Home Page | Calendar | Forums | Login |
Forums > Debates (Open) > Prime Minister rebuts Dawkins’ faith school attack

Prime Minister rebuts Dawkins’ faith school attack

REPLIES: Page 9 of 9. Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8

Martin Lisemore (22/12/2011 18:13)

My post of 19/12/2011 23:00 was very largely tongue in cheek, yet it was badly received it seems. Sad lack of humour among some posters here.

Science is about knowledge, Seumas, you said knowledge is; that's sounds like a college lecturer's statement to ensure you follow the party line.

I'll emphasise John Miller's question: What are their theories about destiny of man, or to be more precise the destiny of every man?

In as much as you were so ready to shout me down for a tongue in cheek piece, please do answer John's question; might make a good article in Nature magazine.

RF (Guest) (23/12/2011 10:48)

Martin I find it very hard to accept that your post at 23.00 on 19/12 was largely tongue in cheek.Still you can always say it was!

It was an ignorant and unfunny rant.'...the one in a wheelchair...' is an ungracious comment - almost penned diarrhoea and I could go on - but it's not worth it.

Maybe you need a friend [a decent stranger would do] to offer you advice and hopefully a way forward in a world of ever increasing complexity.

Martin Lisemore (23/12/2011 14:02)

Thank you Roland for your kind words. They are well received.

A friend? I have many but I'll always be willing to befriend another.

John Miller (23/12/2011 16:29)

Martin, your language was colourful and your sentiments laudable. I did not find your post offensive or inappropriate. Professor Hawking has used his disability to great purpose in his denial of God and His mighty works in creation. He is a living tribute to the patience and long-suffering of the God whose grace he refuses.

Martin Lisemore (23/12/2011 18:11)

John, thank you for being reasonable.

The piece was intended to provoke discussion, but clearly missed the mark!RF (Guest) (23/12/2011 18:16) I see that John Miller supports ML. Fortunately there are a lot of Christians that [without surrendering their faith] take a more measured view.

John Miller (23/12/2011 21:00)

Dear "RF", I do not support ML, as you quaintly put it. I only make an observation based on my estimation of words and facts. The professor is an enemy of the cross of Christ. He is in denial of the existence of God. According to scripture he is a fool. He may be an educated fool, but is nevertheless truly a fool. His obsession with his perception of the origin of the known universe blinds him to the consequencies of his mortality. In his last book, strangely called "A grand Design" he advances the theory that because of the law of gravity the universe can create itself. A simpleton like me would ask how you can have a grand design without an greater Grand Designer. There is a depth of evil in the works of men like stephen Hawking that is absolutely of the devil.

Martin Lisemore (23/12/2011 23:12)

I find it difficult to believe at east two self professed 'intellectuals' on this forum could take my post seriously! Perhaps this says so much more about you than it does me!

My post ridiculed ME, and the world we must inhabit not you or your convictions or treasured beliefs. It was self deprecating. And yet I get responses implying I'm drunk! How little you know about me. How lacking in humour you are. How small is your God!

Roland, I'm so disappointed. Months ago you showed yourself a worthy gladiator, one with whom I was willing to engaged in combat, but now ... well, you plumb the depths. This is not worthy of you Roland. You may yet do so much better. And soon please.

Seumas, you've proved a cut and run man, read something you don't like, got nasty,and quit which doesn't befit you. All of which leaves me wondering about your convictions about science and the manner you make a living.

And Pawlo, not the courage to become a member of CT, but happy to hurl insults from the sidelines. Not so anonymous as you might think. But without God's expressed humour, like so many.

And John, my post was not serious, perhaps you're the only one to perceive that. Your heart is with the heart of God who laughs. Thankyou.

It does seem the time for a little theological levity has passed. That saddens me. If our God can laugh at the absurd why can't we?

The answer will fit on a postage stamp.

RF (Guest) (24/12/2011 09:19) JM's first sentence on 23/12 at 21.00 is a classic! Merry Christmas to you all.

Seumas, Tobermory (Guest) (24/12/2011 10:18)

Martin Lisemore - I think you've got issues, to be frank with you. That posting of yours which has since dropped off the end did not sound remotely "tongue in cheek" It sounded decidedly serious. It sounds exactly like the sort of stuff that uber-fundagelical comes out with all the time to the embarassment of most reasonable Christians.

And no I am not cutting and running, I simply have much better things to do with my time than waste it on a worthless thread like this (which is what these things inevitably become)

I already stated what my faith position is - it is the same as many other Christian scientists. I dont feel compelled to add to that in any way.

You may have plenty time to spend on this sort of place but I dont. So there. Its Christmas Eve. Peace and Goodwill, chill a bit will you.... ( Page 9 of 9. Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 )
From:
Comment:

© 2014 Christians Together High Accessibility Version. (Full Graphics Version)