.
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:50pm
Reid

I just wanted to know if you are unsure of the true interpretation, how you can claim my more literal reading is wrong

Because, duh, understanding is not a binary concept. You have a road to understanding not an on-off switch. And if I’m further along the road to accurate understanding than you are, it stands to reason I’m more likely to be accurate in my current interpretation than you are in yours, doesn’t it.

It’s not rocket science, is it.
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:53pm
Steve (North Shore)

Sofia @ 2.39

A religious thread would be nice.

This has been suggested several times since when it was actually tried, and that was may be four years or so ago.

The fact it doesn’t work relates in part to some statements made here are not for the religious reasons they pose, but because they are otherwise motivated.

An example, that occurs here time to time, usually begins –
Good moaning Kiwibloggers, have you seen this?

It then purports to be an alert to an issue of corruption. local affairs dishonesty, or the elite oppressing the poor of Auckland, especially if they use water.

But it is really about “look at how important and invaluable I am” and then the perpetrating magpie flits on to shit in another nest.
No matter how derogatory any response may be, the initial commenter
usually concludes –

You have no idea how much you have made my day

In fact the shittier any derogatory response is, the greater is her day made, because being noticed is the payoff.

And so to any religious ‘general’ debate – many comments on religion have so little to do with religion, such a religious debate falls flat on its face, just as a whistle-blowers anti-crusaders ‘general’ debate would also die on the spot.

So have a nice day, you have really made mine

Seems many are afraid of losing their virtual audience. Us HEATHENS just scroll through so we don’t read the content.
It is a mini religious circle jerk with the same few trying to outdo each other – pathetic
4 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:57pm
kowtow

Excellent piece on Afghanistan by Max Hastings…….

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2525463/Afghanistan-war-Max-Hastings-Mr-Cameron-deluded-The-tragic-truth-Britain-accomplished-NOTHING-Afghanistan.html

MT Ararat…….

interesting how our secular world is so fond of using biblical symbolism…..the dove and the olive branch….almost universally a symbol for peace ,following a disaster……nice!

….yet the Wats and nasskas are full of bitterness ,hatred and bile and take only the negative from these great texts…
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 4:58pm
Steve (North Shore)

Even Pete George @ 4.05 is instructing people what to do.
“As per your suggestion at 2.33 don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.”
Who the fuck are you Pete George? to tell someone they must listen before replying?
You are as bad as the devil dodgers – fuck off to your own blog if you want control
0 6
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:01pm
Manolo

Rain or shine, cold or hot, AGW is responsible for all:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/environment/climatechange/10546128/Worlds-climate-warming-faster-than-feared-scientists-say.html
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:11pm
Steve (North Shore)

Now, just for something different, has anyone seen or heard from Len Brown?
What is he up to, what is he doing? Who’s money is he spending?

Sorry, wrong Blog
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:15pm
kowtow

Irony alert
Steve North Shore bemoans PG telling people what to do ……and then concludes by,yep, telling him what to do!!!!
7 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:15pm
Steve (North Shore)

I’m good eh kowtow lol.
At least I don’t do it all day, every day
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:16pm
RichardX

Reid (14,579 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 4:53 pm
Because, duh, understanding is not a binary concept. You have a road to understanding not an on-off switch. And if I’m further along the road to accurate understanding than you are, it stands to reason I’m more likely to be accurate in my current interpretation than you are in yours, doesn’t it.
It’s not rocket science, is it.

It could be argued that understanding is a binary concept. Either you understand something or you don’t but in one thing you are correct. It is not rocket science
In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion

Apologies to the rest of the kiwibloggers
I do find it interesting to try to understand what people believe and why and fully accept that no amount of evidence or reasoned argument will change an individuals belief
I’m afraid the second comment of the day had a religious bent to it and things went downhill from there
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:19pm
Reid

In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion

Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is. So it’s only opinion if you want to claim it is for your own purposes.

I’d suggest Richard given my journey of understanding started where you are currently at, with a literal interpretation, then on any “scientific” basis my understanding is almost certainly more accurate than yours.

I realise that’s inconvenient, but nevertheless that’s really where it lies, in the real world, where facts and science lives.
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:25pm
Pete George

And I was taking the piss, reid has a habit of instructing not to comment until reading or listening to something.

No one is supposed to comment on the Bible unless they’ve read it more than a hundred times. We could make that a blog rule, it might help.

“the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is” – so you can make up your own mind anyway.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:33pm
Gulag1917

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ooo5UgZUeTA
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:39pm
Steve (North Shore)

Tahi, Rua, Toru, Wha.
On the fence again
Just can’t wait to get on the fence again
The life I love is bullshiting with my friends
And I can’t wait to get on the fence again

Read more: Willie Nelson – On The Fence Again Lyrics | MetroLyrics
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:39pm
Reid

reid has a habit of instructing not to comment until reading or listening to something

No I do it occasionally normally when religion is under discussion by someone clearly ignorant. Perhaps I say it to Pete more often than I do to others. Go figure.

“the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is”

Which it is, Pete. All 774,000 words of it. I realise you find that confusing. Rest assured, others won’t.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:46pm
Pete George

Sounds like Steve is caught in barbed wire.

Reid – no, I don’t find it confusing knowing that people get 774,000 interpretations out of the 774,000 words.

If they get something out of it for themselves, good for them. If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 5:53pm
Dean Papa

“If they get something out of it for themselves, good for them. If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.”

More than that, it is arrogant.

Discussion question for the Christian fundies: Is arrogance a sin?
4 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:01pm
Reid

If they try and claim some superior knowledge or ability due to their particular interpretations then it looks silly.

And who does that, Pete? Or do you hallucinate a discussion of religious accuracy is “claiming superior knowledge” and if so, do you also hallucinate that when someone explains, say, the theory of relativity and if so, why?

Discussion question for the Christian fundies: Is arrogance a sin?,

Of course. It’s called pride. Why?
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:01pm
wat dabney

kowtow,

“yet the Wats and nasskas are full of bitterness ,hatred and bile and take only the negative from these great texts…”

That you admit the Bible contains what you euphemistically call “negatives” is to concede the entire case. If every word of it is not the height of moral goodness then it has no authority whatsoever; at which point you are left to pick the good bits out of it just like any other book. In which case you are no longer taking guidance from the Bible, since you are applying your own judgement to decide what is good in it and what is bad.

Finally you get the point.

(For the moment we’ll ignore the fact that what you quaintly term “negatives” in reality is untrammeled barbarity, cruelty, merciless ethnic cleansing and the murder of just about everone in the whole world.)
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:03pm
Dean Papa

Bible course at Yale, there’s also one for New Testament

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mo-YL-lv3RY&list=PLV16HQsVJXeLGq3IE2XkPkee5WGka9wvS
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:04pm
RichardX

Reid (14,580 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 5:25 pm
In fact, it is not science at all which means your opinion has as much validity as any other individuals and without facts, evidence or the application of scientific theory, it remains an unprovable opinion
Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is. So it’s only opinion if you want to claim it is for your own purposes.
I’d suggest Richard given my journey of understanding started where you are currently at, with a literal interpretation, then on any “scientific” basis my understanding is almost certainly more accurate than yours.
I realise that’s inconvenient, but nevertheless that’s really where it lies, in the real world, where facts and science

A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.
To paraphrase, you only claim your understanding is any more accurate for your own purposes and it is an unprovable statement for which you are unable to provide evidence or proof
I am not inconvenienced by the fact that in the real world of maths and science, evidence and proof are important and all you have been able to provide are your assertions
To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:05pm
kowtow

Faaark ,for people who claim to not want religion on GD you boys do a great job of filling GD with religion…..
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:08pm
RF

Might pay to Lock up your children in the West Auckland area. An attempted abduction with a lucky break for the child. Dare I ask if the Police have any idea who the offender might be. I.e. Age, race etc…. I now wait for the do gooders and hand wringers to give me the thumbs down.
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:11pm
Manolo

Bongiorno bambino: http://money.cnn.com/2014/01/01/news/companies/fiat-chrysler/
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:14pm
Reid

A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.

Actually, your understanding of maths grows over time as each concept builds on the other.

Same with Shakespeare.

Same with the Bible.

Same with everything else whether it’s a scientific paper, a novel or the Bible.

To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion

Only in your mind Richard, and you might want to ask yourself what it is inside you that makes you so resist simple logic on this one particular book and not on others. For example would you deny Shakespeare follows the same process? A literal reading of Shakespeare yields no understanding whatsoever but the more you understand human nature the more it reveals in each and every sentence. Perhaps I used a confusing analogy with maths, given that math really is binary, but it still has steps along which your understanding progresses. And lets face it, a literal reading is always the first step, no matter what you’re looking at.
3 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:20pm
kowtow

wart

Among other things, I take the OT to be a history of the Jewish people .Being a history it will be full of the whole expanse of human existence……good bad and in between…..Even the NT has much such in terms of the human experience.

You sir, are as fundamentalist in your hatred and negative interpretation of the Bible as the most recalcitrant fundamentalist Christian you are so quick,and happy , to condemn.

In other words you are also a bigot,only a secular one.
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:21pm
Manolo

A clown, a very rich clown, who should be deported:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/9570148/Fireworks-and-Dotcom-a-good-mix
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:29pm
nasska

Alas poor Wat….condemned as a secular bigot for bringing much needed balance to these forums.
1 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:30pm
RichardX

Reid (14,583 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 6:20 pm
A pointless discussion as previously stated with no expectation of changing your belief but maths books do not require interpretation. You either understand the provable, repeatable mathematical concept or you do not.
Actually, your understanding of maths grows over time as each concept builds on the other.
Same with Shakespeare.
Same with the Bible.
Same with everything else whether it’s a scientific paper, a novel or the Bible.
To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion
Only in your mind Richard, and you might want to ask yourself what it is inside you that makes you so resist simple logic on this one particular book and not on others. For example would you deny Shakespeare follows the same process? A literal reading of Shakespeare yields no understanding whatsoever but the more you understand human nature the more it reveals in each and every sentence. Perhaps I used a confusing analogy with maths, given that math really is binary, but it still has steps along which your understanding progresses. And lets face it, a literal reading is always the first step, no matter what you’re looking at.

Now you have changed your argument
Maths was not a confusing analogy but an inaccurate one
8 different mathematicians will not give you 8 different interpretations of the same theory or principle
8 different scientists will not give you 8 different interpretations of the theory of relativity
As you have agreed, 8 different theologians or even everyday Christians can give you 8 different interpretation of the same passage

I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs. I resist your logic because it is flawed
3 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:32pm
Manolo

What a beast! Will she be on the DPB?
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/crime/news/article.cfm?c_id=30&objectid=11180346

A woman arrested for drink-driving with two small children in the car had one of the highest breath-alcohol levels recorded in New Zealand – and might have consumed the equivalent of 25 drinks or more.

The 29-year-old was described by police as an “incredibly dangerous driver”. She blew 1568 micrograms per litre of breath – nearly four times the 400mcg legal limit for adults.
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:34pm
wat dabney

“In other words you are also a bigot”

A “bigot” apparently is someone who condemns barbaric acts of cruelty, mass murder, numerous forms of brutality, ethnic cleansing etc.

Who knew?

What, then, do we call someone who doesn’t condemn such evil acts.

A “Christian”, apparently.
1 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:37pm
Reid

Now you have changed your argument

How?

I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs.

Our discussion got started by your hallucinating the Bible says “x” and my response was, no, it doesn’t, it says “y.” That’s not telling people how to live, that’s an academic discussion to which you still haven’t made a response.

And what’s wrong with that?
4 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:41pm
Johnboy

Dotcom should be deported on his BMI alone Manolo!

In fact he should never have been given entry in the first place!

Unless he pays for a new hospital of course! 🙂
1 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:54pm
Johnboy

Everyone has their price and Godzones seems to be very cheap! 🙂
2 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:56pm
RichardX

Reid (14,584 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 6:41 pm
Now you have changed your argument
How?
I agree that Shakespeare is open to interpretation and I have no problem with that because people do not use Shakespeare for the justification on how they live their lives or how they want others to live theirs.
Our discussion got started by your hallucinating the Bible says “x” and my response was, no, it doesn’t, it says “y.” That’s not telling people how to live, that’s an academic discussion to which you still haven’t made a response.
And what’s wrong with that?

The bible specifically states X, you delusionally claim this to be interpreted as Y
You have nothing but your assertion that your interpretation is correct
We disposed of the logically flawed maths and science equivalency and we are back at the starting point that all works of fiction can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret them
The problem with different interpretations of the bible is that the impact of different interpretations is far greater than any other book
No one has; killed anyone, started a war, imposed their will on others, made judgements on lifestyle choices, etc, etc because they interpreted Shakespeare in a different manner
2 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:56pm
Johnboy

JK and Bill set this one…..so come in boy’s and tell us how you would have done it differently with hindsight? 🙂
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 6:58pm
Johnboy

Jesus …..RichardX is morphing into a quadratic equation! 🙂
3 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:00pm
Steve (North Shore)

Hey Johnboy,
those virtual sheep you mentioned the other day; do the have a ‘mute’ button?
Like the neighbours around here are a bit strange (middle earth north shore)
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:06pm
Johnboy

The mute button is also virtual and entirely contained and operated in your own mind Steve(NS)! 🙂
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:09pm
Lucia Maria

The problem with different interpretations of the bible is that the impact of different interpretations is far greater than any other book
No one has; killed anyone, started a war, imposed their will on others, made judgements on lifestyle choices, etc, etc because they interpreted Shakespeare in a different manner

Oh, I don’t know. Plenty of contenders for that one, such as these guys: A smile… then a kiss of the Koran: Lee Rigby’s distraught family leave court in tears after his Muslim killers show no remorse as they are found GUILTY of hacking him to death in London street
5 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:25pm
Johnboy

How is your Mum doing Lucia?
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:27pm
slijmbal

My tolerance gland has died

Reid says in response to Richard’s comment that

“To claim any sort of equivalency between understanding relativity and understanding the bible is pure delusion

“Only in your mind Richard”

That is one of the most ignorant comments in relation to science I have ever seen.

Relativity leads to predictions that can be measured – it is probably the most tested two theorems in history and its huge number of consequential and highly measurable predictions have been bashed to death and never, ever disproved.

The bible is a book that depending on your faith system backs up your religious beliefs, is an interesting summary of some prophecies or an example of silly religious beliefs. I have never, ever heard of anything it allowed to be proven.
5 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:48pm
Johnboy

For their next move Reid and slijmbal will resolve the quotations of the bible, the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics!

After that has been resolved Reid and slijmbal will answer the one question that you have all being asking. “Where does the Higgs Boson fit into Old Testament Teachings” ! 🙂
4 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 7:56pm
nasska

Women believe if a pet cat strays, it’s because
of a lack of affection at home.

Women believe if a pet dog strays, it’s because of a
lack of affection at home.

Women believe if a woman strays, it’s because of a
lack of affection at home.

Women believe if a man strays, it’s because men are arseholes.
6 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:00pm
Johnboy

Did you become an arsehole this year or 2 days ago nasska? 🙂
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:04pm
nasska

It could have happened JB, but the flesh was weak. My ball & chain is looking after one set of grandkids in town & I’m baching until Sunday.

I’m just not used to living without constant supervision. 🙂
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:10pm
nasska

Looks like your downtick monster has been cloned JB. 🙂
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:14pm
Johnboy

If you get really desperate nasska go for the ugly ewe with the gammy leg. She’ll be easier to catch and very grateful! 🙂
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:15pm
Johnboy

All the downtick folk are playing to a tune conducted by me nasska! 🙂
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:17pm
nasska

I don’t worry about catching or holding them JB….what the Hell do you think a man’s got dogs for? 🙂
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:19pm
Johnboy

Shitting on his lawn? 🙂
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:21pm
Rowan

Whatever your religous status it all comes down to faith at the end of the day. For a practising atheist how much faith do you have that there is “absolutely no God” and how much faith do you have that the earth was created by a big bang that occured out of nothing creating the universe and all its complexities.
3 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:22pm
nasska

That too JB. 🙂
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:22pm
Johnboy

Just about everything I have ever enjoyed Rowan involved a big bang! 🙂
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:25pm
Johnboy

Night all…….. Minder has just started on Jones followed by Jack Regan! 🙂
0 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:31pm
kowtow

Rowan

It’s not just faith ,its also culture,history and tradition.

When these fuckers attack Christianity ,they attack western history,culture and tradition.
4 1
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 8:52pm
Reid

My tolerance gland has died

Well I’m glad something has. Bible discussion isn’t any fun, otherwise.

That is one of the most ignorant comments in relation to science I have ever seen.

Why? If you’ll bother to read the context, you’ll discover that all I’ve been saying is the elementary fact that the Bible is like any other book, in that there are layers of meaning in it, and as you read it more, you get closer to what it is really saying. Which is precisely, I was saying, is how maths works because that builds on concepts as you go, as does Shakespeare and everything else.

Poor Richard probably got a discombobulation in his logic circuits because in his rage he hallucinated I was alleging the Bible is LIKE maths, but I wasn’t. Shame that, for Richard, but I shall deal with him in my next post.
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:20pm
RichardX

Rowan (1,347 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 8:22 pm
Whatever your religous status it all comes down to faith at the end of the day. For a practising atheist how much faith do you have that there is “absolutely no God” and how much faith do you have that the earth was created by a big bang that occured out of nothing creating the universe and all its complexities.

There is a problem with your terminology and understanding
There is no such thing as a “practicing atheist”
I have never stated there is “absolutely no God”
Atheism is the rejection of the claim of the existence of god as such a claim has not met the burden of proof
Faith in a religious context is defined by http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/faith as being

strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof:

and as such is not required to believe what science tells us
2 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:25pm
RichardX

Reid (14,585 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 6:01 pm
And who does that, Pete? Or do you hallucinate a discussion of religious accuracy is “claiming superior knowledge” and if so, do you also hallucinate that when someone explains, say, the theory of relativity and if so, why?

Reid (14,585 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 5:25 pm
Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:27pm
Harriet

“….There is no such thing as a “practicing atheist”….”

I would seriously doubt that.

Atheists have a Church.

What on earth do they do there I wonder…………..maybe EVERYTHING that they do there – isn’t then related to Atheism but to Christianity.
0 4
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:33pm
Rowan

Richard
Atheist/Agnostic/non believer whatever you want to call yourself.
All your ‘beliefs’ are based around faith, i.e. you have faith in what science ‘tells’ you or call it belief if you’d rather.
Evolution is a load of bollocks, I strongly believe that I am not descended from monkeys or ‘evolved’ from some other species, although I haven’t meet all my ancestors there is still no proof (or credible scientific explanation) that they weren’t human.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:33pm
Reid

The bible specifically states X, you delusionally claim this to be interpreted as Y

No I haven’t, actually. Nowhere above have I discussed anything at all relating to an actual Biblical quote nor have I even suggested what a particular book says or a verse or a chapter. Disappointingly, but it hasn’t happened. So not sure where you delusionally claim I claim a “Y” interpretation because I haven’t claimed a thing.

You have nothing but your assertion that your interpretation is correct
We disposed of the logically flawed maths and science equivalency and we are back at the starting point that all works of fiction can be interpreted however anyone wants to interpret them,

No, we’re currently at the point where Shakespeare’s a better analogy for the elementary proposition I was making, that’s why I introduced it, because Shakespeare is easier to see the proposition in, because unlike maths, it’s not binary. But as for your hallucination I was comparing the Bible to a binary discipline, go ahead and tell me where I said that above, because the only place you’ll find that is in your own imagination.

So because you’ve obviously completely missed the point, I’ll repeat it. A complex book like the Bible has layers of meaning. Thus a literal interpretation exposes only the most superficial layer. The more you read it the more layers are uncovered. You can see the same in Shakespeare, which also has layers of meaning, where also the literal reading yields only the topmost layer.

I mistakenly used the analogy of maths because when I thought of it I was thinking of the fact that when you learn math you learn one concept after another and it’s like building blocks. However I failed to recognise the obfuscatory factor of its binary nature plus your immense emotion over this whole subject which in combination have led you quite down the garden path over that analogy. If I’d thought more carefully this afternoon I would have simply used Shakespeare since it’s much more accurate and analogous.

But notice Richard we have not been discussing anything in the Bible, but rather how it’s read. And your point was a literal interpretation was as good as any other. My point has always been, no, it’s not, because the literal interpretation uncovers only the most superficial detail. Simple, isn’t it. Hopefully you’ll calm down eventually and not start a war over it. That would be ironic, wouldn’t it. An atheist starting a war over the Bible.

Except that the book is right there for interpretation just as a math book is.

x+2y=f

is the same as the writing in the Bible. That’s what I was saying there Rich. Next?
2 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:36pm
RichardX

Rowan (1,348 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 9:33 pm
Richard
Atheist/Agnostic/non believer whatever you want to call yourself.
All your ‘beliefs’ are based around faith, i.e. you have faith in what science ‘tells’ you or call it belief if you’d rather.
Evolution is a load of bollocks, I strongly believe that I am not descended from monkeys or ‘evolved’ from some other species, although I haven’t meet all my ancestors there is still no proof t(or credible scientific explanation) that they weren’t human.

You are welcome to hold whatever belief you choose but do not attempt to justify it as science or denigrate the science that supports evolutionary theory.
I suggest you need to do more research
Do you believe that the attempts to teach Intelligent Design in America are of benefit to their competitive advantage when it comes to education?
You could try looking at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kitzmiller_v._Dover_Area_School_District or https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epLhaGGjfRw
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:42pm
Harriet

Very well put Reid.
1 3
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:47pm
Reid

Cheers Harriet, but ~~who knows what hallucinations will arise next~~ let’s hope he gets it, this time.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 9:51pm
Harriet

“…..Do you believe that the attempts to teach Intelligent Design in America are of benefit to their competitive advantage when it comes to education?…”

What has competitive advantage got to do with it?

They are still going to teach more practical areas of science. They haven’t said they’ed no longer teach maths or physics.

And as I understand it the uni’s will still be teaching evolutionary science.

And it does give them another perspective if they do teach intelligent design —– So yes, it could be seen as a competitive advantage.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:05pm
Rowan

Richard
I am not attempting to justify my beliefs as anything. I wouldn’t go as far as trying to teach intelligent design in schools but I don’t really know a lot about it, I skim read the article.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:06pm
RichardX

Reid
There is nothing new in your 9.36
It is still your claim that interpretation is required to understand the bible
I agree that works of fiction require interpretation
You agree that christians have different interpretations of the bible, some literal, some not so much but
Remember this discussion started with your assertion that

No I’m afraid it backs up his ignorance Richard and yours too if you think he’s correct. Listen to what this guy says about Leviticus, which is one of the usual books ignorant people like you and Wat normally cite in your ignorance. And don’t bother replying until you’ve listened to what he says.

The assertion of this was that without spending the time and methods of studying the bible as espoused by Pawson an individual is ignorant
Nothing you have written justifies that position but feel free to justify your personal interpretation in any way you want
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:12pm
RichardX

Rowan (1,349 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 10:06 pm
Richard
I am not attempting to justify my beliefs as anything. I wouldn’t go as far as trying to teach intelligent design in schools but I don’t really know a lot about it, I skim read the article.

Surely if you reject evolution you must be aware of the alternatives and the fact that creationism and intelligent design are not science
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:15pm
Rowan

Richard

Yes they are not science, did I ever claim they were?
The scientific argument is a load of rubbish and is just unhelpful on trying to explain anything.
0 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:23pm
Reid

The assertion of this was that without spending the time and methods of studying the bible as espoused by Pawson an individual is ignorant

Pawson gives you the context, the structure, the cross-references and the intent of the author of Leviticus. He doesn’t tell you what it says because he assumes you can read it for yourself. But unless you have that knowledge you’re most unlikely to understand it, same as every other book in the Bible because, like I said, it’s a complex book.

And to return to maths, E=MC2 makes no sense whatsoever to a mathematician without the equations that led up to that solution. If you’re a mathematician, WTF does Energy = mass times the square of the speed of light mean? So what if you know what the symbols say? No, if you’re a mathematician, you’d naturally go to the source equations and work them back.

So how pray tell do you expect to learn anything substantial about Leviticus if you’re not even willing to do that but rather prefer to hallucinate that the way to go is simply open at random and read about say, how to cure leprosy?

Simple fact is, you just don’t appear to want to understand it, Richard. Which is peculiar, given you just spent so much time discussing it. You might want to ask yourself why that is.
1 2
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:31pm
Rowan

This explain your ancestry Richard?
http://www.kiwiblog.co.nz/2014/01/general_debate_1_january_2014.html#comment-1254794
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:31pm
RichardX

Rowan (1,351 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 10:23 pm
Richard
Yes they are not science, did I ever claim they were?
The scientific argument is a load of rubbish and is just unhelpful on trying to explain anything.

Reid (14,588 comments) says:
January 2nd, 2014 at 10:31 pm
Which is peculiar, given you just spent so much time discussing it. You might want to ask yourself why that is.

I feel pity for those that are willfully ignorant yet project superiority for their unjustified beliefs
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:40pm
Rowan

I pity those who ‘know’ they are always right and express their ‘factual’ opinions while calling anyone who doesn’t agree with them ‘ignorant’. Or is this just arrogance?
1 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 2, 2014 10:49pm
SPC

Reid, this is the 21st C.

The issue for many is no longer based on acceptance that the bible is the word of God revealed to man, and how best to understand it. But instead whether the concept of a Creator God is valid, and if so, whether revealed religion actually has anything to do with it or whether it is an invention by men.

In the absence of an affirmative to both questions – hardly relevant to an atheist – study of religious works is a field for those interested in learning about the way those of the religious traditions in the world see their life in the world.

People can examine meaning and depth of meaning in any written work, the question is why should they should bother to do so.

Most people do not bother to investigate evolutionary theory or relativity or quantum mechanics – they accept there is expertise in the area and they can read about it, but little more. But no amount of expertise on the presumption of Creator God existence and the supposition that God is revealed by the written works of men in the faith traditions is going to provide supporting evidence to convince the doubters – unlike in science.

Some make the case that religion forms character and without it, secular society would decline – others that with the absence of some religious characters secular society might have a chance. The question is to balance inclusion of all with a commonality of values. Yet the Jewish, Moslems and Christian religions themselves are divided and the commonality is difficult to present to each other let alone outsiders.
2 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 3, 2014 12:08am
Azeraph

III Love you guys.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 3, 2014 12:10am
Azeraph

There’s talk out there that parasitic life has in many ways completely stopped evolution, i can’t remember where i read this but it was compelling to read.
0 0
Log in to Reply
Report
January 3, 2014 12:14am

More comments:

‹
1
2

Add a Comment Cancel reply

Login to comment or vote

« Complaint Letter of the Year

2013 Kiwiblog Awards »

Donations

You can now donate to Kiwiblog

Exclusive content from DPF on Patreon

Become a Patron!

Never miss a post

Email Address

Join 37.4K other subscribers

Highlights

Health Target 5 – elective treatments
Health Target 4 – Specialist appointments
Health Target 3 – Emergency Dept Waiting Times
Health Target 2 – Immunisations

Links

Javier Milei’s Chainsaw on Bureaucracy
Not PC
Woman of the day
Hompaddock
#climateemergency
Utopia
Do The Health Authorities Require Too Much From a GP?
No Minister
The h?koi was M?ori Party’s crowning glory – and provided plenty for Labour to think about
Point of Order
It’s National ACT NZF who are Dishonouring the Treaty + the day Moana Jackson knocked Gerry Brownlee on his bum
The Daily Blog
Open mike 22/11/2024
The Standard
Drawn
No Right Turn
The transgender agenda sunk Kamala
Bob McCoskrie's McBlog
SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT
No Punches Pulled (Bob Jones)
What does “reciprocity” mean in New Zealand laws?
Croaking Cassandra
A Day of Reckoning
NZCPR
Media Link: “A View from Afar” on the US elections.
Kiwipolitico
This will not end well
Offsetting Behaviour
Top 14 Predictions for Round 10
Stats Chat
Tory Whanau may have to sell Wellington mayoralty to make ends meet
The Civilian
The Accidental Engagement
Imperator Fish
Legal Beagle: Election '23: The Special Votes
Public Address
Making this movie might have been a mistake
Liam Hehir
Why I am retiring from political blogging
Kiwi FireWalker
Angie Warren-Clark: Meet the Newbies
Dan Moskovitz

editor@kiwiblog.co.nz

PO Box 12270, Thorndon, Wellington 6144

Facebook
Twitter
FourSquare
Instagram
LinkedIn
Google+

Archives
Disclosure Statement
Editorial Policy
Privacy Policy
Complaints Policy
Comments Policy

Design by cre8d