Die Poepol van die Week prys gaan aan Gretha Wiid. Natuurlik het sy en god baie te se oor 50 Shades of Gray. Soos gewoonlik is dit die satan se werk en gaan dit alles uitloop in die dood, wat de fok dit ook al beteken. Hierdie mal bitch is, soos meeste fundies, behep oor wat mense met hulle geslagsorgane aanvang. Hulle preek dat hulle got ok is met so bietjie seks, solank dit binne ‘n huwelik plaasvind. Mens kan hierdie kak nie self uitdink nie. Ons arme ou volkie. Gretha Wiid word ryk deur haar spookstories te vertel van wat die gotte met goeie mense gaan doen as hulle nie luister nie. Sy laat vrouens wat onderdruk is goed voel oor hulle lot terwyl sy terselfdetyd vir hulle vertel dat hulle haar raad moet volg om die jong mense ook te onderdruk deur hulle skuldig te laat voel oor hulle seksualiteit. Geen masturbasie nie, geen seks nie, niks gevryery nie. Sy se vir mense die enigste goeie verhouding is een wat binne ‘n huwelik is. Min besef die idioot dat as jagsgeid tot trou toe lui dat daardie arme jong mense die grootste fout van hulle jong lewens kan maak. Nee, dis goed om so bietjie te naai. Veral as jy jonk en jags is. Maar wat poepolle soos Gretha nie van praat nie is voorbehoedmiddels en hoe om op ‘n gesonde en veilige manier lekker te naai nie. Nee, sy is te behep met die duiwel en die gotte en hulle bronstydperk boek. As jy kyk na waar liewe jesus vandaan kom, sal daar vandag in die hof duidelik gese word dat sy pa, die hoof spook, vir Maria verkrag het. Hy het nie met haar getrou nie, hy het nie haar toestemming gevra nie. Die ou fokker het een aand terwyl sy geslaap het haar op een of ander manier binne gedring en sy het swanger geraak as gevolg daarvan. Arme Gretha Wiid, sy huil al die pad bank toe terwyl sy vir ons volkie vertel watse skade hulle aanrig deur hierdie boeke te lees en hulle sekslewe so bietjie opwindend wil maak. Gelukkig het die natuur hom nog min gesteur aan sulke idioote se reels. Vrouens lees die boeke want dit maak hulle jags. Mense naai want hulle is jags. Gretha en haar bybel sal dit nooit verander nie. Sy is ‘n skouer om op te huil vir vrouens wat ongelukkig is en sy maak baie geld daardeur.

Standard
5 November 2012

Vroue van oraloor is in rep en roer oor die 50 Shades of Grey-reeks. Dit sal glo jou huwelik ’n hupstoot gee… Maar is dit werklik die waarheid? Gretha Wiid maak ’n bietjie die oë oop.

Ons is almal goed bekend met Gretha Wiid en haar no nonsense manier van praat. Die wêreld bombardeer ons elke dag met slaapkamer-truuks en tonele, sonder om te skroom. “Seks sells” is die leuse van baie besighede. Dis immers dan net reg dat iemand vir ’n slag ook reguit praat oor seks en die gawe daarvan.

Ja, die gawe van seks soos wat God dit gemaak het om binne die huwelik te wees. Maar hoe nou met die “mommy-porn”-boeke wat jy deesdae kan koop, sonder om eers daaroor te bloos? Almal lees dit dan! En as almal in die vuur spring? “Die titel kondig reeds die waarheid van die boek aan. Grys – die kleur van kompromie wat jy kry deur swart by wit te voeg,” vertel Gretha. “Dis vir my skokkend om te hoor hoeveel Christene hierdie boeke aanhang.

Wat egter meer skokkend is, is die feit dat so baie kinders van die Here die boeke regverdig in die naam van avontuur en opkikkering! Wil God hê dat ons sekslewe warm en avontuurlustig moet wees? Natuurlik! Het Hy egter duidelike grense oor reinheid en heiligheid in die huwelik? Ongetwyfeld! Ek persoonlik dink dat baie mense reinheid met koekerigheid verwar. Sommige mense wat reken jy moet als opspice, maak dalk die fout om te dink dat as jy heilig en rein wil wees in jou huwelik, moet jy seker seks open met skriflesing en gebed, en om vergifnis vra as jy ’n fantastiese orgasme gehad het. Ai tog! As ons net kon verstaan dat God groot avonture en pret in gedagte gehad het met seks, maar als in die veilige ruimte van sy Waarheid.

Die waarheid dat seks nie buite die huwelik hoort nie, dat seks meer is as net die vlees. “Na my mening is kompromieë die geheime wapen van die satan. As hy ons so ver kan kry om ons keuses te regverdig, al moet ons God se beginsels en waarheid so ’n bietjie prysgee, dan trap ons netjies in sy strik. 2 Tim. 2:26 sê: ‘As jy dan in die strik van die satan trap, maak hy met jou wat hy wil.’ ’n Strik is immers nie ’n ding wat vir almal sigbaar is nie. Hy is verbloem en word toegemaak om onskuldig te lyk. “As daar nou EEN area is waar die satan ons almal wil kul, is dit die area van die seksuele. Seks is nie net ’n fisieke daad nie, dis by uitstek ’n daad van die gees (1 Kor. 6:12-18). Kan ek die smaak van kos verbeter met gif?

Dalk….maar dit sal uitloop op die dood. Kan ons great, avontuurlustige seks hê met die opkikkering van iets buite God se wil? Natuurlik, maar dit sal uitloop op die dood! “Mense doen nie meer moeite buite die slaapkamer om hulle huwelike pret te hou nie. Couples lag nie saam nie en is later huismaats in plaas van huweliksmaats. Hulle jaag na wind met hulle beroepe, probeer die balle juggle met die kinders, finansies, die huishouding en hulle sosiale programme. Mense is uitgeput, vasgevang in roetine en het hoop verloor. En nou kom daar ’n boek wat beloof om lewe in jou are te blaas, om iets te rekindle wat dood voel. Maar dis so goed jy koppel ’n halfdooie liggaam aan ’n suurstofmasjien. Jy kan ook net só lank kunsmatig aan die lewe gehou word. Boeke soos 50 Shades of Grey sal couples ’n goeie dosis kunsmatige, oppervlakkige, wellustige seks gee, maar sal niks doen vir hulle emosionele hegtheid en verstaan van mekaar se harte nie. Daar is miskien 50 skakerings van grys volgens sekere mense, maar volgens God is daar net een skakering van die Waarheid en heiligheid.

Ek het ’n paar bladsye in die boek gaan lees omdat ek so baie navrae hieroor kry. Onheilige snert met die vermomming van prettige, spontane avonture. Gaan die boek ’n paartjie se sekslewe opspice? Sonder twyfel! Maar nou ja…so doen pornografie en vibrators ook. Ek weet nie van ander kinders van die Here nie, maar ek en my huis, ons sal die Here dien. Ek en Francois sal mekaar behaag, opvry, vuurwarm maak – als in die wete dat ons God eer, en dat ons huwelik uitloop op die Lewe!

Om meer te lees oor hoe jy jou sekslewe en huwelik kan laat blom op God se manier, kry nou Gretha Wiid se Onblusbare Liefde.

Advertisements

223 thoughts on “Die Poepol van die Week prys gaan aan Gretha Wiid. Natuurlik het sy en god baie te se oor 50 Shades of Gray. Soos gewoonlik is dit die satan se werk en gaan dit alles uitloop in die dood, wat de fok dit ook al beteken. Hierdie mal bitch is, soos meeste fundies, behep oor wat mense met hulle geslagsorgane aanvang. Hulle preek dat hulle got ok is met so bietjie seks, solank dit binne ‘n huwelik plaasvind. Mens kan hierdie kak nie self uitdink nie. Ons arme ou volkie. Gretha Wiid word ryk deur haar spookstories te vertel van wat die gotte met goeie mense gaan doen as hulle nie luister nie. Sy laat vrouens wat onderdruk is goed voel oor hulle lot terwyl sy terselfdetyd vir hulle vertel dat hulle haar raad moet volg om die jong mense ook te onderdruk deur hulle skuldig te laat voel oor hulle seksualiteit. Geen masturbasie nie, geen seks nie, niks gevryery nie. Sy se vir mense die enigste goeie verhouding is een wat binne ‘n huwelik is. Min besef die idioot dat as jagsgeid tot trou toe lui dat daardie arme jong mense die grootste fout van hulle jong lewens kan maak. Nee, dis goed om so bietjie te naai. Veral as jy jonk en jags is. Maar wat poepolle soos Gretha nie van praat nie is voorbehoedmiddels en hoe om op ‘n gesonde en veilige manier lekker te naai nie. Nee, sy is te behep met die duiwel en die gotte en hulle bronstydperk boek. As jy kyk na waar liewe jesus vandaan kom, sal daar vandag in die hof duidelik gese word dat sy pa, die hoof spook, vir Maria verkrag het. Hy het nie met haar getrou nie, hy het nie haar toestemming gevra nie. Die ou fokker het een aand terwyl sy geslaap het haar op een of ander manier binne gedring en sy het swanger geraak as gevolg daarvan. Arme Gretha Wiid, sy huil al die pad bank toe terwyl sy vir ons volkie vertel watse skade hulle aanrig deur hierdie boeke te lees en hulle sekslewe so bietjie opwindend wil maak. Gelukkig het die natuur hom nog min gesteur aan sulke idioote se reels. Vrouens lees die boeke want dit maak hulle jags. Mense naai want hulle is jags. Gretha en haar bybel sal dit nooit verander nie. Sy is ‘n skouer om op te huil vir vrouens wat ongelukkig is en sy maak baie geld daardeur.

  1. That article was published in a religious women’s mag called “Finesse”. “Finesse is a magazine for the modern woman and focusses on her self, her friends, her body, her spirit, her success and her house. It inspires every woman to be her best in all facets of her life. Finesse is your feel good magazine which makes you shine and helps you celebrate your womanhood.”

    Whenever you see a blurb about a publication addressed at “the modern woman” you know that you are dealing with a seriously uptight target market of sexually repressed housewives, and they are most definitely going to read 50 Shades of Grey and pretend they were disgusted by it. They only read the first two pages. And then the next two pages … and … and …

    I see this type every day. Uptight busybodies talking about Jesus, attempting to open Jesus Camp B&Bs because the husbands are losers who can’t cut it financially and beat them up. So they have paying tenants in pondokkies all over the garden so the husband can’t beat them up.

    Haai sies tog.

    Like

    • Hierdie Gretha lyk na ‘n heel wulpse bokkie. Ek wonder of sy…… nee wat, los dit maar daar. Aan die ander kant….. stop dit Phineas! Nou dadelik!

      Like

    • “LET WEL : Enige kostes van swangerskappe wat voortspruit uit die nuutgevonde jubel en geluk, kan nie ‘gedek’ word deur Gretha Wiid nie. :-)”

      Holy nutsack of bipolar chimpanzees! There are actually people who would pay to get knocked up at a Jesus Camp!

      I regularly tell the fundie bitches next door to “BUGGER OFF AND STOP BOTHERING ME”. Both divorced and remarried, praying to Jesus that this time things will turn out better. Only it won’t, because they’re both married to losers. And they’re sluts, they drop their broeks as soon as something marginally better comes along.

      AND THAT, GRETHA WIID, IS WHY THESE STUPID WOMEN BRING THEIR STUPID HUSBANDS TO YOU. So you can wave a magic wand over this loser shit and hey presto! Jesus is making these guys start working for a living for a change BECAUSE (big whoop!) Jesus is sharing the bed with the husband and the missus! And that means, as we all know, that you’re really going to strike it rich soon.

      Like

    • Nou goed dan. Ek het navraag gedoen oor die volgende kamp, koste ens.
      Klink my mens kan lekker spyker daar.
      Sal julle op hoogte hou.

      Like

      • M.b.t. die kantaantekeninge:

        Ek praat onder korreksie maar volgens Johannie het hy n broer wat agnostic/ateis/agnostic ateis is. Of die broer van Johannie werklik bestaan weet ek natuurlik nie. Indien Johannie se broer nog n heiden is weet ek nie. Miskien het Johannie hom al “gerehabiliteer”.

        Johannie se hy was self n ateis maar blykbaar het die uie afgeskil (dit is nou die EGO). Die mense om hom het om gehelp met sy problem van ateisme en nie moed opgegee nie. Blykbaar het n boedhis (Ek is nou nie seker of die boedhis n teis of n ateis is nie) die tegniek van “uie” (ego) skil aan Johann gewys of so iets. Die boedhis het aan hom met n laggie verduidlik dat hy dalk god kan vind.

        EK wonder egter of die boedhis sy god gevind het? Blykbaar is Johannie n meester op hierdie gebied want Johannie het die “regte” god gevind.

        Johann se mees onlangse kommentaar praat nou weer van hoe sleg hierdie blad is. Elke dag is Johannie egter op sy pos hier tussen ons ‘haatlike” en ‘nydige” heidene. Toemaar Johannie as ek jou in die regte lewe ontmoet sal ek jou n drukkie en n goeie vryf geen soos wat ek met my hondjies doen (moet dit nou nie met gay verwar hoor). Op n vreemde manier is ek tog lief vir jou. Daar is iets spesiaal aan iemand wat so toegewyd is aan sy saak. Ek sal n video stuur van n Mongoolse Shaman. Ek stem natuurlik nie saam nie, maar daar is n sort “beauty” aan die Boesmans en hierdie Shamans wat hulle praktyke beoefen.

        Soos, ek se is Johannie elke dag op sy pos hier tussen ons heidene. Laat my dink aan n man wat elke dag n prossie sien. Praat van hoe sleg dit is maar die volgende dag is dit maar weer dieselfde ou storie. Die selfde met sigarrete……

        Ek dink Johannie projekteer sy haat en nyd op ons. Ons is n slaansak vir sy broer se agnosticism/ateisme of wat dit ookal is.

        Hy is behep met nuwe woorde. As hy n word soos ego hoor dan loop hy daarmee. Dieselfde met “demonstreer” waarby ek later sal kom vannaand hopelik.

        Johannie is n meester van mense se EGO’s. maar hy kan nie sy god in ons almal demonstreer nie. Dit skep oneindige frustrasie….

        Daarom hou hy aan met die ego. Hy kan nie demonstreer wat in ander mense se koppe rakende die “regte” God aangaan nie.

        Hy kan ook nie sy got in my kop demonstreer nie.

        JY VAT ALLES TE ERG OP JOHANNIE. KALMEER….

        Like

        • ” moet dit nou nie met gay verwar hoor). ” O ja en dan baklei julle ook vir die “vrolikes” se regte volgens Mad Mack se 22 gebooie! Sekerlik weet iemand nou eintlik ook watse “vrolike” regte baklei julle voor, as ek die neiging van homophobia hier optel, dan kan ek nie anders nie . . .alles skyn heilig.

          Gerhardus kan jy nie eens vir ‘n oomblik een van die vrolikes wees nie, wat is dit wat jou so daarvan afsit?

          Kan jy net vir oomblik daaraan dink om vir Mad Mack so ‘n lekker tong en ol soen te gee . . . . daar’s niks aan verkeerd om ‘n man te soen of so nie – miljarde vrouens doen dit, en hulle hou daarvan – meestal ek dink – die statistieke wat ek gehoor het wat sekerlik verkeerd is “give or take” ‘n miljoen of 2 dan is daar op enige gegewe oomblik 100 miljoen mense besig met die voortplanting simulasie. (wat sou beteken daar is 6.9 miljard mense wat afgeskeep voel . . geen wonder die wêreld is in so ‘n toestand nie)

          Like

          • “….as ek die neiging van homophobia hier optel, dan kan ek nie anders nie . . .alles skyn heilig.”

            Jy kort n kopdokter. Moenie my woorde uit verband uit trek nie. Waar het ek tekens getoon van homophobia. Inteendeel dis sekere christene wat al te kere gegaan het oor gays op hierdie blad. Wat 2 mans of twee vroue in die slaapkamer doen is geen van my besigheid nie. Soos ek al vir jou vriend – Kokkerman – gese het: Ek is n volbloed man, maar ek sal opstaan vir die regte van hierdie mans en vrou. Ja, soms dink ek sekere gays vat dinge te ver maar dit is n gesprek vir n ander dag.

            Ek daag enige iemand van julle Christene op hierdie om enige homophobia by my te bewys wat ek so ver geskryf het.

            Jy hoort in n malhuis ou perd.

            “”””Gerhardus kan jy nie eens vir ‘n oomblik een van die vrolikes wees nie, wat is dit wat jou so daarvan afsit?””””‘

            Want ek is nie GAY nie jou armsalige kinderagtige vent. Ek
            het van JOU gepraat wat nie moes dink ek is gay nie omdat ek jou n drukkie wil gee as ek ek jou sou ontmoet in die regte lewe. Gaan jy my nou dwing om met n man te slap…..

            Die vet weet maar julle godbots is onnosel.

            Jy is n haatlike en nydige vent Johannie.

            Antwoord eerder dit waaroor ek geskryf het. Indien jy my ego die heeltyd wil aanval omdat jy nie kan bewys dat JOU God in mense se ego’s bestaan nie dan gaan ek terugslaan.

            Jy is die Homofhobiese ou hier. Waar is jou bewyse dat die mense hier Homofobies is. Bewys dit bietjie.

            MOENIE JOU HAAT OP ONS PROJEKTEER NIE

            Like

            • Johannie se logika:

              Indien n man wat vroue verkies – maar wel opstaan vir Gay en Lesbiese mense, maar nie in seksuele kontak soos “tongsoen” met n ander man wil verkeer nie, dan is die man (dit is nou ek) outomaties “skynheilig”

              Wat Johannie eindlik se is dat hy HAAT gays maar nou gaan hy probeer om ons ook as homofobies voor te stel. Ek wonder hoekom doen hy dit? Wil hy homself troos? Sy gewete n bietjie sus?

              Nee-wat ou kerel daar is niks verkeerd met n soengroet nie. In menigde kulture doen mans dit. Ek is egter nou nie so seker dat straight mans “tongsoen” in verskillende kulture nie.

              Like

              • En as jy so eerlik is kan jy mos vertel hoekom die idee dat ander mense kan dink jy is een van die “vrolikes” jou so af sit?
                (Net soos enige “groepering” van mense is daar van daai’s wat eerder stil gebore moes gewees het, selfs onder ateïste is daar “goeie” mense, ons weet dit tog almal, so ek dink nie dis regverdig om ‘n hele “groep” te veroordeel net omdat daar ‘n paar is wat uit die bus uitgeval het nie)

                Dan aan die anderkant is daar die mense wat “glo” dat al wat daar is is materie en selfs gedagtes wat blits vinnig mens kan laat reageer, is sommer net senuwees’s wat af gevuur word in sekere neurologiese paadjies wat deur indoktrinasie gevorm is, en alles bestaan net uit atome en molekules ens, . . .en as Mallies die voortplanting ding doen, is dit net ‘n klomp molekules wat opgewonde raak en as hom vra hoekom hy nie met MadMac se molekules wil vet pret hê nie, dan is hy sommer stil, want skielik is die “alles wat is is materie” nie meer so aantreklik vir hom nie. Dan kom die gedagte ook by my op dat Malles so heilig probeer skyn hier voor die ander ateïste, maar in die gemene tyd doen hy dieselfde as dit wat hy die “ander” mense van beskuldig – hy probeer net heilig skyn.

                Like

                • “””En as jy so eerlik is kan jy mos vertel hoekom die idee dat ander mense kan dink jy is een van die “vrolikes” jou so af sit?””

                  Jirre maar jy is toe. Wie het gese dit sit my af? Ek het van JOU gepraat, nie van ander mense nie. Ek het van jou gepraat omdat jy volgens my medewete n Afrikaner is. Afrikaner mans is nie juis bekend daarvoor om mekaar oormatig te omhels en te soen nie. Sekere Afrikaners sien dit dikwels as gay.

                  Afgesien van meisies/vroue het ek het al “advances” van gay mans gekry, maar dit met respek van die hand gewys….

                  “Net soos enige “groepering” van mense is daar van daai’s wat eerder stil gebore moes gewees het, selfs onder ateïste is daar “goeie” mense, ons weet dit tog almal, so ek dink nie dis regverdig om ‘n hele “groep” te veroordeel net omdat daar ‘n paar is wat uit die bus uitgeval het nie”

                  Nou probeer Johannie weer ewe vroom wees.. Ek – ten minste – het nie probleem met gelowiges van welke aard nie. Fundies soos jy aan die ander kant………

                  MOENIE JOU HAAT EN NYD OP ONS PROJEKTEER NIE.

                  Like

  2. Oukei oukei julle het nou genoeg gedemonstreer wat ateïsme is. Hierdie tert opvryfvery in die donker is genoeg om mens naar te maak
    Al wat julle kan doen is om “ander” te kritiseer en julle haat en nyd en boosgied en frustrasie te kom uitkots hier op julle braakselblad.

    Klink meer na laat aand kroeg dronk praatjies.

    Maar natuurlik is ek bly dat julle veg vir vroue regte, al weet Mallies nie waarvoor hy veg nie, julle moet seker die mees wonderlikste mense wees, Gods gift to mankind, vrolik, gelukkig, vol pret, en “lots of fun” om saam mee te wees!!! Goeie bure ook.

    Soos: Mad Mack.

    “wyn in. Die panties kom altyd vinnig af na so paar glasies” Mad Mack miskien moet jy daai baarmoeder draer van jou gaan vra of dit met haar gebeur het, want na die tyd het sy jou lewe hel gemaak omdat haar baarmoeder jou verwerp het en jy ‘n konstante herinnering is van daai wham bam fank u mam oomblik.

    En dan vir die juweeltjie van almal: (eintlik het ek nou nie veel gelees nie, dis maar moeilik om soliede stukkies te kry tussen die entropiese kots)

    Gerhardus skryf na aanleiding van,
    “As jy dalk weer tyd vind kan jy met woorde aan my demonstreer wat ateïsme is”
    en sy respons:

    “Wat van n vraag is dit? Wil jy nou he ek moet aan jou demonstreer (bewys) dat GOT/TE (GOD/GODE) bestaan asook dat dit NIE bestaan nie? ”

    Wat sê dit nou vir jou? Ateïsme kan nie ‘n konsep vorm in sy psige sonder ‘n god konsep wat hy self geskep het nie . . . . en nou baklei die 2 konsepte, wat net in sy kop “bestaan”, teen mekaar en vervolgens kom hy hier na die geskepte braakselblad waar hy saam met die res van die “gemeente van die heiliges” kan kom kots.

    Gerhardus ek’t nie gevra dat jy jou konsep gode aan my moet demonstreer nie ek vra dat jy net ateïsme sal demon streer. (Skielik beteken die woorde demonstreer en “bewys” vir jou dan dieselfde?)

    Like

  3. Ek wil julle ietsie vra. Julle ouens weet mos baie van hierdie soort goed af. Hier is hierdie een stuk skuim wat ‘n facebook page oopgemaak het wat se naam is ” Wolf butchering and cooking”. Iets soos dit. Hy het aspris fotos van dooie wolwe en jagters met dooie wolwe gepost op facebook. Doelbewus om ander mense te skok en walg.

    Daar is ‘n ander knaap ( Ook anoniem) met die naam “Henry the horse”. Hierdie ou het ook ‘n site wat dieselfde walglikke materiaal bevat. Ek vermoed dis dalk dieselfde persoon wat twee facebook pages oopgemaak het. Anyway enige iemand wat soveel as verskil van hulle word gevloek en sleg gese. Vrouens word cunts genoem. Hulle het my ‘n pole pusher genoem. En allerhande vieslikke taal en stellings word gebruik.

    Daar is tans ‘n petisie om hierdie gemors te verwyder van facebook af maar facebook smeer hulle gatte af. Blykbaar het hieride Henry the horse ‘n vrou se account gehack. Hy het ‘n vals profile opgestel en allerhande walglikhede daarop gepost. Hierdie siek groep wat wolwe doodskiet is blykbaar soos ‘n sort cult.

    Hulle is defnitief gelee in die staat Idaho. As dit so is dat hulle jou profile kan naboots dan is ek bevrees ek gaan nie meer facebook gebruik as hulle nie iets aan ‘n klomp psigopate doen nie. Ons het hulle gewaarsku en hulle het niks aan die saak gedoen nie. Hierdie ou is duidelik uiters siek en gevaarlik.

    Dit gaan te laat wees as hy eers klaar iets gevaarlik gedoen het. Ek het solank my account gedactivate sodat ek seker is hy kan nie dalk daarin nie, indien hy nie dalk al klaar kon nie. Ek het facebook laat weet dat ek teleurgesteld is met hulle en dat ek nie veilig voel nie.

    Ek sal kyk of hulle vir my iets terug laat weet, so nie gaan ek nie weer op nie. Hulle moet daai gemors verwyder! Facebook is ‘n sosiale media ding en hulle het nie die reg om sulke kak daar te plaas en doelbewus vyande maak met ander mense nie.

    Vir die van julle wat wel op facebook is gaan maak gerus ‘n draai daar, maar wees gewaarsku jy gaan gevloek word en sleg gese word. Soos ek se, ek weet nie hoe veilig dit is nie.

    Like

    • Adriaan, ek reken dit gaan oor blootstelling en advertensie-waarde (vir hulle, en vir Facebook).
      En hoe meer kontroversieel, hoe beter.

      ‘n Petisie sal nie help nie. Miskien (MISKIEN) word die blad toegemaak, maar die praktyk sal voortbestaan.

      My advies? ignoreer dit.

      Like

      • Phineas daar is duidelik ‘n fyn lyn tussen wanneer is dit aanvaarbaar en wanneer is dit verkeerd. Kinderporgrafie sal ook baie mense lok maar die vraag is of dit reg is of nie en watter scenario mens skep deur sulke dinge toe te laat. Nee ek weet die praktyk sal bly bestaan. Maar ja ek sal bly wees as hulle die bladsy verwyder. Dit se vir my iets van facebook. Facebook soos baie ander goed is ‘n 800lbs gorilla. Mense skep daai ding. Mense moet besef dat dit sleg kan wees vir jou en jou kinders. Vir my is dit soos bubblegum kou. Jy geniet dit maar jy kry geen waarde daaruit nie. Die probleem met geweld is dat mense afgestomp raak. En dis gevaarlik.

        Like

    • My vet Adriaan ek ken ook so ‘n webblad waar mense probeer skok woorde gebruik om hul haat en nyd te ekspres teenoor mense wat nie soos hulle “glo” nie, maar ek kan nou net nie onthou waar nie.

      Like

        • My vet Ardiaan dis net ‘n ekspressie, dis seker beter as die Amerikaanse omg (O my god Adriaan . .!) Hoe moes ek nou geweet het jy is sensitief oor jou gewig . . ? ( Aan die anderkant as daar ‘n rokie is . . .)
          Het jy dalk al gedink dat ek sensitief is oor mense wat my vervloek . . .?

          Like

          • Nee dis basiese common sense en maniere om ander mense nie so aan te spreek nie. Maak nie saak of iemand sensitief is oor sy/ haar gewig nie. Jy se dit net eenvoudig nie. Dis uiters onbeskof en onopgevoed. Ek het nie met jou gepraat regtig nie en die eerste ding wat jy vir my se uit jou eie is skoorsoekrig. Ek se weer vir miljardse maal. Ek is nie vet nie. Dis wat mense soos Danie Kok in sy kop het. Hy het geen maniere daarom spreek hy ander mense so aan. Julle christene verstaan een groot ding van christen wees nie wat voorgeskryf was deur Jesus. Wees lief vir jou mede mens. Dis totaal ontbrekend by die oorgrote meerderheid van hulle.

            Like

            • Adriaan, Johannie se sort christene het nie die vermoe om hulself in die skoene van ander mense of diere te plaas nie.

              Ek het dit al baie by hierdie soort christene gesien. Ek verkies die opregte christene bo Johannie….

              Like

              • Adriaan, ek gaan nou eers gym, maar het jy enige “tips” vir maagoefeninge? Ek moet nog net n bietjie van my maagvet ontslae raak en dan kan ek al my aandig aan gewigte gee.

                Like

                  • Daai maagvet is moeilik om te verloor – die eerste plek waar ‘n man se oortollige reserwes gaan sit.
                    Ek reken dit het meer te doen met die gereeldheid van oefening, eerder as die tipe oefening self.
                    In die eerste 8 weke van my army-dae het ek 25kg verloor, af na 60kg. Nie soseer weens PT nie, maar mens moes altyd stap (‘march’,1km+) na en vanaf die menasie, en oorals waarheen jy moes gaan. Die etes het baie stysel bevat – so much for Banting.
                    Na aandete was mens nog honger genoeg om ‘n paar Bar-Ones en six pack Coke deur te draf voor ‘lights-out’. Go figure.

                    Like

                • Wat aanbetref jou maag vet verloor sal cardio en dieet die ding doen. Blykbaar is dit ‘n mite dat mens vet op jou maag verloor as jy dit gereeld oefen. Vir my persoonlik is die hanging leg raise ‘n goeie oefening. Gewone crunches. Ek vat gewoonlik die tricep rope en maak dit vas by die lat pulldown machine. Ek doen dan standing cable crunches 3stelle van 25 behoort die job te doen. Staan met jou rug na die masjien en doen standing cable crunches. Moet dit nie te swaar doen nie. ‘n Ou wil nie sy obliques te veel inbring nie. Reverse crunches behoort ook goed te werk.

                  Like

    • Adriaan, ek is nie juis n facebook ou nie, maar is daar fotos van geweld op hierdie blad teen wolwe? Ek praat van geweld soos bv. marteling?

      Is hierdie ou al lank besig op facebook? Ek sal kyk of ek op iets kan afkom.

      Like

      • Gerhard hy het blykbaar in 2013 al die gemors op gesit. Ek het so ‘n bietjie oor hom gaan oplees. Hy het blykbaar vir ‘n ander vrou in goed gese op ‘n site waar hulle brag oor hoe hulle katte doodmaak. Dit was volgens haar ‘n hele paar jaar terug al. Hy het blykbaar 8 verskillende bladsye oopgemaak.
        Hy is walglik en siek. Hy hat blykbaar ook ‘n jong meisie sexueel getry. As facebook sulke gemors toelaat is hulle siek en moreel vertraag.

        Like

    • Adriaan this cyber terrorism has been going on for quite a while. American legislation will soon clamp down on Google and Facebook for allowing arseholes like these to intimidate others and threaten to hack their e-mail accounts, find out who their girlfriends and mothers are, threaten to rape their girlfriends and hack their mothers to pieces, etc etc etc etc.

      You don’t have to unsubscribe from Facebook. Set your profile so that only yourself and friends can view new posts. Block those sites that offend you from viewing your profile altogether. They can then never contact you or see you; it is then as if you don’t exist for them.

      To know more about hate crimes and developments in legislation, download “Hate Crimes in Cyberspace” by Danielle Keats Citron from Amazon. You will find it interesting reading and realise that you are not alone in being horrified and, more importantly: Google, g-mail, hotmail and Facebook can no longer defend themselves by saying that they can’t control what people do on the internet. They can control what is posted, and they are being made to do something about it.

      If you are concerned about possible hacking into your e-mail accounts, run a regular computer deep scan for possible trojans and rootkits. NEVER get into e-mail contact with idiots like this.

      As for Johann: You have been a naughty boy. Wait until your father gets home!

      Like

      • Johan, now there is a cyber terrorist. Man I would so love him to say to face that I’m fat. Rude fucking assholes like him should be sorted out. Johan’s fucking cunt of a mother didn’t teach him manners just like that Danie Kok piece of shit. Johan is a typical coathanger abortion.

        Like

        • Ek het nou net weer onthou waar die walglike taal gebruik en siek pogings om te skok so uitgebasuin word . . . met verwysings na ontlasting en vroulike anatomie en voortplantings vermoëns . . . en foto’s van naakte vrouens en gekruisigde bebloede gemartelde mense . . .! ek sal julle eerder nie vertel nie, want Adriaan is al klaar so getraumatiseerd deur die ander blad waaroor hy nou so tekere gaan.

          Like

            • Adriaan, hierdie Johan is werklik deur die mis (Johannie gaan nou weer dink ek praat van ontlasting).

              Jy het nou n belangstelling in die wolwe van Noord-Amerika by my aangewakker. Ek sien al klaar n paar belangrike kwelpunte oor wetgewing rakende die beskerming van wolwe en hoe dit n politieke saak in veral die “middel” state van Amerika geword het. Daar is ook n vieslike geskiedenis van die uitmoor van hierdie mooi diere in Amerika. Dit is die moeitewerd om n bietjie navorsing te doen. Ek kan wolwe sien. Jesus en sy pappa het ek egter nog nooit gesien nie.

              Johannie

              Daar is ook sover ek weet geen bewyse dat Jesus gekrysig en opgevaar het nie. Wolwe is meer “real” as “Jesus”.

              Ek weet nie wat op die facebook blad aangaan nie. Maar as daar werklike sprake is van marteling dan wil ek weet wat aangaan. Die verskil is dat Jesus nie meer met ons is nie. Of hy nou bestaan het of nie of gekruisig is of nie. Buitendien hou sekere katolieke van n gekruisigde Jesus op n kruis

              Die verskil tussen Jesus en wolwe is dat ons wolwe kan “sien”. Dit gaan nie net oor die facebookblad van Adriaan nie. Hierdie wolwe word uitgemoor en daar is werklik min oor.

              Like

              • Ja Gerhard wolwe is pragitge diere. In Europa is hulle so te se uitgewis. Noord – Amerika het nog redelikke significant populations. In state soos Idaho, Montana en Wyoming is wolfjag veral erg. Jy weet Gerhard mense dink nooit daaraan nie maar veronderstel ons planeet is die enigste planeet in die hele heelal wat daar lewe op is. Dan sal dit absoluut terrible wees as die mens alles wat op aarde is uitwis. Die mens gaan homself ook eventueel uitwis. Ek verstaan op geen manier hoe ‘n mens se kop werk wat nie van diere hou nie. Mense is die skuim van die aarde en oor en oor en oor is daar gese – Moenie mense vertrou nie! Wat is so wonderlik omtrent mense dat mense , mense bo diere stel? Hoe kan enige iemand in ‘n wereld sonder diere wil leef?

                Like

              • Gerhardus so ek kan aflei dat jy al TYD, bewussyn en verwronge spasie ge-“sien” het, hoe lyk dit? en ek twyfel of jy al ‘n wolf gesien het. In SA is jakkalse ook onder groot druk, maar dit sal jou seker nie pla nie, dis mos net amerika amerika!

                Like

              • Ek vermoed hierdie is fotos van Prairie Wolwe (coyotes). Hulle word nie beskou as bedreig nie. Nie dat dit enige mishandeling regverdig nie.

                ‘n Ander wolf eie aan Noord Amerika is die Rooi Wolf. Daar is so min van hulle oor, in reservate, dat ek nie kan dink iemand sal die kans kry om een te skiet nie.
                Die Grys Wolf (Europa en Asië) is die mooiste, en populasies daar word as ‘stabiel’ beskou.
                Ek het wolf-afstammelinge in my huis. Baie intelligent. Ek kan hulle dalk leer om skaak te speel.

                Like

          • Johann, nobody is upset about “verwysings na ontlasting en vroulike anatomie en voortplantings vermoëns . . . en foto’s van naakte vrouens en gekruisigde bebloede gemartelde mense” – except you.

            Now go and play in the traffic.

            Like

      • As for facebook. My point is that first they are completely immoral. Secondly they have been warned by the users ( Who clearly feel very uncomfortable with this rubbish) that this guy is dangerous. If they want to make their own job easier then they must start taking hints from the public. That’s why I deactivated my account. If they can take ” racist ” stuff of they can take that of too. That’s what a democracy works like. I hate it when people bend backwards to 800lbs gorillas they created themselves.

        Like

        • Yes, Facebook is immoral. They have power. Power corrupts, and a lot of power corrupts completely. Your typical Facebook terrorist is very much like a fundamentalist Christian. You can at least do something about Facebook, however. Fundies are all over the bloody place and they encroach on your right to enjoy anything. It’s only a computer, not a fucking horrible fundie neighbour.

          Like

  4. I have never worn real fur clothing and have never owned leather furniture. Fabrics are much more versatile in any case. I keep red meat consumption down to a minimum (although my husband likes it) as too much red meat is not healthy for humans. So there is another reason to hate me, Johann: an atheist who doesn’t eat lamb very often. If I do occasionally eat lamb, the little beast must have the excess fat removed by the butcher, cubed into bite size pieces and honoured by being slow cooked in a Moroccan tagine with plenty of herbs and spices.

    Off track but funny (well, funny to me, anyway): it must be lousy living next door to me if you are a fundie who believes there is a god that administers absolute justice and showers gifts on the deserving. Every other day I have couriers from Takelot and Zando delivering parcels to my door: huge TV flat screens, computers, printers, toner cartridges, packages containing skincare, perfumes, dresses, leggings, jerseys, boots and books – the list is endless. So now the neighbours ae complaining that I have too much delivered to my home and that I SHOULD STOP BUYING STUFF. The dogs bark when couriers ring my doorbell to drop off my happiness-creating stuff and this is irritating to their nerves. I can just imagine them growling inside their house: “Die wiel draai … daai donnerse wiel SAL draai, Hy MOET draai.” They remind me very much of a couple of characters in an illustrated book called “The twits” by Roald Dahl.

    Like

    • I LOVE getting stuff delivered by courier. Think I should order something right now. Financial ruin looming…

      Like

      • You can save money by buying on the internet. You are not influenced by subliminal music or lighting or a high pressure salesperson. No parking to pay for, no car guards. No pressure to open accounts. If you pay off your credit card in full at the end of each month, you’re managing your finances.

        There are often specials on sites like Takealot and Zando and Cape Union Mart. Prices will be lower because you are not subsidising account holders who don’t pay their accounts.

        Places like Game have become more expensive because they give credit, while bad debt is spreading like an out of control virus. Have you noticed how many groceries Game is selling, for example? Poor people open accounts at Game knowing they can’t ever meet their repayments on their grocery purchases. The management of Game don’t mind because there are idiots who pay cash for prices that have been inflated to make up shortfalls caused by bad debt.

        Like

          • Atheists don’t usually get into arguments with Catholics because they don’t evangelise, which avoids arguments in the first place. They’re a bit like the Jews, they (usually) keep it to themselves. A closed mouth attracts no foot. Catholics do get crucified in tv debates with atheists though.

            Like

            • Odd that opposition to atheism mainly comes from Xians.
              OK, in some Islam dominated regions an atheist would probably get stoned to death, but that same punishment will apply to a woman baring her ankles in public.

              Like

              • At the moment I am prepared to turn our house into a Muslim household with Moroccan lamb stew laid on and dogs in kennel for a day or so if I can get the Beckers Muslim repairman from Lenasia to come down and stay here in a nice bedroom with ensuite bathroom so he can clean the chimney and service the anthracite heater so we can be warm with anthracite in the winter months which haven’t hit us yet here so far. I am probably simplifying this as he will need an assistant because chimney sweeping involves rope, pull rings and weights to remove the creosote build up inside the chimney in addition to servicing the heater itself. I could volunteer Themba, the gardener to help with the pull rings and weights and he is not dof and is quick to learn.

                It’s a question of what you need that determines who you will cooperate with. I might enjoy milk tart occasionally, but I wouldn’t eat it every day. This is what Afrikaner fundies don’t understand. A deeply insecure lot, they cannot live with the realisation that their guaranteed government job days are over. A government job isn’t good for a person in the long run as it encourages a “Ja baas” mentality while actively discouraging initiative.

                So now this same lot has a “Ja baas” relationship with an imaginary god who they believe will save their volk so they can go back to cushy government and bank jobs again and their wives will have black maids for ever more. If they were prepared to enter this insanity on their own it would be their own business, but they get out the loudspeaker to tell everyone else that if they are not with them, they are against them. And that if you are perceived to be “against” them, there will be dire consequences for you, not only in hell but on this earth as well. You move to a small town where you expect to enjoy peace and the wonders of nature, but you have the misfortune of having dangerous, bullying fundies living in your immediate neighbourhood. Most of these fundies eventually move out because they have financial problems, but some of them will try to make money out of their faith by setting up faith-based guesthouses which they operate without a licence to do so. They will accept any paying guest, however. There was an instance here of a couple owning a guesthouse attacked by eight robbers. Two guys had booked a double room (these are usually truck drivers driving in tandem). They went out to buy food after checking in and returned with another six guys and then tied these people up and robbed them blind. Personally, I wouldn’t want to live near such an amateur establishment run on blind faith alone.

                Like

              • Ek wonder of die ‘evangelicals’ in Amerika meer en meer militant gaan word oor sake soos bv. die leer van “Creationism” en hul “regte” in skole soos wat die land meer sekuler raak. In die meeste Wes- Europese lande is hierdie nonsens van die Christene se skeppingsverhaal darem sover ek weet nie deel van die wetenskapklas nie.

                Like

              • Phineas, die Christene het darem n bietjie afgekoel. Daar is egter groot oplewing wat konflik in die Moslem wereld aanbetref. Dit is nou sekere moslems wat hulle soos die Christene van ouds gedra.Die Moslem wereld moet nog n verligting ondergaan wat sekere lande aanbetref. Selfs n sg. “demokratiese’ Turkeye het nog n end om te loop.

                Die Moslems wag nog op hul eie verligting…

                As ek egter kyk na die Europese geskiedenis van die 20ste eeu dan wonder n mens of selfs die Christenwereld ooit n verligting gehad het. Ek praat nou van Hitler, Churchill en Stalin….

                Like

                • Om eerlik te wees is die probleme in sekere dele van die Moslemwereld darem nie net die skuld van godsdiens as sulks nie.

                  Like

    • Ja dan stem jy saam met jou prez wat nou hier met die afrika dag beweer dat kafrika in vrede saam geleef het tot die “ander” alles kom bederf het. Bedoelende nou julle wittes wat die diereryk hier kom versteur het . . . so asof ons daar was! En nou prober jy ook die blaam op ander plaas sjym is jy ook ‘n “victim”

      Like

      • Johannie, dit is a.g.v. godsdiens dat die regse Afrikanertjies (ek is amper seker dat jy net soos Kokkerman regse neigings het) hulle teen n muur vasgeloop het.

        Kokkerman noem my mos n “vreemde” soort Afrikaner. Dit is nogal n kompliment want “regse” (kom ons noem dit ook maar konserwatief vir ons doeleindes)- en liberale Afrikaners is volgens my dieselfde “virus”. Dit hang natuurlik af oor watter spesifieke onderwerp dit handel wanneer n mens van konserwatief, liberal of n ander ideologie praat.

        “Ja dan stem jy saam met jou prez wat nou hier met die afrika dag beweer dat kafrika in vrede saam geleef het tot die “ander” alles kom bederf het. Bedoelende nou julle wittes wat die diereryk hier kom versteur het . . . so asof ons daar was!”

        Sinnelose aanval op Holy….

        “En nou prober jy ook die blaam op ander plaas sjym is jy ook ‘n “victim”

        Wil jy bietjie verduidelik?

        Godsdiens was die doodsteek Johannie. Geen verbeelding onder die liberale en konserwatiewe Afrikaners nie. Maar nou-ja, n gesprek wat ek nie eindlik verder wil vat nie.

        Like

        • So gepraat van viruses. Indien n mens nou die geskiedenis van die Christelike geloof vining saamvat t.o.v. waar dit n sterk invloed – met die verloop van die eeue – uitgeoefen het dan kan mens die volgende streke min of meer identifiseer as “Christelike streke:

          Noord-Amerika, Sentraal- en Suid- Amerika, Europa (ingesluit die Kaukakiese lande en Rusland, Australasie, dele van veral Sub-Sahara Afrika en ander werelddele.

          Die Christendom het nooit juis opgang gemaak in lande soos China en Indie (Pakistan en Bangladesh was destyds ook deel van India en dus die Britse empire). Vandag is daar iets soos 24 miljoen Christene in Indie uit n bevolking van amper 1.3 Biljoen mense.

          Nou wonder ek. Onlangse navorsing wys dat die Christelike geloof tekens toon dat dit in Noord-Amerika besig is om te kwyn terwyl Wes-Europa asook meer Oos-Eurpeuse lande die Tsjeggiese Repebliek al lank n kultuur van ongeloof wat aan die ontwikkel is.

          Aangesien ek nou bietjie filosofeer vandag wonder ek of die virus nie dalk na China en India gaan oorspoel nie, terwyl Afrika, die Midde-Ooste, die res van Asie en Latyns-Amerika die godsdiens “bastions” gaan wees?

          http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/americas-changing-religious-landscape/

          Like

              • Is dit so verkeerd van my om te sien dat dit maak nie saak waste geloof mense aanhang nie, as dit ego gedrewe is, of as dit iets is wat die ego “geskep” het, maak dit nie saak wat jy dit noem nie, dit bly slegs iets wat in mense se koppe bestaan, en al dink julle nou die ateiste is so wonderlik sal daar ‘n “tipping point” wees waar hulle meer militant gaan optree en hulself skuldig maak aan presies dit wat hulle kastig so verafsku. Soos dis oukei vir Adriaan om my te vloek, en baie swak opvoeding van ‘n f** ma wat my so sleg groot gemaak het word ek vertel, maar laat ek net my spreektaal ekspress, dan bollie hy hier op die blad. . . . dit het alreeds begin.

                Like

                  • Mooi Fielijas uiteindlik ‘n vraag waaroor ek moes dink, – “Wat het jou geloof geskep? Dis sekerlik nie net een ding nie, maar eers sal ons moet ooreenstem oor wat “geloof” is.

                    Geloof is nie ‘n gedagte nie, is dit?, maar kan in ‘n gedagte verander as mens daarop fokus. Geloof sit m.a.w. agter die gedagte en as jy bv skryf dat – “ek glo aan niks” is dit sekerlik ‘n onmoontlike, want alreeds glo jy aan “ek glo aan niks”

                    Like

                  • Wat n wonderlike wereld beleef ons nie. Ek het onlangs n nuwe geloof leer ken. Afhangende van watter bronne raadgepleeg word en is daar ongeveer 2 tot 8 miljoen Caodaiste (Cao dai) met Vietnam as die land met die grootste aantal gelowiges. Dit is nou afhangende van die bronne wat raadgepleeg word.

                    Blykbaar is Jesus, Mohammed, Buddha, Louis Pasteur Lenin en “Joan of arc” ook rolspeler in hierdie godsdien. God se oog hou ook n wakened oog oor die mensdom. Ek kan nog steeds nie verstaan of daar helle of/en hemele is nie. Ek wonder of daar net een hemel en een hel vir almal indien n mens nou die onderstaande bron lees.

                    Dit brinh my nou by ateisme. Ek het n dokumenter gesien “Around the world in 80 faiths”. Daar is 8 episodes waarvan ek 2 al gesien het. Blykbaar gaan ateisme ook aangespreek word as n geloof (dit het belangrike implikasies Johannie as ek dit aanvaar as n gegewe vir die doeleindes van gesprekvoering) Nietemin iets om na te kyk.

                    Daar is selfs n inset oor “Afrikaner Calvinism”. Die BBC program (wat op Youtube gesien kan word) wys ook die insette oor Boesmans. Wat egter insiggewend is is dat sekere Afrikaner Calvinste van Groot Marico – die wereld van Herman Charles Bosman – glo iets te se het oor 2020 waar belangrike dinge gaan gebeur. Dit is nou episode 3…..

                    Jong, daar is darem baie GODE…..

                    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cao_%C4%90%C3%A0i

                    Like

                • Nee ou maat. Jy het eerste met jou kak begin. Jy het eerste begin name noem. As jy dit nie kan hanteer om hier te wees nie moet jy liewerste waai. Moenie die argitek van ‘n speletjie wees wat jy nie meer beried is om te speel nie. Oordat die ander te rof raak. Jy moet kan vat wat jy kan uitdeel. Jy het eerste begin.

                  Like

                    • Ja nee kyk as jy darem al meer as twee jaar hier is moet jy darem weet die ander kinders speel baie lelik hier. Ons almal hier het al bloedbekke gekry.

                      Like

                  • Ja, Adriaan

                    Jy was vir n lang ruk weg en toe kom vra jy raad oor daardie storie met die wolwe. Jy het nie kom moeilikheid soek met Johann nie. Hy het eerste begin.

                    Like

                • Wag n bietjie Johannie, miskien moet ek tog nog vandag n kommentaar of twee lewer.

                  ”””””Is dit so verkeerd van my om te sien dat dit maak nie saak waste geloof mense aanhang nie, as dit ego gedrewe is, of as dit iets is wat die ego “geskep” het, maak dit nie saak wat jy dit noem nie, dit bly slegs iets wat in mense se koppe bestaan, en al dink julle nou die ateiste is so wonderlik sal daar ‘n “tipping point” wees waar hulle meer militant gaan optree en hulself skuldig maak aan presies dit wat hulle kastig so verafsku.”””

                  Bewys die ander Gode verkeerd en bewys dat hulle geloof wat aangehang “ego gedrewe” is.

                  Laat ek nou bietjie mooi verstaan. Se jy bv. dat n “ego gedrewe” Moslem verkeerd is en dat n Moslem wat nie “ego gedrewe” is nie se God bestaan. Net so is dit op toepasing van alle Gotte/Got/God/Gode. So alle Gode bestaan en is werklik? Nou hoe weet ons jou God is die super-God Johannie? Wat jy hierbo geskryf het beteken jy het in sirkels geredeneer. Bewys ook sommer dat daar problem met hierdie mense se “ego’d” is. Jy sien Johannie jy is ook n ateis t.o.v. van ander mense se claims dat hulle God die regte God is. Jy moet net van een God ontslae raak, dan is jy ook n ateis.

                  Like

                  • ……..Jammer ek praat van ego’s

                    ”””….en al dink julle nou die ateiste is so wonderlik sal daar ‘n “tipping point” wees waar hulle meer militant gaan optree en hulself skuldig maak aan presies dit wat hulle kastig so verafsku”””

                    Selfs al ek aanvaar ek dit dat sekere ateiste militant gaan optree soos wat al die ander gelowe se mense opgetree het is my antwoord nogsteeds:

                    SO WAT DAARVAN?

                    Jy sien, jy het nog niks van jou God bewys nie. Wat bv. het die feit dat mense mekaar dikwels vermoor of oorlog teen mekaar voer uit te waai met die waarheid. Die mensdom se idiotiese gedrag kry nie einde nie, maar wat het dit met jou God uit te waai?

                    Like

          • Ja, Gerhard. Talking about the devil and Prada: Jani Allan was here recently to promote her memoir, “Jani Confidential” in which she once again lies that she Did Not Have An Affair With Eugene Terreblanche.

            Of course she did. She is as far to the right as a fish knife. She’s a born again Christian that lies every time her lips move. (The lips below are more honest.)

            I bothered to buy a copy of her book and you can read between the lines. Apart from repeatedly denying that she had an affair with the “pig in the safari suit” she tells little that is not already in the public domain. There was some mildly interesting stuff from way back in the nineties. But everyone knows by now that Cliff Saunders, previously PW Botha’s sycophant and newsreader for the SABC, was a double agent and worked with the ANC in London to try to murder Mangosuthu Buthelezi.

            So now she wants someone in South Africa to bail her out from her waitressing job in New Jersey, America, because hey, she’s a born again Christian, she has seen the light, she loved her boerewors and valium too much, so sorry. Sy kruip nou gat by die Jode en Israelgatte.

            Like

            • Holy, whats the story with Cliff Saunders? I don’t get it. According to my Knowledge Saunders produced a documentary on Botha which the SABC rejected?

              Like

              • Gerhard, I don’t know about that, but Saunders did a stint in London where he pretended to befriend the Inkatha Freedom Party while all the time being an agent for the ANC who wanted to draw out Buthelezi to a place where he could be murdered more easily.

                Like

          • There is a charismatic (Pentecostal) group where I live and yes, they tell me the Pentecostals worldwide want to expand “Christianity” (make pots of money) in China. A pastor and his wife I know are very excited because they have volunteered to go. The Chinese now have money. That was the missing ingredient.

            The Chinese authorities hate and resist any form of religion. If you visit China, don’t wear a crucifix. You might be turned back at the airport. I haven’t been for a while, so that might have changed.

            Like

      • What I don’t understand is why this pizza kroeg owner didn’t tell them to keep their R14 but never come back again.

        Like

  5. I’m not in favour of e-tolling, but these morons are taking it to the next level:
    https://www.facebook.com/saagainstdaggaandsatan?ref=profile

    Here’s a recent post:

    “Hi Barend,
    Thank you for your question. Yes, you are indeed correct. EVERY CENT that you pay towards E-Tolls goes straight into Satan’s pocket.

    Any real Christian would gladly accept death before paying satanistic tribute at those hellish gantries with their otherwordly blue lights.

    Please do not bother to pray for those lost fools that are paying, as they are dead to us and, by extension, to Jesus.

    Yours sincerely,
    Pastoor Hennie”

    Like

    • Bwa ha ha ha ha ha! Ja, well let’s see if they really do accept death before paying Satan. In the meantime Pastoor Hennie is milking his parish of 10% of their gross salary every month.

      Like

    • I wonder what Satan spends the money on. They say he wears Prada. I bet he’s also partial to Louis Vuitton.

      Like

    • Unbelievable. Pastoor Hennie is clearly as nutty as 20 pots of Black Cat peanut butter. What gets me is that other Xtians that will agree with his degree of nuttyness, are typically quiet. They have no problem making an effort to attack non-believers or other religions, but turn a blind eye to fundamentalism in their own ranks. What hypocrites.

      Like

      • Malherbe, this pastoor exploits the poor out of the little they earn with the promise that they will get back sevenfold if they give to the Lord.

        Some of these Afrikaners are not even lucky enough to have jobs.

        From The Times today:

        Sixtysomethings among those living on the streets

        A “conservative” estimate of 200,000 people are living under bridges, on pavements and under bushes near rivers, a summit convened by homeless people in Pretoria heard yesterday.

        Dr Stephan de Beer, a researcher and director of contextual ministry at the University of Pretoria, said the largest concentrations of homeless people in Tshwane were in their 20s and “rather disturbingly, over the age of 60 – people who should be benefiting from state social assistance.”

        He said Stats SA data showed that in Tshwane 54% of the homeless population was male, 46% female, 55% black, 39% white, 3.1%coloured and 2.1% Indian.

        The provision of temporary shelters and soup kitchens was important but not a permanent solution. Permanent housing was the solution.

        Like

  6. Hier is iets wat Gehardus vroeër gepos het:

    “Hier is solank vir die soveelste keer nog n voorbeeld oor ateïsme en wat geloof is.”
    http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Atheism_is_based_on_faith

    “an atheist is one who either lacks positive belief in a god or who believes that no gods exist, not one who claims to know absolutely that no gods exist”

    So dan weet julle nie absoluut regtig nie, nou waarom val julle mense so aan wat sê dat God wel ‘n realiteit is, hoekom sê julle hulle is verkeerd?

    “As the article on faith discusses, the two primary meanings of the word are: (1) confident belief in the TRUTH, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing; and (2) belief that does not rest on logical proof or material evidence”

    Verduidelik dan hoe kan julle weet dat God nie bestaan nie op grond van logiese beredenering?

    “Someone who has never heard of the concept of “gods” would not believe in them. Under the broader definition of atheism, they would be an atheist and yet not have faith that no gods exist”

    Haha julle “konsepte” van God wat julle in jul ego”djies” opgemaak het is toe die “vals self” se eie maaksel en nou wil julle nie daaraan glo nie omdat julle nog met jul eie ego”djies” geïdentifiseer is.

    “If the god is not logically consistent” Weer die logika ding waar aan julle “glo”, wie het logika so verhewe dat dié nou alles moet kan opklaar? Logika kan nie eens bewussyn logies verklaar nie.

    . Even strong atheism is simply a position on one particular issue: there is no god. Thus, even assuming strong belief in this point, that doesn’t say anything at all about the actual cause, nature or purpose of the universe, except in the negative (“it’s not God”).

    “Thus, even assuming strong belief in this point” Werklik ‘n sterk geloof of wat anders . . ‘n swak geloof. Geloof bly geloof.

    So kan ek aangaan, maar die indruk wat ek kry is dat ateïsme ‘n tiepe “ingesteldheid” is wat ‘n denkrigting ondersteun (confident belief in the TRUTH, value, or trustworthiness of a person, idea, or thing) dat daar ‘n idee is wat êrens in stilte rondhang waaraan julle getrou moet wees, ‘n tiepe idee dat daar iets groter as julle is, ‘n idee wat julle “worship”.

    So sorrie Gerhardus al wat julle sê is wat ateïsme NIE is nie, is ateïsme so ‘n vae idee van “ek” is reg, “ek” weet die waarheid, so ‘n vae gevoel dat julle sal sien eendag sal ek reg wees. Dis net jou ego”djie wat jou goed laat voel oor jou”self” om jou in die donker te hou.

    Like

  7. Jy weet Johannie, vir n voormalige ateis is jy darem lekker dom ne?

    ”””So dan weet julle nie absoluut regtig nie, nou waarom val julle mense so aan wat sê dat God wel ‘n realiteit is, hoekom sê julle hulle is verkeerd?””’

    Ja, ek persoonlik weet nie of daar n Got/Gotte/God/Gode is nie. Ek het mos ook al vir jou gese ek gee nie om wat in jou kop aangaan nie. As JOU God in jou kop bestaan dan bestaan dit. Die probleem kom gewoonlik wanneer daar met die eksterne wereld in aanraking gekom word. Ek val die mense aan wat dink net hulle God is reg en die ander se Gode verkeerd. Daar is egter geen bewyse vir enige Got/Gotte/Gode/God nie. Jy kan dit nie bewys nie. Gaan loer maar n bietjie daar by die argumente vir die bestaan van God (let op dat die argumente vir God dikwels ook nie spesifiseer watter God nie. Nietemin is die argumente vir die bestaan van God wat ek nie hier opnoem nie dikwels maklik weerlegbaar met teenargumente.

    Meer spesifiek t.o.v. ”””’ nou waarom val julle mense so aan wat sê dat God wel ‘n realiteit is”””

    Want hierdie mense dink dikwels hulle God (waarvoor daar geen bewyse is nie) is die “regte” God terwyl ander Gode verkeerd is. Jy het mos al gepraat van ‘afgode” of hoe Johannie? Of was dit nou Kokkerman of beide van julle? Wat is die implikasies as almal se Gode reg is. Hoe weeg die Judahisme bv. op teenoor die Christendom. Praat ons alweer hier van dimensies waar alles reg is of selfs verkeerd is. Jy het die storie van die hel afgewater tot ons (dit is nou die wat die krummels kry) teenoor julle wat iets beter kry). Hoe de hel kan ek tergelyk bv. na Allah se hel toe gaan en na die christelike hemel of visa versa. Jy sien ek het sopas begin lees oor die Quran. Ek sien veral uit na die stukke oor Jesus. Die Jode wag nog vir die Messiah of hoe Johannie? Is hulle verkeerd in hulle seining oor Jesus. Ons almal weet dat die hele Christelike geloof tot n groot mate gebou is op die storie van Jesus en die opvaar na die hemel. Ou Mohammed het dit ook gedoen so dit is niks niets nie. Hoe onderskei jy
    tussen hierdie ‘supernatural claims”?

    Het julle bewys dat net julle God reg is en dat die ander Gode verkeerd is? Julle het nie.! Dit is wat jy moet verduidelik. Al die ateiste en die ander gelowe het mos n probleem met hulle interne ego of hoe Johannie. Johannie het egter die antwoord. Die heidene (ateiste en agnostics ingesluit vir hierdie doeleindes)

    …”hoekom sê julle hulle is verkeerd?”””

    Want daar is geen bewyse nie. Indien iets sonder bewyse aanvaar word dan kan enige iets aanvaar word sonder dat daar bewyse is. Oneindige Gode kan dan as waar aanvaar word. Wat as jy verkeerd is t.o.v. die ander Gode.

    “Verduidelik dan hoe kan julle weet dat God nie bestaan nie op grond van logiese beredenering?”

    Die meeste ateiste se siening is dat Got/God/Gode/Gotte nie verkeerd bewys kan word nie. As n moslem sy Allah as die waarheid voorhou dan kan ek hom nie verkeerd bewys nie. Die problem is derhalwe dat niemand mekaar se Gode verkeerd kan bewys nie. Ons sit met n probleem soos ek vroeer vir jou gese het. Kan jy logiese beredenering toepas om DraakGod verkeerd te bewys. Ongelukkig kan jy wat Johannie is nie my almagtige DraakGod sien al sou jy hier langs my sit waar ek nou tik. Jy sien niemand ander behalwe ek kan hom sien nie. Jy kan my nie verkeerd bewys nie, net so min as wat jy die Moslem weergawe – 1 van die 3 of 4 Abrahamitiese – gelowe nie verkeerd kan bewys nie

    Like

    • Ek sal more verder skryf, maar hier is solank weer n stukkie van n voormalige pastor – nou n ateis – wat ek vir jou gestuur het n paar maande gelede. Ek stem min of meer saam, maar veral die laaste drie sinne is die essensie van die saak:

      Skepticism is my nature.
      Free Thought is my methodology.
      Agnosticism is my conclusion.
      Atheism is my opinion.
      Humanitarianism is my motivation.

      —Jerry DeWitt

      Like

    • Dis nou my driede poging om te antwoord en elkekeer verloor ek die pos, maar . . . .

      Gerhardus ek probeer nie om te bewys dat God bestaan nie en ek kan nie praat vir ander gelowe nie, maar sover ek weet as jy vir jouself wil weet is daar net een manier om uit te vind, en dit is iets wat die ego / “vals self” nie lus is om te doen nie. Die ego weet net die dinge wat dit kan sien en voel en hoor en dis al wat dit ken. As jy wil weet of daar iets meer is in die heelal dan kan jy net vir jouself uitvind en om na ander te kyk gaan nie help nie.

      Like

      • “”””Gerhardus ek probeer nie om te bewys dat God bestaan nie en ek kan nie praat vir ander gelowe nie, maar sover ek weet as jy vir jouself wil weet is daar net een manier om uit te vind, en dit is iets wat die ego / “vals self” nie lus is om te doen nie.”””””

        Ek weet jy “‘””” probeer nie om te bewys dat God bestaan nie””””. n mens hoof nie n rocket scientist te wees om te weet dat dit jou vertrekpunt is nie. Dit is al lank wat ek dit by jou bespeur. Maar ek moet Jahweh aan jou defineer en verduidelik? Wat/wie/hoekom is god inelkgeval?

        Ek weet jy kan nie “”””praat vir ander gelowe nie””””. Jy kan hulle nie verkeerd bewys nie + jy het nog nie eers al die gelowe geondersoek nie. Die laaste vraag rakende “glo”, geloof en godsdiens het ek met n rede gevra.

        “””””….maar sover ek weet as jy vir jouself wil weet is daar net een manier om uit te vind, en dit is iets wat die ego / “vals self” nie lus is om te doen nie.””””‘

        Inderdaad, dit is jou probleem want jy kan nie jou ego lus laat word vir die ander gelowe nie. Waarom verwerp jy ander gelowe/godsdienste as n waarheid? Indien jy nie ander gelowe/godsdienste verwerp as n waarheid nie, dan sit ons met n probleem dat ALMAL reg is. Selfs die ateiste kan ook reg wees, want dalk is daar n sort God wat al julle theists in die hel gooi omdat julle dit durf waag het om die “mind” van God/Gode (jy is bewus daarvan dat nie alle mense op aarde net een god dien nie) te probeer verstaan nie..

        Ateiste ondersoek dikwels so veel as moontlik godsdienste. Ek persoonlik probeer soveel moontlik godsdienste verstaan. Dus laat ek nie die moontlikheid van n god uit nie. Bewys aan ons dat jy alle godsdienste geondersoek het. Die wereld is groter as bv. net die groot 5. Daar is baie ander gode soos die van Cao dai (God het blykbaar een oog as ek dit nou reg verstaan, wat alles sien). Blykbaar het God dan ook n Ego of hoe Johannie. Jou God is blykaar nie die enigste almagtige God nie. Een van die eerste voor-filosowe in die griekse tydperk het op n tyd verklaar dat n mens nie eenkeer in dieselfde revier kan loop nie. Godsdienste kom en gaan volgens my humble opinie. Die Christendom is niks spesiaal nie. Ek dink die Moslem geloof – wat 600 jaar jonger as die Christendom is – gaan die Christen geloof verby vat as die grootste geloof in die wereld.

        Ek lei af dat daar n spesiale plekkie in dieselfde hemel vir Jesus, Stalin, en Mohammed is volgens Caodaism. Dit is n ingewikkelde affere hierdie Johannie. Maak solank jou hart oop vir die dierbare ander GODE. Jy moet n bietjie werk aan daardie ego. Mohammed wag vir jou. Soos ek se, ek lees die Koran vir n slag.

        “As jy wil weet of daar iets meer is in die heelal dan kan jy net vir jouself uitvind en om na ander te kyk gaan nie help nie.”

        Wie se ek kyk na ander?

        “”””Die ego weet net die dinge wat dit kan sien en voel en hoor en dis al wat dit ken.””””

        Jy is so voorspelbaar Johann. Ek het geweet jy gaan dit een of ander tyd as n argument probeer voortbring.

        Verduidelik jou formule en hoekom kom almal nie by dieselfde god uit nie. Daar Boedhis waarvan jy praat mediteer seker al vir jare, maar Johannie het die waarheid sommer chop-chop gevind. En die Boedhis? Waarom word nie alle boedhiste christene nie.

        Nee-wat Johann. Om soms te se jy weet nie is n goeie eienskap om te he.

        RAAK STIL JOHANN EN SOEK DIE WARMTE VAN MY HEILIGE DRAAKGOD OP…

        Like

        • “Ek val die mense aan wat dink net hulle God is reg en die ander se Gode verkeerd” en jy het seker jou private redes daarvoor . . .?
          As jy dan ander of alle gelowe ondersoek hoekom kies jy nie een en gaan “kyk” waaroor dit gaan nie, ek is nie seker en ek hoef ook nie oordeel te vel oor of ander gelowe reg of verkeerd is nie, sover dit my aan betref kan jy en niemand God in ‘n blik druk nie, daar is mense wat ander gelowe aanhang wat sekerlik gevind het dat God op verskillende maniere met mense kan “kontak” maak.

          As jy weer gebore word uit die “gees” sal enige logiese en rasionele denke jou nie anders kan oortuig nie, dit gaan die verstand te bowe soos hulle sê, net so min aswat jy kan verstaan wat tyd en ruimte is net so min kan jy verstaan wie of wat God is.

          En jy verwys na die “hemel” wat is dit vir jou? Hel is om vark peule te eet wat jou ego”djie” jou voer, nou wat is hemel vir jou?

          Like

  8. My opinion. Analysing Gratha Wiid’s childhood – she had at least 5 male rejections and therefore became a Lesbian. Gretha Wiid is still rejected by man, as is evident here. In my opinion, Gretha Wiid has suffered more as a child as she adopted the act of Lesbianism (very evil stuff according to Leviticus). According to Liviticus, neither her or her husband will be saved and everyone connected to them will be cast into further darkness.

    Like

  9. One thing i do not understand about Atheism is that in my understanding, they believe in evolution. I think what it means is that they believe that everything came from nothing, and that nothing became something by a big explosion, creating something like the oceans, animals,oxygen,flowers, mountains, even humans. I think that it is much more far-fetched, than believing in intelligent design. Even Darwin admitted that the human eye , could not have evolved.
    On Gretha Wiid, i think sometimes she is very outspoken, i guess she will get some slack. I am sure she can handle it.

    Like

    • Anthony, not all atheists actually do believe in evolution. But in the West I think that most Atheists do believe in evolution. You don’t have to believe in evolution to be an Atheist. And please remember that evolution doesn’t deal with the origin of life. The origin of life is a mystery we must yet discover. Evolution is a scientific theory (not a theory like some people understand it)

      Also remember that Darwinism and modern evolution is not the same thing. Read what modern scientist say about the eye then I’ll argue against intelligent design.

      Regarding your first cause argument. What you just wrote is nothing new. I hear this argument often. But let me rather focus on your statement “I think what it means is that they believe that everything came from nothing” – I already told that evolution and the Big Bang are not scientific theories of the origin of the universe and life. It always amaze me that people don’t gasp it.

      Regarding God/s and nothing. I often ask people if their God/s can do anything. They say yes. When I ask them if their God/s can be nothing (by which I mean not even black or white matter – absolutely nothing). They then say no, their God is eternal which means she/he/it/they cant create itself out of nothing. So if God/s cant create itself out of nothing then way the hell should I believe that this “thing” is actually God/s. Heck Atheist might be currently right that God/s are dead. Well its much more complicated but I’ll stop here for now.

      Regarding Einsten. Its true that Einstein were neither an aggressive atheist nor a follower of the Abrahamic religions. He probably believed in some kind of non-personal “God” (if we can even call it a God). Thus a God that don’t tell people how they should act or send them to “hell” or heaven” ( like in the Abrahamic religions).

      Question everything Anthony!

      Like

  10. This should start you off into what Einstein believed regarding religion. As an Agnostic Atheist (not a “aggressive gnostic Atheist) I’ve got no problem with Einstein’s view. Do you what an Atheist is and the types of Atheists there are? Regards

    Like

  11. It also seems that he believed in some kind of “cosmic religion”. You should however research what he means by “God” and “religion” I cant talk for all Atheist but I have a deep sense of aw of the universe. This is also what many Pantheists. But if you think about it, Pantheists can also be atheists and they don’t even know it.

    Like

  12. Gerhard, thanks for your post. Looking at Einstein, there was a believe system which he was outspoken on, but i think you covered that sufficiently. i have atheist friends, and i respect them. I have found that their belief system is a bit shaky from time to time, just as any Christian from time to time. You see being a Atheist like yourself, i sometimes wonder and this is just my opinion,. your hole existence is limited to your hole potential, resources and ability.So let say you are wealthy,have education and are privileged ect. The next Atheist might have less or more than you. Obviously someone will always have more.How do you reconcile
    yourself with that? The thing is you can only go as far as your resources and ability takes you.
    After that, not believing in God, and not knowing Him, you have a problem. I do not no how old you are, but let’s say you are 40. Do you reconcile yourself with the fact, if you are lucky you have another approximately 15000 days left, assuming you live another 40 years. What do you believe happens to you when you stop living. Are you then in a nothing state. Which is fine if you believe that. You see if i were to say that you know everything, 100 % everything. You would say you don’t. We can do it even 50 %, you would say you don’t. But let us assume that you know 50 % of everything, would you concede the other 50 % that you don’t know, that the possibility of God’s existence is true? For now, going in to facts, i always ask my Atheist friends one of many questions, which we always have a laugh about it, because they can never answer it. If there was no creation made by intelligent design as the bible explains. If just taking the earth, forget about the universe. Why are there such a small amount of people on earth today? Closing in on 8 billion people there should be trillions on earth just going back 50 000 years, starting out with 2 people, with average population growth worked out since we started recording these mathematical stats. Just 250 years ago we were living so primitively. Only 250 years ago,no electricity, no plains, no plumbing, no phones,, no antibiotics, actually living very primitive. Then people want to talk about million of billions of years ago, , then thousands of years ago. Sometimes i wonder if people know how long a thousand years is, it is a very long time. You see if i were to ask you do you believe Genghis Khan lived you might say yes or no, i do not know. But most people will say yes, atheists and non atheists. But they will say yes based on no proof what so ever. There are no photos no living person to testify about his existence. Yet people belief what is recorded in writing. So looking at Christ there is ample evidence besides the writings that he lived, most of today’s nations use His time line to, His coming as their time line, the most talked about person in history. I do not want to discuss His divinity now, that is another discussion. Anyway nice chatting to you, just a couple of thoughts. KEEP WELL.
    .

    Like

    • Well I’ll try to answer quickly. Long day ahead tomorrow

      “I have found that their belief system is a bit shaky from time to time, just as any Christian from time to time.”

      It depends on what you mean by “shaky”. If you mean going to hell or heaven. I don’t fear that. If you mean that there might be a God/s. Well, most atheists I know are agnostic Atheists which basically mean they say God/s dont exist as a believe claim. They don’t say Gods don’t exist as an absolute knowledge claim.

      “You see being a Atheist like yourself, i sometimes wonder and this is just my opinion,. your hole existence is limited to your hole potential, resources and ability.So let say you are wealthy,have education and are privileged ect. The next Atheist might have less or more than you. Obviously someone will always have more.How do you reconcile
      yourself with that? The thing is you can only go as far as your resources and ability takes you.”

      I suspect you have a deeper question but I’ll answer this one as best I can. I suppose your talking about injustice and that heaven or hell will be the ultimate justice. What makes you think that religion (and scriptures) sorts out the problem of injustice here on earth? I can see a lot of injustice towards people/nations and scriptures solds it as absolute truth. In the Bible injustices are being done to the “others” without even a blink because the “people of God” thought “God” spoke to them. We also don’t have the other side of the story of the peoples the ancient Israelites slaughtered (if the Bible is absolutely true) . I have a pretty gray view on humans. Sometimes I love them (i.e. what we achieved and things such as love and friendships) and sometimes I despise them (i.e. arrogance and hate that we have). Humans have constructed injustice through systems. I mean what is money really? I can elaborate but I’ll think I’ll leave it for now.

      Regarding heaven and hell. Religions have created heaven and hells but here we move in Pascal’s wager territory. Which hell/s or heaven/s is the right one?

      Like

    • “The thing is you can only go as far as your resources and ability takes you.
      After that, not believing in God, and not knowing Him, you have a problem. I do not no how old you are, but let’s say you are 40. Do you reconcile yourself with the fact, if you are lucky you have another approximately 15000 days left, assuming you live another 40 years. What do you believe happens to you when you stop living. Are you then in a nothing state. Which is fine if you believe that. You see if i were to say that you know everything, 100 % everything. You would say you don’t. We can do it even 50 %, you would say you don’t. But let us assume that you know 50 % of everything, would you concede the other 50 % that you don’t know, that the possibility of God’s existence is true?”

      Why should it be a problem? You are making it a problem.

      Don’t know because there’s no evidence regarding the afterlife. But some other creatures will have a whale of a time (if you want a coffin). Who knows, maybe there is a afterlife in the sense that you’ll live in some kind of essence (but I see now evidence) while your human conscious wont even know it. But this is mere speculation. Yes I concede the 50%/50% narrative. But then you have no evidence and proof that your God is the right God. Maybe some other God or Gods we don’t really know.

      Like

      • But just a question? Why on earth do you think just one (3-in-1) personal God created the cosmos (and no I’m not necessary talking about the Greek mythological Gods) It’s a fallacy and we also have to bring Occam’s razor into the mix.

        For all that we know we atheists might indirectly “worship” the right God/s. In my view atheists can be right on the premise that God/s can do anything such as not even existing now. my view is that religions are indirectly putting “God/s in a box”. They claim that God/s are eternal but they reject the notion that God/s can’t create themselves out of nothing. Therefore God’s being able to be absolutely nothing and yet something or one thing (probably the wrong word) at a time.

        Sorry I must go. Will try to answer the rest of your comments later.

        Like

  13. Gerhard, sorry i forgot, i hear what you say about atheists and evolution, but i took it from a angle, the mystery of live that is the thing to consider.

    Like

  14. Hier gaan ons weer om eeu-oue argumente wat teen Charles Darwin gerig word, te verwerp. Julle godiote moet bietjie wyer lees en nie al die kreasionistiese snert vir soetkoek op te eet nie.

    Evolution deniers are very fond of quoting the following passage from On the Origin of Species, chapter 6:
    “To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.”
    …but they invariably neglect to quote the remainder of the section, where Darwin goes on to say that, absurd though it might seem, he had no problem believing it.
    “…If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down. But I can find out no such case.”

    http://friendsofdarwin.com/misc/faq/eye-complexity/

    Like

    • Evolution is an opinion. There is no scientific evidence what so ever to proof evolution. Even atheist , Richard Dawkins changed his tune that he can not for sure know that God does not exist. That makes him i guess an agnostic. I hear what you say about Darwin and i accept what you say, but Darwin’s opinion does not refute certain facts about a Creator. Just one thing take carbon dating , for years evolutionists used it for proofing things are millions of years old. It is a scientific fact it can only date things for thousands of years. There are many more things i can list but let us start there. Everybody is entitled to there own opinions.

      Like

  15. Gerhard, when you speak of occam’s razor, i have never really understood it, and i am not an expert. I think it it is more philosophy, there being more explanations for certain things, which could be true. you say christians reject the notion that God can’t create Himself out of nothing.
    Well this is the thing, and you probably have heard this. if i were to say, can God create a being more powerful than Him, and i say yes, then He is not God anymore, because then the created being is more powerful than Him. If i say He can’t create a being more powerful than Him, then people will say i thought God could do everything, why can’t He? That is selective reasoning. It is like evolutionists saying we found a dinosaur fossil in the rock layer. How do we know the dinosaur is millions of millions of years old, because the rock layer is millions and millions of years old.Then asked how do you know how old the rock layer is, they say we found a dinosaur fossil in there that is how we know. If God could create Himself out of nothing, then He had to exist before doing so. It does not make sense. Any matter, or physical thing had to have a cause. This includes, but is not limited to the universe, animals, water etc. So yes i am going to say it God is not a created being, because if He was, then His creator would have a creator and so forth.You said the origin of life is a mystery, ( i believe it is God). I think the Jackpot question is not who for example created God? The mystery question is how is God not a created being. How does He not have a beginning, nor and end, How is He eternal and nothing higher than Him. I believe all these things about God, i truly do. But i do not have the answer how that is possible, but i do believe it, i am sure i will find out one day. I do believe that we are living in a day were a lot of preachers, especially televangelist has raped the gospel, with prosperity teachings and a lot of Christians are sucked into that unfortunately. They actually make me sick. Therefore the church as we know has perpetrated terrible things in history i agree, it is grazy to think about it. These are human actions and i believe that God had nothing to do with it. Sure God’s walk with the Jews in the old Testament was violent against nations, even woman and children. I am not going to try to explain why God did certain things, i do not have all the answers. I do believe though that this current world is broken and distorted and bad things happen to good people and i relate that to man’s rebellion, so the hole human race will have these challenges, because of original sin. I believe as a christian this is not the final destination, and one is merely passing through. I am sure God had His reasons for doing certain things, but i believe in the new covenant and what Christ teaches me, because i can not fault His teachings. The way i see it and a friend of mine once said this. This i will explain from my personal life experience. I see this hole issue of a believer and a atheist as follows: Faith is a bridge. I am on the side of the believing, and for example you are on the side of not believing. I personally and it is true was on your side for a long time, believe me. I decided to jump to the other side of believing. So i have experienced both sides. i much more prefer the side of believing, and can never return to the side of not believing, to much has happened. You might say you also have been on both sides.But if you have not been, you have nothing to loose to try it out. Right or wrong? You asked would i also concede for example if i did not know 50 % of everything that God does not exist. i can concede that. But i know i can not really because i really have experienced Him and know for a fact that He not only exists, but personally knows me. Nice talking….. Keep Well……

    Like

  16. “Evolution is an opinion. There is no scientific evidence what so ever to proof evolution.”

    Nonsense! Evolution is a scientific fact that stands on pillars of concrete. Read “EVOLUTION. What the fossils Say and Why It Matters” by Donald Prothero to enlighten you. But godiots like you are not detracted by scientific facts because your gods don’t allow you to think for yourself.

    Also read Scientific American; “15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense”

    https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/15-answers-to-creationist/

    As far as determining a fossil’s age, you surely are ignorant! Carbon dating is not used for dating substances that are more than about 30 000 years old. When dating fossils, radiometric dating techniques are used. Go read up on this subject before you utter such nonsense.

    This blog has had many godiots like you surfacing here to spew their unscientific bullshit. After many postings and answers from us atheists, they disappeared with their tails between their legs. I do not have the time anymore to show you proof of the sound science of evolution, ask you to supply proof of the existence of your gods, and many other mundane facts that any person who does a little wider reading than that of your book of fable, has acquired, so I will not answer you again.

    Tramp maar voort in jou onkunde.

    Like

    • Savage, if you read what i said. i am referring to carbon dating which is a method of radiometric dating. We can discuss tree rings, ice layer dating ect. That is not the point. I like the discussion and will continue later, running out of time this morning.Just one thought for purposes of discussion. Do you have an answer for your population problem, if earth is so old? I mentioned it in a previous post with Gerhard.

      Like

  17. Science is written the language called mathematics. If you don’t understand this language, you will never really understand what scientists discovered and are still discovering. You godiots rely on the “facts” written in your book of fables; the book you call the Bible. This is why you cannot come to terms that this book is just a rambling of unproven bullshit. And grownup people like you still believe in gods that have never been seen.

    Take evolution. This scientific fact is written in the fossils, and it is written in the DNA. The facts are there to see, but you are blind because that book of yours says something different to scientific facts. And since you have never learned how to think for yourself, you trample forth if this state of ignorance.

    Like

    • Savage. Obviously you believe in evolution. I am not picking a fight with you. I am giving an opinion and then some facts. You can not proof evolution and neither can i proof God to you.
      If i can proof God to an atheist and miraculously phone God and say i want to introduce you to Savage, what is the logic in that.? Every atheist will suddenly believe because they met God. God is spirit and do not operate in the natural. Yes you will say that it lame, but it is a fact. You can not proof something in the spirit world, reflecting in the natural. You can not see oxygen or the wind, which is actually in the natural. The fact that you can not see it, does not refute the fact that is there. Sure you will say it can be scientifically proved. By all means, it is still in the natural.You say we are ‘Godiote’. I accept that with a smile. If you really believe, that your great, great,great,…………grandfather was a monkey, and you see logic in that, you will not be offended if i call you a Monkey. You quote Donald Prothero. You see i can quote other paleontologists who believe and can give their side of the story. I can quote science, astrophysicists, biologists ect who will give their opinions, which will counter Donald Prothero. This is a senseless exercise, you will say this and i will say that. You can quote for instance pastor Jerry DEWitt turned atheist. I can say i have my own opinion why he did it, and that is my opinion. He became quickly famous, speaking at every atheist meeting he could find, writing his literature and becoming a modern day celebrity atheist . In my opinion he found a way to make money and he loves it. He is doing exactly, in the atheist world what the greedy celebrity pastors are doing in the Christian world. It is very rarely about conviction, it is all about the fame. You see these guys like him and the greedy pastors are all the same they are doing it for money, they just use different mediums. Atheism and Christianity. If evolution is true then i want to ask one question:What are you as a human evolving in to right now. Are you evolving into, i don’t know a being not yet discovered, or are you becoming a monkey again, or maybe a fish, or maybe you are becoming a Laptop? It is ludicrous. If humans are on this planet hypothetically another 5 billion years, they will be exactly the same as they are today in the sense of their physical body, only i guess super advanced in knowledge, which by the way the bible confirms. You quote science, and i like science to. So most scientists believe there are different dimensions of time and space, even Dawkins do. But we are not advanced enough to understand that yet. So obviously the possibility of God transcending those dimensions are and could be very true. Maybe you should look for God in those dimensions.Remember the question about your problem with the amount of people on earth, if evolution is true. Why are there approx only 8 billion people on earth.? There should be trillions then. If you find the time to comment. Thank You…Keep Well…….

      Like

      • Antony
        So let me first focus not evolution but on your other questions.

        Regarding the 8 Billion people in a +/-: 4500 year period (since noah’s flood)

        cite your sources and method.

        Regarding the Bible and people gaining more knowledge:

        Cite you Bible verses

        Regarding your comment on pastors and people like Jerry De Witt:

        Jerry de Witt got fired from his job (no not the church). Not because he was incompetent….. . Before that he investigated his faith and came to a different conclusion. So he wrote a book about his agnostic thoughts. So what? He is an Agnostic and Atheist. Regarding the “other” Christians. Apparently you think they are wrong but your version is the correct one? I much more respect for some of the “crazy” Christian who follow their faith by the book than the moderates or liberals who want to sugar coat it.

        Like

  18. Gerhard,
    Trust you are well.When i refer to the time table i do refer to the time table since the flood,.this would be starting from 8 people. These are approximates for purposes of reference. i will just mention extracts and give you one source.The current world population could have been attained in approx 6000 years. I prefer giving you a link, for purposes of time. http://www.icr.org/article/evolution-population-problem/
    Obviously this is from a creationist point of view so it could appear to biased.There are other sources, which i can give you, but let us leave it here for now. I am not a population expert.Other explanations against the above i have not found to be authentic, you might have something.The basis of my argument is that the figures do not make sense. If the human race evolved millions of years ago then the evolutionists will have to admit that maybe the human race got extinct and started over again( not the flood, i am referring to) for their purposes not believing in the flood.So i do not find another module to explain it. An old friend of mine who lives in Ireland( he is agnostic with a PHD in mathematics once acknowledge to me that the creationists theory looks more plausible, but he had another reasoning that the human race almost got extinct 7000 years ago ( not the flood, some other reasoning) which i do not understand. Obviously that is not my strength of the argument and can not be tested at all. When i refer to future knowledge i am talking about Daniel 12:4 and Revelation 22 verse 10 which correlates. I do not want to go into the Hebrew meanings and Greek meanings for purposes of time. This is also open to interpretation.I hear what you say about Jerry DeWitt, and respect that, i simply gave an opinion, relating him to ‘ the other ‘Christian Pastors who are greedy. I definitely do not say i am always right and i am open for correction, and i make many mistakes. The pastors i am referring to like Benny Hinn, Jesse Du Plantis, Kennith Copeland, I truly belief they are charlatans., i could be wrong. So am not saying my interpretation is always right. I agree with you about the moderate and liberals who sugar coat things. If i came across arrogant, i apologize…..The internet is hanging tonight on my side, very slow, so i will leave it here…..Have a good evening….Keep Well… If there are spelling mistakes, sorry, everything is hanging.

    Like

  19. Antony, do yourself a favour and read an authoritative work on evolution. Works of Jerry Coyne (Why evolution is true) or Richard Dawkins (The Greatest Show on Earth) should help you in understanding the tropic better. You should then also see the errors of your argument above.

    Like

  20. Sorry Savage, been away for long and did not notice that you already attempted to educate this ignoramus…in vain – no surprises there. Seems like nothing has changed in the time I’ve been away. Just another idiot joining the ranks of Maljohannie.

    Like

  21. Malherbe, do not have time for long post, will have a look at it. As explained to Savage seeing that your great….great grandfather was a monkey, you to won’t be offended if i call you a monkey as well , seeing that i am an idiot in your kind words.

    Like

  22. ‘No, we do not know yet how life originated on earth, but we have good leads and we may never know how life originated on earth, because traces of early life vanished. We know it happened at least once, but not how. I am pretty confident that in 50 years from now we will be able to create life in a laboratory in conditions of primitive earth, but that too won’t tell us exactly,only that it could’- Jerry Coyne- Does not sound like he has a clue what he is talking about. I can give you countless biologists, scientists that will counter him, It it is a useless exercise of you say this, and i say that, and then Richard Dawkins the father of all atheists, so many times discredited himself.

    Like

  23. Welkom terug, Malherbe, ek het jou gemis.

    Soos ek aan die godioot, Antoon, geskryf het, ek gaan hom beslis nie verder antwoord nie. Sulke idiote lewe in ‘n totaal ander wêreld en geen wetenskaplike bewys sal hulle van stryk laat bring nie. Johannie en nou weer ‘n bedmaatjie en hulle kan mekaar maar “ondersteun”.

    Dit is egter, as mens die tyd kan afstaan om dit te lees, ‘n openbaring om die absolute stommerikke onkunde van hierdie jafels waar te neem. As Homo Sapeins deur die eeue sulke gedrag gevolg het soos hierdie godiote, sou ek of jy nie vandag gelewe het nie, en vandag se wetenskaplik-onkundige mens sou nog in grotte gebly het en vir die Maan gehuil het. Hulle sou ook tot vandag toe nie ‘n Liewe Jesus in hulle verbeelding geskep het nie.

    Like

  24. Antony I didn’t read all the comments posted “above”, but these atheist follow the same pattern every time, it doesn’t take long for them to show their real “spirit” behind their words.
    it seems this time the arguments is all about “Theory of evolution”
    A theory that explains how living things develop to where we are now and we should be in awe that we now know how humans develop into this consciousness becoming aware of its own conscious. (ok its a bit much to ask – consciousness does not exits because it hasn’t been proved by the other scientist)
    It seems no other animal, which we all are according to atheist, has develop in the direction we have (some beloved humans and the chimpanzee – who share 99% DNA with humans – seem to be close to the missing link all be it on either side.

    Non the less the “theory of evolution” “is a scientific fact that stands on pillars of concrete”,
    for some, although the pillars stand on probably a elephant in the room that is to big to see
    Whether you want to believe it or not doesn’t make any difference to the “Theory of evolution” – it is what it is, but what difference can it possibly make to “you”?

    For some it proves that their concept of God is not the ultimate reality, for others they believe that other people’s concept of God is not real, but as you said standing on this side of the rift it’s easy to see the blindness on the other side, the identification with the ego is clear

    Like

    • Ai Johannie ek het amper van jou vergeet. Jy kan natuurlik nie genoeg van die “ego” kry nie ne? Vertel my bietjie sodat ons net dood seker maak van jou standpunte. Ek (n ateis) moet binne myself kyk en nie meer met die identifiseer nie. nou geld dit ook vir die afgode (bv. Moslems, pantheists en Codeaiste asook die antieke ander gelowe)?

      Like

      • Gerhardus dis nie so maklik om te verduidelik waar ek is – met woorde nie en om koel Diek se guru se woorde te leen ““Just as I wouldn’t expect a gynaecologist to have a debate with somebody who believes in the Stork-theory of reproduction, . . .”. Dis hoe ver dit is met woorde en verduideliking, maar die uiteindelike realiteit is so naby, al wat mens hoef te doen is om te gaan “kyk”, dis onmoontlik om jouself daardeur te beseer

        Like

  25. Johann, thanks for your post. My point is if Malherbe, Savage or Gerhard say they are atheists, i believe them. I do not doubt their unbelief in God, on their own admission they say that God does not exist.When i say i am a believer and believe in God they should extend me the same courtesy, to say they believe that i believe with billions of other believers. Now this is actually the point. It is impossible to say to billions of believers that their experience with God is not true. That billions are deceived and delusional. That nobody has heard anything from God in the history of this earth’s time line. It is impossible to refute believers relationship with God,
    because there would be to many testimonies to question. Yes, there are some false testimonies, but like i said the true ones can no be negated. On the other hand i can say to an atheist, his experience is non-existent, by there own admission to that., that there is no God and no experience or relationship with God to be found. There is no atheist including Dawkins that can give any example today of an evolving process right now. It is always over long….long…long…periods that they say it happens. I ask the question. Are we maybe evolving into laptops? Surely science can give us that answer? Why can’t they? because it does not exist. Even Dawkins changed his tune at one stage saying intelligent design could have started life on earth. But then he says it could have been aliens. He would rather say it’s aliens than to admit that God created it. He can not say it is God, then he will loose his celebrity status as the father of modern atheism….Keep Well……

    Like

    • Antony, You must have noticed that I’ve been good to you. But here you write a comment with your first sentence and I can’t notice but feel sorry because you don’t even realise against what you are arguing against:

      Johann, thanks for your post. My point is if Malherbe, Savage or Gerhard say they are atheists, i believe them. I do not doubt their unbelief in God, on their own admission they say that God does not exist

      Do yourself a favour and study atheism (not only what anti-atheist or creationist say for example.). Do comprehensive research because you have created a strawman argument. I have already hinted at what I believe. This is the problem with some fundamentalists. They don’t understand atheism and it seems that neither do you.

      Like

  26. Gerhard, looking at it, your right i should have left out your name in that sentence. I think there would be some things we would agree on. Your hints are evident that you differ from Savage and Malherbe and i respect that.

    Like

  27. Nope, I don’t see Malherbe or Savage claiming that they have knowledge that Gods don’t exist. From their recent comments I see no such thing. Please show me? Maybe you are talking about comments from relative long ago when you were not even here on the blog. Please show me?

    Like

        • I have seen your explanation of atheism and agnostics. I note your view of the knowledge part. But to be honest in my opinion if you say that you lack the knowledge of the existence God, that is a very clever way of selective wording and reasoning, leaving open the possibility that if you have the physical proof you would believe. Of course you would, but that is not the way it works currently. There will come a time after this physical life that God will be seen by everybody whether good or bad. So looking at the comments on the hole blog it is evident that Savage and Malherbe do not believe in God at all. Just because the word lack of knowledge is thrown in it does not make you a maybe believer, if the evidence were there.I think that you Gerhard being an agnostic atheist are open for certain views which do not necessarily need knowledge, just my observation.But they openly say the bible is a fairy tail, and say there is no proof of God. That makes them Atheists!!

          Like

  28. Hieronder is een van die redes hoekom sekere wetenskaplikes nie enige debatte voer met godiote wat dink die Aaarde is 6000 jaar oud.
    Van Richard Dawkins:

    “When the debate is with someone like a Young Earth creationist [dit is nou Antoon en sy anti-wetenskap brigade], as the late Stephen Gould pointed out – they’ve won the moment you agree to have a debate at all. Because what they want is the oxygen of respectability. They want to be seen on a platform with a real scientist, because that conveys the idea that here is a genuine argument between scientists. They may not win the argument – in fact, they will not win the argument, but it makes it look like there really is an argument to be had.

    “Just as I wouldn’t expect a gynaecologist to have a debate with somebody who believes in the Stork-theory of reproduction, I won’t do debates with Young Earth creationists.

    “Creationism vs. evolution however is not worth debating. Why? Simple, there is nothing to debate. Evolution is a scientific fact, backed by mountains of evidence, peer-reviewed papers you could stack to the moon and an incredible scientific community consensus. Creationism is a debunked mythology that is based solely in faith. It has zero peer-reviewed papers to back up its claims, it has absolutely no scientific consensus and is not even considered science due to the fact it cannot be tested.”

    Like

  29. Like i said before, you get top evolutionist scientists and top creationist scientists. You are right there is no point in that debate, because top scientists with different opinions and proof. of that.

    Like

  30. The problem Antony is that this is a creationists video. Please define information. then we can take it further. Dawkins has already addressed this issue in his books. The problem is tha so-called “creation” scientists can very easily manipulate people who don’t understand evolution or science in the first place. Answers in Genesis is a joke. So please define information. He paused for 11 seconds. so what. I also sometimes pause because I want to answer better and in context

    I’m not a fan of Dawkins that I eat up everything he says especially his view on politics and some issues regarding religion.

    Like

  31. Again it is open for interpretation. He paused yes, it could be that he wanted to answer better, but like i said everybody must make up there own mind on this video.Point is the answer Dawkins gave is related to the question, but he sidesteps the question cleverly. He can not give an example. I hear what you say about Dawkins other opinions.

    Like

  32. People cant make up their own mind if they don’t even know whats it all about. The question has already been answered.

    Like

    • Have you read his books. He deals with it much earlier than 1997 – when this edited creationist video were made. But its interesting that you use the word “interpretation”. I shall further write about it later when I have time.

      Like

  33. Hi, i don’t know if it was in ‘Unweaving the rainbow’, can not remember. I saw the footage where he claims that a man asked him the question. people saying that he edited that video. Who knows who is telling the truth.What i mean by interpretation , was it Dawkins who edited his explanation for the video or was creationists who edited the video.

    Like

  34. Antony these atheist has been going on on this web page sins 2009, almost 10 years en they are still nowhere, and they keep on asking the same question, “give me proof that god exist”, to answer that is we must be clear on what does “exist” mean, for instance ask them what is that does exist, then all they cant answer and some lame efforts about nature, matter and the forces that holds the universe together,
    So I ask them what is gravity and after ‘n few efforts I was told to leap off a cliff and then I should know that gravity exist,
    So I told them if they really want to know “does God exist” they will have to take a leap of faith then they will know, but then they refuse, their little ego’s tell them not to go there

    Do not go there
    I can give you plenty of reasons not to go there
    its only ignorant and losers that go there
    and that you are not
    you are intelligent, smart open minded
    and so so so superior
    we will find a new book to read
    with more proof that you will be as stupid as them if you go there
    haven’t I been your friend
    ‘been inside your head
    show you the sunset and told you “isn’t that pretty”?

    You can’t go there, I will be discovered
    I will lose control
    Without me you will be nothing
    What would your friends that know us say
    No no no you can’t go there it’s shaky grounds

    And their little dense ego’s keep on telling them it is not possible

    I don’t know of any other way to become a christian, maybe you do, “how does one become a christian?”
    So it takes ‘n lot of courage to come out of the cave and step into the unknown
    it’s comfortable to sit and watch the shadows against the “wall” and work hard to keep the illusion going.

    Even the “stupid goat herders” – according to the atheists, wrote this thousands of years ago;

    Heb 4:12 For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart

    Like

  35. Johann, I think the hole question and suggested answer is, Yes 4-sure it is Faith. I sometimes wonder and this is abstruse, whether Atheists when they find absolute proof of God….Will they then believe, or vice versa? But yes faith is the substance of the things hoped for and the evidence of the the things not seen.( Heb11). You and i both know that we live in a physical world,But, there is a spiritual realm, which i have experienced which is more real than the physical in many cases. God can only be understood in that realm. Who knows how many realms did He create… Have a good one… keep Well….

    Like

  36. “Just as I wouldn’t expect a gynaecologist to have a debate with somebody who believes in the Stork-theory of reproduction, I won’t do debates with Young Earth creationists.”
    (Richard Dawkins)

    Ek volg Dawkins se raad: om met godiote soos Johannie, Antoon, Kokkerman en menige ander godiote wat hulle onwetenskaplike twak op hierdie blog plaas, is dit ‘n mors van tyd om hulle te debatteer oor, o.a., die ouderdom van die Aarde, en dan ook spesifiek die werklikheid van die evolusie proses wat oor honderde miljoene jare die fauna en flora gebring het tot waar dit vandag is.
    Ek is net bly my ouers en familie is nie van die stoffasie van hierdie godiote gemaak nie. Wetenskap is hoog op ons agenda en lag net lekker vir die idiotiese beskouings van godiote, en ignoreer hulle want die lewe is te kosbaar om jou tyd met hulle te mors. Al wanneer ons opstaan teen hulle, is wanneer hulle ons kinders en kleinkinders wil indoktrineer. Maar as jy hulle tromp-op konfronteer hieroor, openbaar hulle maar min rugmurg en blaas vinnig die aftog.

    Like

  37. You are right life is precious and one should be thankful. I guess looking at your beliefs it is even more so, seeing that on an assumption all the time you have is limited to this life on earth, so i suggest you choose wisely. Why can’t children make up their own minds about believing in God?

    Like

    • Oh Antony, you guys are funny

      “so i suggest you choose wisely”

      The same question can be used against you. On the assumption that hell and God/s exist you can also be thrown into hell/s because you worship the wrong God. Who knows Christians will go to hell and atheists to heaven for using their brain and sceptism

      “Why can’t children make up their own minds about believing in God?”

      Off course they should. That means that they should not only learn one religion in school or on their own, but even more which include Satanism and atheism (since many think atheist is a religion). But the fundies will throw a tantrum over this. Maybe also a requirement that children learn the bible from beginning to end. That is how I became an atheist. Not trough cosmology or biology. The bible is the source of my atheism. But hey, then the fundies will also fight over which bible is the right bible to use.

      I love reading the bible. I went through Hooglied yesterday. Always but a smile on my face. One of my favourite passages from 7 verse 3:

      Jou twee borste is soos takboklammers, soos die tweeling van n ribbok.

      Children should learn this in school. No age restriction. Did you hear about the prostitute, breasts and the donkey?

      I

      Like

  38. Couple of valid points your making, i see that witchcraft will be a degree you can study at the varsities . If people want to go that route i don’t have a hassle, it is their choice. I don’t know who will be the lecturers. Tell me about the prostitute.

    Like

    • From what I see so far is that story about the witches is a joke. The story I mentioned is in the Bible. Literal or figuratively, the story is pretty funny.

      Like

  39. Koel diek wil nie sy “tyd” mors nie, want vir die atijoote is God vêr en vaag en ‘n illusie, maar die dinge wat werklik bestaan is – dit lyk my . . .TYD

    Ons is al voorheen hier deur, en ek vra nogsteeds “wat is tyd”? en al wat ek kry is gehapte borrels, nou volgens Koel Diek met sy wetenskaplike feite wat hy êrens gelees het, is gravitasie die gevolg van gebuigde tyd en verwronge spasie en soos dit maar hier gaan is die vraag of “kan die son stilstaan” dan spring die grondboontjie galery baie opgewonde rond. Dan is ek te dom om “iets” te verstaan en daai iets kan nou nie aan my gewys word nie.

    So ek lei af as mens nie besig is om wetenskaplike formules te resiteer of nog ‘n boek van hawkêns of dawkens lees nie dan mors jy jou tyd

    My vrae oor tyd wat ek al lankal aan die intelligente atijoote gevra het;

    Die oomblik waarin ek nou is is die dieselfde oomblik op Jupiter en ook daar by die “naaste” swaartekrag kolk 25 duisend ligjare weg, is die hele heelal nou in dieselfde oomblik . . .?

    Soos jare terug sal hier geen wetenskaplike feite geplaas word nie . . stilte

    Met die oerknal was elke deeltjie waarmee my liggaam nou dans, daar . . . daar by die oerknal, elke atoom, neutron – in die rekenaar die sleutelbord die lig v/d monitor . . was daar, nou as ek die wetenskaplike feite reg verstaan kan ‘n swaartekrag kolk tot “lig” intrek en so ook “tyd” buig sodat dit relatief tot ons kan stilstaan, nou as al die materie waaruit die heelal bestaan daar by die oerknal was, was tyd toe gebuig? Het miljarde jare verby gegaan binne ‘n paar minute?
    (dis relatief tot die tyd soos ons dit nou ken, en om nou te verkondig dat die aarde soveel “tyd” oud is beteken dit dat tyd nog altyd teen dieselfde “spoed” beweeg het, as dit nie is nie is dit sinneloos om te beweer dat die aarde so oud is en die heelal so oud)

    soos voorheen verwag ek net stilte

    3. Kan iemand vir my bewys dat tyd bestaan, of is dit net ‘n illusie?

    Tjoep stil

    Die “gees” agter Koel Diek se woorde is ook een van verwaandheid, superioriteit, en vol van haat . . . dan wil hy my van “iets” oortuig?

    Like

  40. Wel Johannie, miskien kan ek jou antwoord. Ek sien geen bewys dat opjektiewe tyd bestaan nie. Natuurlik dink mense tyd bestaan in terme van sekondes, minute, ure, dae, weke, maande en jare. Die Bybel gebruik ook hierdie terme maar dit is nie werklik n goeie siening van wat tyd werklik is nie. Die Bybelmense het die son en kalender gebruik maar onviously anwoord dt nie die vraag oor wat tyd werklikis nie. Daarom word dit in die bybel ook so gebruik want die skrywers van die Bybel was ook maar mense en daar is geen bewyse dat hulle geweet het wat tyd is nie. .

    Wanneer Einstein oor space-time praat dan moet dit altyd gesien word teen die agtergrond van die spoed van lig. Lees tog Einstein se relatiwiteitsteorie.

    Like

    • Mooi Gerhardus getrou aan jou “self” het jy weer baie woorde gebruik om niks te sê nie, behalwe miskien dat jy impliseer dat Koel Diek se stelling dat hy “tyd mors” ‘n illusie is omdat tyd nie “objektief” bestaan nie

      Like

      • Johannie jy het geen bewys dat jou “self” die regte “self” is nie so brabbel maar voort. Ek verstaan wat Savage bedoel so tramp maar voort.

        Like

  41. Sure you can look at Einsteins Theory to explain a bit of it. But no scientist really understand time, nor the dimensions of time, nobody really does. Best to ask the Ageless One, God, He surely created it. Just looking at Francis Thomson’s definition of an atheist : An Atheist Is A Man Who Believe Himself To Be An Accident. Time also is no accident it was deliberately created by someone who is not bound by it and that is God.

    Like

    • Nope, classic God of gaps argument and a false dilemma. For instance there should not be only two options – God exist or God doesn’t – but many more such as for example we dont know or maybe many Gods exist with each having the same “powers” or maybe there is many Gods with different powers. Or maybe “he” is not a personal God so you could never ask him/it/them/she. Maybe the “God/s” could be nothing more than a being with only the power to create.

      Stupid quote by Francis Thomsom. I dont “believe” in something where there is no evidence so I live life as a pragmatic atheist. I see that you two must still learn a lot about what I and probably many other atheists believe in.

      These religious and atheist youtubers can sometimes make stupid arguments. Believe me some atheists make some stupid arguments just as the religious do. For instance some atheists I took a text from the bible to proof Jesus said EVERYONE would do the miracles that he supposedly had done while Jesus clearly spoke to the people present before he left for the heavens.

      Not that I say I’m always right but I dismiss you guys for claiming you guys know “him” (your Christian God.

      Like

      • And I think it is very arrogant from Christians to claim that their God had them in mind as the “special” being (die kroon van die skepping). They claim to speak for God where there is no evidence. That has always been my position. I reject Popes, dictators, imams, pastors, disciples of “Christ”, the Bible-writers who claim they write through God’s “hand” and people like Johannie who claim they have truth on their side. Al these thing among many others I reject.

        Like

            • Johannie, ons het al tot vervelens jou storie oor die raad gehoor van die Boedis wat jou raad gegee het oor die sny van die ego. Jy het reeds jou onkunde bewys toe ek jou onkunde uitgesniffel het. Ek het ook daarop gewys dat jy nie bewys het dat jy deur alle godsdienste – klein en groot – asook individuele godsdienste van sekere persone “gesny” het om tot jou “waarheid” te kom nie. Ons het ook gepraat oor die onderafdelings van gelowe soos die christelike geloof en die verwante duisende denominasies.

              So jy kan gerus stop met jou stupid vrae want jy het geen bewyse dat jou “I”, “self” of “ego” die waarheid weerspieel nie. As jy die socratic method wil gebruik om jou “holy ghost” te bewys moet jy met beter vrae kom.

              Nou ja wie is die “I”? Om jou logika te gebruik van persoonlike ervaring. Ek is wie ek is. Julle is net figmente van my gedagtes. I am the one and only being:)

              Of ek kan se ek weet nie

              Of ek kan se ek weet nie wat is die “essence” van I nie

              Wat van ek se “I” is n atoom

              Either way, stupid vra lei nie tot jou spook nie en jy bewys boogerol.

              Like

              • Gerhardus ek probeer nie jou “spook” konsep aan jou bewys nie, dit bestaan net in jou kop, wat ek by jou wil tuisbring is as jy regtig wil weet, of as jy avontuurlustig voel, of as jy “glo” jy is vry om te doen wat jy WIL, doen die eksperiment en doen die geloof sprong, daar is mos niks wat jou terughou nie . . . . of is daar?

                Soos jy sê ek is net ‘n “figment” van jou gedagtes, wat sal dit saak maak aan jou “figment” van my as jy dit doen? (Jy het mos klaar jou “figment” van my se onkunde uitgesnuffel)

                Like

                • As ek dink aan die ander “figmente” van Mad mac en sy grondboontjie galery wat hulle gaan doen is dit ‘n ander saak die “figmente” gaan vir jou lag en jou as belaglik probeer uitkryt, maar net soos ek is hulle ook maar net “figmente” van jou gedagtes (stieks en stouns kyn bryk maai bouns, bat whurds kunt tasch mie)

                  Wonder of jy kan, maar as jy nou die “figmente” van die grondboontjie galery kan beskryf, hoe lyk dit? Soos Koel Diek wat daar vêr op sy ivoor troontjie sit en af kyk na sy “figmente” van ander . . . . byvoorbeeld, dis hoe mens na “binne” kyk

                  Like

  42. Mollie eks bly jy kom loer nog hier in en ek hoop jy geniet jou “aftrede” en reis baie rond, maar die ouens hier het hulp nodig, hulle het niks om te sê nie, hulle het alles gesê wat hulle kon en dit is maar net ekspressie van haat en nyd teenoor die “ander dom” mense, m.a.w. hulle het in die cul de sac beland en stoom maar net voort noord sonder om êrens uit te kom.

    Wat sou jy sê “waarvoor is daar bewyse” van dit wat regtig bestaan?

    Like

  43. The four stages of spiritual development[edit]
    Peck postulates that there are four stages of human spiritual development:[15][16]

    Stage I is chaotic, disordered, and reckless. Very young children are in Stage I. They tend to defy and disobey, and are unwilling to accept a will greater than their own. They are extremely egoistic and lack empathy for others. Many criminals are people who have never grown out of Stage I.

    Stage II is the stage at which a person has blind faith in authority figures and sees the world as divided simply into good and evil, right and wrong, us and them. Once children learn to obey their parents and other authority figures, often out of fear or shame, they reach Stage II. Many so-called religious people are essentially Stage II people, in the sense that they have blind faith in God, and do not question His existence. With blind faith comes humility and a willingness to obey and serve. The majority of good, law-abiding citizens never move out of Stage II.

    Stage III is the stage of scientific skepticism and questioning. A Stage III person does not accept things on faith but only accepts them if convinced logically. Many people working in scientific and technological research are in Stage III. They often reject the existence of spiritual or supernatural forces since these are difficult to measure or prove scientifically. Those who do retain their spiritual beliefs, move away from the simple, official doctrines of fundamentalism.

    Stage IV is the stage where an individual starts enjoying the mystery and beauty of nature and existence. While retaining skepticism, he starts perceiving grand patterns in nature and develops a deeper understanding of good and evil, forgiveness and mercy, compassion and love. His religiousness and spirituality differ significantly from that of a Stage II person, in the sense that he does not accept things through blind faith or out of fear, but does so because of genuine belief, and he does not judge people harshly or seek to inflict punishment on them for their transgressions. This is the stage of loving others as yourself, losing your attachment to your ego, and forgiving your enemies. Stage IV people are labeled as Mystics.

    Peck argues that while transitions from Stage I to Stage II are sharp, transitions from Stage III to Stage IV are gradual. Nonetheless, these changes are very noticeable and mark a significant difference in the personality of the individual.

    Like

    • Dis nou M Scott Peck se storie, nou begin ek die grondboontjie galery in die 4 stadiums inpas, . . . hande op vir die wat uit die eerste stadium uit is! Sover ek kan onthou het Millies darem stadium 2 gehaal vir ‘n rukkie, nou is ek nie seker of hy toe weer terug geval het na stadium 1 nie ( met sy roekelose uitsprake) en of hy stadium 3 geruik het. Al hierdie “wetenskaplike feite” is maar net ‘n konseptualiseering van die ego wat die individu verblind om beter te voel oor die “self” . . . daar êrens is daar kastig ‘n feitlike wêreld wat die realiteit is, gaan kyk wat het dawkens en hawkens te sê êrens op tv skerm of in ‘n boek met woorde dan bou jy jou wereld op dit . . .?

      (Adriaan ek het regtig empatie vir jou, maar jy wil nie luister nie en jou digte ego hou jou gevange)

      Like

    • Soos dit vir my lyk het hy, M Scott Peck, lank in stadium 3 vasgehaak, maar hy het oopkop gebly en lyk my die Quakers v/d 17 de eeu het sy nuuskierigheid geprikkel en hulle glo dat elke mens die “children of light” is en dis nie nodig om aan een of ander denominasie te “behoort” nie. Hy was lank ‘n psigiater gewees en sy vrou ook, en hy het self vir sessies gegaan by ander psigiaters om sy “geïndoktrineerde verlede” af te skud, of dit in sy bewussyn in te bring, soos alle mense wou hy sy liggaam gemaklik hou met lekker kos en warmte en sy ego streel met “affairs” wat hy erken eintlik sy soeke na God was.

      Soos jy weet het hy die “stille pad na wasdom” geskryf (Road less travelled) en ek lees nou sy boek “In search of stones” wat ‘n tiepe van outobiografie is, as ek kom by sy geloofsprong sal ek jou laat weet wat met hom gebeur het.

      Like

  44. Johannie, n mens kry voorlesings van Peck se boeke op Youtube. Dit is lank maar ek is seker ek kan so nou-en-dan na dit luister.

    Dit wil egter vir my lyk asof Peck darem n snaakse soort “christen” was deurspek met allerhande “New Age” leerstelling en die verwerping van sekere leerstellings in die Bybel self. Hy beskryf sekere stories in die Bybel as “mites” en dat almal -watter geloof jy ook al aanhang – deur n “sense of community” gered kan word. Hy praat ook van n soort “cosmic Christ” en ek dink hy het definitief n “pantheist” invloed in sy sieninge gehad. Dit lyk my hy het ook n soort een wereld regering nagestreef.

    Dit wil oor vir my voorkom dat hy nooit van sy boedistiese en hindoe sienings totaal afgewyk het nie. Lyk ook of hy n soort evolusie geondersteun het waarvolgens ons besig is om “Godhood” te bereik. Mens kan seker ook na n soort reinkarnasie verwys volgens boedhisme. Lyk ook of hy nie juis veel gepla was oor die skepper nie. Boedhisme glo mos nie in n skepper God nie. Lyk of hy meer gepla was oor die sogenaamde “skepsels” (Ons en ander dinge in die kosmos).

    Dan was hy ook sterk onder die invloed van Carl Jung – daardie Europeuse “mystic” en shaman met o.a. sy “archetypes”

    Miskien moet ons vir Kokkerman, Antoon en Quasidote vra om hul mening te geen indien hulle hierdie blog nog lees. Ek ie hoeke weer lus vir n fight tussen christene.

    Like

    • “Die wind waai waar hy wil, en jy hoor sy geluid, maar jy weet nie vanwaar hy kom en waarheen hy gaan nie. So is elkeen wat uit die Gees gebore is. ”

      Gerhardus die Scott Peck is ‘n snaakse christen vir jou? Is dit omdat jy ‘n “archetype” het van hoe ‘n christen veronderstel is om te wees?

      Al die geskarrel van jou is net ‘n poging van jou ego/”geïndoktrineerde verlede” /false self om nie uitgevang te word nie, maar ek verstaan dat jy dit nie kan “sien ” nie omdat jy nog met jou ego geïdentifiseer is.

      My vraag is dan hoekom gaan vind jy nie uit vir jouself nie, . . . wat hou jou terug? Ek veronderstel dat jou “archetype” van ‘n christen is so “nie jy nie” dat dit jou met weersin vervul.

      Soos Peck ook skryf dat met ouderdom is daar honderde illusies wat verval en is gejaag na wind. Die uiteindelike realiteit is anders as wat die ego kan opdis

      Like

  45. Hi, Guys.
    I am not a expert on Scott Peck. The problem is that the internet has made everything more difficult in some way. People Google things and just believe it to be true. So apart from what Pecks said on camera, in books or any provable medium one can not take anything as truth outside that. It is the old argument, that i believe rings true. Nobody can proof that anybody existed or said things from a couple of hundred years ago. Technology is the only thing that can proof that somebody said something, either by recordings, film ect. To give an example nobody on earth can proof that Columbus existed let alone discovered the States. Yet everybody beliefs it. there is no evidence, the alleged pictures of him, nobody knows if it is him. Yet some people are skeptical of Christ;s existence.( not now talking about His divinity) The world is using His coming to the earth as a time line( BC/ AD). So even an atheist will say it is 2017 this year. Obviously they know how they equate the date all linked to one man, Christ. I guess what i am trying to say is that, very recent history of normal people and historical figures can not even be proved, 250 years ago our world was so primitive,no cars, no phones, no electricity, no plains,, no plumbing, no antibiotics, in fact let us be honest it was really primitive life. And then people want to make statements of millions of years ago, but they can not even proof peoples existence 500 years ago. Another thing went through the post where Savage mentioned the 6000 years of earth can not be ect. The thing is, i can easily admit and say that the Universe is millions or billions of years old, and earth could be much older, yes sure. But i believe the structures what we have today. The current human race was created by God, which is in line with the biblical story and time lines. Logically if you look at Genesis 1 where it says the earth was empty and void and darkness was on the face of the earth, God spirit hovered over the waters, it suggest that earth needed fixing and there was something before the current creation as we read in the bible. I am not saying this to be a fact, but it makes sense. If there was a earth prior to the world that we know it, as described in the bible, then God must have had something to do with that as well. Just because everything is not written in the Bible does not refute some things that could be.possible. The bottom line is humans are to stupid to figure it out, without God. So yes, there could have been a pre-adamic race, i do not know. Luke 8;17- there is nothing hidden that will not be disclosed, and nothing concealed that will not be known or brought out in the open. So all the skeptics just wait, day is coming exactly like that scripture says.

    Like

    • Well, I tend to agree with Savage Antoon. Why? Because in the comment above you make a great case for scientism on the existence of God/s and related event such as the so-called resurrection of Jesus and Mohammed’s flying horse episode to name only a few.

      Your argument is devastating to your own case so a reply is not really necessary. After your “comments” you then proceed to tell us what evenyour book says in Luke and you think we must be impressed with this quote? Then you tell us that we must wait and see.

      This is the problem with Christians such as you and Johannie. You have no evidence and then you proceed to tell us things according to your scripture with know evidence. You even believe without evidence that the authors of the “holy” book/s wrote the text through the “finger of God” as it were. You even claim to speak for God’s

      Ironically you provide great advice: “I don’t know”.

      That is what we do. We say we don’t know, but you try to smear the Bible onto humanity with no evidence. By this I mean all the stories in the Bible that you think is absolute truth.

      Like

  46. Antoon, miskien moet jy maar liewer by Afrikaans bly, want jou Engels is beroerd. Maar die twak wat jy hierbo skryf, sal selfs in Grieks twak bly, so dit maak seker nie saak in watter taal jy nonsens praat nie.Dit sal net bly wat dit is; nonsens.

    Like

  47. Savage, looks like you are not only an expert on evolution , science , history and let us not forget the existence of God, but also an expert in the English language . Looks like when you don’t have a comment on a comment you run to that ‘Ego’ Johann refers to, who constantly gives you the false identity of knowing everything.

    Like

  48. Antoon, ‘n persoon hoef nie ‘n kenner van die Engelse taal te wees om te kan sien dat jou Engels beroerd is. Dit is hoekom ek voorstel dat jy maar liewer jou in Afrikaans moet uitdruk. Oor die nonsense wat jy kwyt raak in jou repliek sal ek jou nie antwoord nie. Die wind waai wes, soos hy wes gewaai het toe ek Johannie probeer oplei het; julle het net nie die intellek om die Natuur te probeer verstaan en te waardeer nie.

    Like

  49. Savage, I did not ask a question in the previous post, i made comments. You don’t have to answer it. I recall that you said, you won’t give any answers to posts made by myself, so why don’t you stick to that. I have seen many like you. All knowing, hiding behind a computer making ridiculous statements, boasting in your arrogance. In real life you don’t have any answers to the fears that surround your own questions, seeing that you have to solve them in your own immortal existence. Then we should assume that you and probably some of your selected atheist friends are the elite who has the immense capacity to understand nature and enjoy it. Are you sure you are not SIR SAVAGE?

    Like

    • Antony, I would like you to keep in mind that Koel Diek (Savage) believes that he doesn’t have a “free will” and his responses is just a reaction to the “environment” like they say animals do.

      If I can put it in other terms, he believes in materialism and that is all that exist – matter – and the forces that influence it, it like saying that your computer’s hardware is the cause of the software, the firing of the neurological paths in you head gives you the illusion of thought.

      I think I get what you are doing with the comments that you made as a scan of die doldrums of your mind, which is a good thing, the past and a few moments ago does not exist in the moment we are now only the “residue” of it

      When he was trying to “train” me, I ask him why do particles attract each other, hence gravitation, and he thought is would be easy to pull the wool over the eyes of stupid people and gave me the formula of how the strength of gravity was measured. Then he tried warp time and space as gravity, but couldn’t tel how do you bend space and deny that the “sun can stand still”, meaning that time cant be bend. Then he said that the prove that gravity exists is because there is a black hole 26 thousand light years away, 26000 years! where it is today we will know in 26 thousand years from now, all and all muddled up in his mind.

      Carry on with your thoughts we are all taking to our self’s and we are all on our own journey, enjoy yours

      Like

    • No Anthony it is you who are making ridiculous statement by undermining your own position. Your are the trying to sell BS.

      “I have seen many like you. All knowing, hiding behind a computer making ridiculous statements, boasting in your arrogance. In real life you don’t have any answers to the fears that surround your own questions, seeing that you have to solve them in your own immortal existence’

      Stop projecting. I don’t fear the questions your talking about. There is nothing to fear for something where there is no evidence for. You and your cult are the one’s that take advantage of others people’s fears and your own fears it seems.

      Like

  50. Mooi so, Antoon, as mens aandag aan jou werk gee is die verbetering duidelik vir almal om te sien. Hièrdie Engels van jou sal ‘n slaagpunt tot gevolg hê.

    Ai, Johannie, verstaan jy nog steeds niks nie. Moeilike denge, Johannie, moeilike denge nè!

    Like

    • Ja Koel Diek dit moet moeilik wees as mens heeltyd op suggesties moet lewe, ja soos jy, “jou ingels is beroerd” (hoekom?), ek verstaan blykbaar “niks” (waarna wys die woord “niks” vir jou?), julle het nie die intellek om die natuur te waardeer nie, (hoekom waardeer jy die natuur?), . . .”Ek volg Dawkins se raad”, (groot tjommies julle 2?) “what scientists discovered and are still discovering” ( hoe om beter bomme te maak?)

      Dink nie jy kry die idee nie, soos dawkins mos sê as jy sê iemand is “so of so” dan moet jy kan sê hoekom anders is dit nie ‘n goeie argument nie.

      dit laat my dink het jou “gedagtes” al aan materie gevat of geklap?

      Like

      • Johannie jy is n nar. Hoekom? Want jy probeer gate in evolusie en ander wetenskaplike teoriee soos gravitasie kry. Die problem is dat al kry jy dit reg (wat ek nie noodwendig se nie) beteken nie dat die Bybel weergawe noodwendig deur default reg is nie. Die probleem is die Bybel kan ook streng wetenskaplik getoets word o.a. wat Genesis en Exodus betref. Wys my bv. die geraamtes van die reuse en hemelwesens (ok per definisie hoef die hemelwesens nie geraamtes te he nie) volgens Genesis 6. Hoeveel reuse was daar en het hulle enige invloed op die menslike DNA uitgeoefen? Jy sien evolusie kan natuurlik verkeerd wees maar daar is goeie bewyse. kreasionism is nie eers n wetenskap nie. Wys die reuse Johannie of gaan jy weer met n ander storie vorendag kom?

        Jy sien net soos ek vir Antoon se. As iets nie bewyse is nie, is dit beter om te se ek/jy weet nie. Bewys jou spook. Terloops daardie Speck ou se boeke beindruk my glad nie. Geen bewyse nie.

        Like

        • Nee Gerhardus ek probeer nie die wetenskaplike teorieë verkeerd bewys nie, wat ek probeer by julle tuisbring is dat die “wetenskaplike bewyse” is ook net “figmente” van jul verbeelding, nie een van julle het al enige eksperiment gedoen om die “wetenskaplike bewyse” te bewys nie. Julle glo dit blindelings

          Ek is oor oortuig dat jou “spook” konsep van God ook ‘n verbeeldings vlug is, as jy bewyse soek vir jou delusies het ek jul al hoeveel keer vertel wat om te doen, maar jy WIL nie en/of jy is so aardgebonde met jou ego geïdentifiseer dat daai “stemmetjie in jou kop” jou dronklap en jou die indruk gee dat “jy” eintlik slim is, wat jy nie kan verstaan nie. Dis soos om jou te vertel dat die aarde is rond en nie plat nie, maar jy kan my nie hoor nie, jy is horende doof en siedende blind

          Sal jy nie graag wil weet nie?

          Like

          • Johannie en hoe weet jy dit is figmente man my verbeelding. Die woord “figmente” verwys in hierdie konteks na n solipsis. Nou ek het natuurlik nie gese ek is n solipsis nie. Ek het dit bloot as n voorbeeld of opsie gebruik as n counter argument. Dit is n moontlikheid maar ek dink nie ek is een nie. Jy moet leer om argumente te verstaan. Gaan terug na die vorige kommentare en lees weer.

            En wat laat jou dink ek het nie eksperimente gedoen nie? Dit is nie ek wat absolute waarheid verkondig nie dit is jy wat moet bewys. Jy het ook nie bewys dat jy alle vorme van gelowe (bekend of minder bekend asook hul sub-variteite geondersoek het nie) deurgewerk het om by jou sogenaamde waarheid te verkondig. Ook het jy nie my gedagtes geondersoen nie. Ek kan aanspraak maak op persoonlike ervaring net soos jy Johannie. Jy het geen bewyse dat jy weet wat ek dink nie en of dit “reg” of “verkeerd” is nie.

            Like

            • Gerhardus, die dat jy na God verwys as ‘n “spook” is ‘n duidelike weg gee van ‘n verbeeldings vlug.

              Ek het ook nie alle gelowe ondersoek nie, waarom dink jy dis nodig? Wie het jou vertel dat mens dit eers moet doen voor jy by die “waarheid” uitkom? Dis ‘n helse en onmoontlike taak, ek vermoed dis daai “stemmetjie” in jou kop wat jou dit vertel om slim te klink en jou daarvan weerhou om te dis-identifiseer met die ego

              En wat is die argument waarvoor jy ‘n “counter” argument gevoer het? Die indruk wat ek kry is jy gooi ‘n klomp woorde in die lug en hoop iemand vang iets net om te “wys” hoe groot en wyd en diep is Hompie dompie se gedagte gange. As jy “glo” dat jy kan al die dinge uitredeneer doen jy dieselfde as die Babiloniërs, wat gedink het hulle kan ‘n toring bou tot daar bo in die hiernamaals. Hmmm wat ‘n Babiloniese verwarring veroorsaak het.

              En sover dit eksperimente aan aangaan, ek vra jou om net een te doen, maar soos Koel Diek het jy nie ‘n vrye wil om dit te doen nie, en jy kan nie sê hoekom nie – “caught in a landslide, no escape from reality” sing daai “vrolikes” en net soos Micheal domkrag se seun (Micheal Jackson) gaan hulle aan daar op fyndraai, maar kan nie verder gaan nie, want die ander ego’s moun en biets saam en laat die geld inrol

              Like

              • “Gerhardus, die dat jy na God verwys as ‘n “spook” is ‘n duidelike weg gee van ‘n verbeeldings vlug.”

                Johaanie ek dink ons het al hierdeur gegaan. Ek gebruik heilige spook omdat dit so in die Bybel staan en ek dit direk na Afrikaans vertaal. Gaan lees die King James Version.

                “””Ek het ook nie alle gelowe ondersoek nie, waarom dink jy dis nodig? Wie het jou vertel dat mens dit eers moet doen voor jy by die “waarheid” uitkom? Dis ‘n helse en onmoontlike taak, ek vermoed dis daai “stemmetjie” in jou kop wat jou dit vertel om slim te klink en jou daarvan weerhou om te dis-identifiseer met die ego.”””‘

                Nou ja Johannie jy het nog nie alle gelowe geondersoek nie en ook nie eers jou geloof reg bewys nie. So daar het ons dit. Johannie se ego dink al weer hy is reg.

                “””En wat is die argument waarvoor jy ‘n “counter” argument gevoer het? Die indruk wat ek kry is jy gooi ‘n klomp woorde in die lug en hoop iemand vang iets net om te “wys” hoe groot en wyd en diep is Hompie dompie se gedagte gange. As jy “glo” dat jy kan al die dinge uitredeneer doen jy dieselfde as die Babiloniërs, wat gedink het hulle kan ‘n toring bou tot daar bo in die hiernamaals. Hmmm wat ‘n Babiloniese verwarring veroorsaak het.”””

                Gaan lees my kommentare hierbo. Wie het gese ek redeneer alles uit? Jy en die Babiloniers moet maar self die nonsens uitklaar. Die Bybel se in Genesis 11 dat die Babiloniers n toring wou bou met n punt wat tot in die hemel reik. Kyk Johannie ek dink nie daardie ouens het die tegnologie gehad om dit te doen nie. Hulle wou die toring tot in die hemel bou so ons weet nie of hulle noodwendig van die “hiernamaals” gepraat het nie. Maar al is dit ook die “hiernamaals” dan moet jy dit bewys. Kyk ek dink nie dit is waar nie maar kom ons se wat die Babiloniers wou doen is waar, dan is die Babiloniers maar lekker dom. Ek sou nogal daarvan gehou het om te versprei oor die aarde eerder as dat al die mense n toring bou. Simpel Johannie simpel. Maar ek admirer die Babiloniers se probeerslag.

                “En sover dit eksperimente aan aangaan, ek vra jou om net een te doen, maar soos Koel Diek het jy nie ‘n vrye wil om dit te doen nie, en jy kan nie sê hoekom nie – “caught in a landslide, no escape from reality” sing daai “vrolikes” en net soos Micheal domkrag se seun (Micheal Jackson) gaan hulle aan daar op fyndraai, maar kan nie verder gaan nie, want die ander ego’s moun en biets saam en laat die geld inrol”

                Jy het erken dat jy nog nie al die eksperimente gedoen het nie so kom ons stop net hier. Ploeter maar voort Johannie met die ego.

                Like

  51. Gerhard, I did not aim those comments at you. Anyway, in my opinion the Nephilim was much more about a bloodline than size. I’m not going to go into that, because i have a theory about that, which will include explanations biblical, but it will only be questioned on this forum. One thing i wanted to ask you. Where does evil and good come from? The hole concept of positive and negative. Are some people just good, and some people just bad, all given over to a cosmic cocktail of chance? Obviously you don’t believe in Satan? As far as scientism, that you refer to. I don’t see how i specifically make a case for it.

    Like

    • Off course I know that and I wont press since you say wont go into the subject of giants and angels.

      Regarding good and evil. What makes you think it exist? Saying the word “evil” or “good” doesn’t necessary means it exist objectively. Who said everything is due to chance. I simply don’t know but I can speculate with numerous views. Why should there only be only 2 options? No I don’t believe in Satan.

      On the subject of scientism. No I didn’t say you made a case for scientism. I said your comments, opinion or argument is devastating to your own argument. In other words relativism destroys your own case for YOUR God.

      Like

  52. ……Off course I know that and I wont press you since you don’t want go into the subject of giants and angels.

    Like

  53. Relativism does not come in here. Relativism is a word in my opinion created by boring philosophers. There are truths that has nothing to do with religion. It is a fact that i am typing this post. It is a fact that Donald Trump is the president of the States. There are witnesses to that, media, people who know him, photos of him being sworn in ect. but you can not say for a fact Columbus discovered America. The photos can not be confirmed, it being him, only literature is being used. The are nobody alive today that can testify to that. Only technology confirms that a person did exist, via records. This has happened in the last part of documented technology. As far as the scientism. I love science and i think it has made the world better. Yes certain things are confirmed via science, but that does not refute the supernatural. Example, it could be that Jesus used science to walk on water, but we humans have not discovered how. Yes i will be the one to first say that He is the very author of science, you don’t have to agree. Gerhard there are absolute truths and moral conscience in the world. Most governments use that to govern, and bring law in order. They use those set of rules. Surely then there is a differentiation of right and wrong just by that fact. Maybe not all governments, that mad man in North Korea probably excluded. Gerhard the very fact that you don’t go out and murder, kill, and plant explosive devices shows that you choose the better part of the good. So like i said before, i can not proof God but that does not mean He does not exist, old argument .Elon Musk is right we are living in the ‘ Matrix ‘.once you finally get plugged out here, you are present in your eternal reality. Obviously he has some other thoughts on that. So yes It was not recorded that Jesus lived, or that God exists, but i choose to believe it. If i am wrong, i have nothing to loose, but if i am right i have everything to gain. I cant say the same of someone who chooses not to believe, even without evidence, what if you’re wrong?

    Like

    • I will reply with comments. The first one purely out of interest and the second more in depth.

      Jesus used science to walk on water? So I suppose when Jesus used spit to heal it was also some kind of science? So your telling me that Jesus used spit because his spit were made up of some kind of healing qualities or alternatively he used the spit in conjunction with “new” science. Since you say Jesus used some kind of science is it possible he had some kind of different DNA make-up or new amino acids and so on or even the science to use waves according to quantum mechanics? So your prediction is that we could walk on water in the future? And no I don’t mean to be nasty but as Jesus was fully man it could be possible to find some kind of attributes if we were to go back in time (if possible) to find amazing things about Jesus such that when Jesus went to the bathroom – and scientifically enquiry about his excrement – we would find some different things that we never find in humans. Or that Jesus never used the bathroom because he used science? Because you specifically said:

      “”I love science and I think it has made the world better. Yes certain things are confirmed via science, but that does not refute the supernatural. Example, it could be that Jesus used science to walk on water, but we humans have not discovered how.”””

      In essence, I think what you are telling me is that the supernatural is science yet to be discovered?. You see science don’t deal with the supernatural. The hard science such as physics and biology deal with matter.

      Like

  54. What i am saying is it could be. I am not saying it as a fact that Jesus used science, i merely made a statement. I think certain things that would be regarded as the supernatural will be explained through science in the future, yes. I am definitely not saying all supernatural things. It is merely an opinion. I can’t explain certain things which Jesus did, like spit etc. But i believe yes He was fully man, and i believe fully God in the flesh. As far as Him being human, i am sure He had every need like any human, including going to the toilet etc. Lets us be honest with the technology of today, if people saw it 200 hundred years ago, they would have said, it is the supernatural! Gerhard, obviously raising the dead, feeding thousands with 5 loaves and two fishes, these things are supernatural. The supernatural, obviously stays the supernatural.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s