Vidqun

Joined

• started 26 topics
• posted 2,003 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Vidqun

• 
  405

  Origin of Life

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

  as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

  there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty: Science says all you need is rock, water and carbon dioxide.

  And that is exactly the reason why I believe what I believe. You can shake, dilute, concentrate, and/or electrocute rock, water, and carbon dioxide. You can do with such a chemical composition whatever you want. You can change the combination and concentrations in any way you want. And whatever you do, you and your fellow evolutionists can carry on doing it for a million years non-stop. But let me assure you, life and its processes will not be kick started in such a way, yes, even if you stand on your head.
  
  
• 
  405

  Origin of Life

  by cofty in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  in recent years significant progress has been made in solving the question of how life originated on our planet.. how do you think theists will respond when it finally happens?

  as a former christian i know my reaction would have been something like "well that just goes to show that it takes intelligent life to make life", but for two reasons that defense doesn't work.. firstly it would prove that life is not an ethereal force that originates with god.

  there is no 'ghost in the machine', no elan vital.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Yes, Slimboyfat, I do think you have nailed it, whether they like it or not. Only two outcomes possible here:

  1) Scientists find life on other planets, e.g., Mars. In that case I will have to reconsider my theistic, ID outlook. By the way, even if scientists do succeed in creating life in a lab, that will not sway me in the least. I will just say: See you need an intelligent mind to create life.

  2) God is the creator and will make himself known. Even then the majority of anti-theists and evolutionists will reject His authority (cf. Rev. 11:18).
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  One thing we should not forget, she was originally involved with hospice care. Those involved with hospice care look after terminally ill people. Not even modern medical care would be able to save their lives.
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Konceptual99, I tend towards your side of the issue. She started off with good intentions and she did improve the situation of many. Who are we to judge her motives? I totally agree with you concerning the theological process of making her a saint. That is utter nonsense.
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Rebel8, the Catholic Church viewed Hitchens as a "Devil's Advocate." Question: Why should Mother Teresa not be canonised? To answer the question, he had to give it his best shot. She is being canonised today, so his testimony was rejected.

  Mother Teresa's had been at it since 1948. Who in his/her right mind would choose to live in a slum (Calcutta's slums were the worst), working day and night with dying people, the poorest of the poor. This she did for approximately 50 years, dying with her boots on (no retirement for her). No, I think she was an extraordinary woman. Pity about the controversy shrouding her legacy. Here the Catholic Church should shoulder the blame. The rest of us, living in glass houses, should refrain from throwing stones. And talk of being judgmental, let's leave that to the Witnesses. We should be able to rise above that.

  Glad to see she was allowed to die in a modern hospital with the best care. That means the Catholic Church looks after its old people. She had to have a Medical Aid to be admitted to a modern hospital. Well, that's much more than the Witnesses can say. They are only to happy to kick the old and sickly to the kerb.
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  If you as an "untouchable" was lying in the street, dying in your own excrement, it would be a saint that would come and pick you up, take you under roof, wash you, cover you with a gown, put you in a clean bed and feed you. I would be thankful for such a person. By Western standards, that's not much, but for that "untouchable," being allowed to die with dignity, it would certainly be highly appreciated. Would he/she be better off? I think so. So, yes, I do view things differently.
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  I saw a documentary of her early days. She was so horrified at what was happening to the sickly and poor in Calcutta, she started helping them. She went against her own Mother Superior and some of the priests in charge. She was not popular and they opposed her all the way. As I said: There's always two sides to a story. Here the objective journalist would go to the poor people that received help from her missions. Always good to hear it from the horse's mouth first?
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Thanks Hiemere, there is always two sides to a story, depending on who the narrator is. The versions of atheists, Catholics, Protestants and Muslims will differ widely. One will wonder: Are they talking about the same person?

  Cofty: Are you suggesting the accounts of the holocaust are American and English lies?

  Read again: "If you want to study Hitler and the Nazis...." If I wanted to study Hitler and the Nazis and their effect on the German people, I would ask a German, that were there, first. He would be able to tell it first hand. From there I would examine other sources and compare them with what I know. The Germans did lose the war, you know? So the version of the victor will always be slanted in his favor.

  Why don't you study American and British movies of the war, during and after the war? These were not very objective, were they? The Americans and British were the goodies, and the Germans and Japaneses were the baddies.

  Who said anything about the holocaust? You are determined to put words in my mouth. Why would you want to do that? Again I ask: Do I spy a measure of bias here?

  Finkelstein, who would be in charge of Mother Teresa's missions and financing? She was but a small cog in the Catholic machinery, and she would not be allowed to handle her own finances. The Vatican has specialized people taking care of the finances (similar to the WT Organization). She would get but a small allowance. In one documentary of her early days she complained that she needed more funds to complete her projects.
  
  
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  Cofty, it's like wanting to study Hitler and the Nazis by reading American and English literature on the subject. Hitchens was an atheist and antitheist. One of his books is called: "God is not great. How religion poisons everything." Do I spy a tad bias there? Of course you will believe every word he said/wrote but that's expected.
• 
  48

  "Mother" Teresa—a Fraud?

  by Saename in

  1. social
  2. current

  i often comment in threads that interest me on this forum.

  moreover, some of you may know that i study the history of early christianity.

  i once wrote an extensive comment on the historicity of jesus' existence in one of the threads.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Vidqun

  I remember she was given the Nobel Peace Price for her work. Members of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee usually research the prospective recipients quite thoroughly before awarding their prize. Don't know whether one should judge her character posthumously. On the one hand she was an employee of the Catholic Church and subject of the vagaries of the Vatican. On the other hand she was quite eccentric. She might have started her mission being sincere. As she became more prominent, the Catholic bureaucracy would certainly have misused her for propaganda purposes. They would have decided where the donations would go. However, no-one should question her motives for trying to do good and serving the poorest of the poor. I know I would never be able to do that.