[_Stefan_]

Hahaha.

You have to be joking.

Terrorism is a form of hostility. Humans have always been hostle to enemies.

Those things can hardly be called immoral, unless you have a 1st century mindset.

Evidence for drug abuse dates back to the Stone Ages.

Lack of regard for others? Come on.

As for your ideas of "proof", you won't get anywhere with them.

[BenV]

I hope are not too sidetracked from what we started talking about. i.e the origin of matter.

Um... have you got the wrong thread?  We weren't discussing the origin of matter at all.

[demadone]

As to the rest: viruses have always plagued humans; humans have always performed hostile acts towards others, and terrorists are actually not a major cause of death; Climate change is the only phenomenon which can even remotely fit your criteria, but it hardly promotes your cause, because the earth has experienced multiple dramatic climate fluctuations before.

You're arguing any facts and trying to explain them before you really think about them. You sound like you're having a chat with Jim Jones or David Koresh. I'm just an ordinary guy and these facts I'm pulling out are just to answer some of the arguments guys have brought forward.

[_Stefan_]

You mean you're pulling those facts out of thin air.

[demadone]

You mean you're pulling those facts out of thin air.

Basically we all agree they are 'facts'. Some would argue even their own existence just to cling to their belief there is no God, that everything came from nothing.

[_Stefan_]

Your facts are either wrong, or not used in the correct context / misused to support dubious arguments.

Not all facts are true.

[demadone]

Not all facts are true.

FACT: a thing that is indisputably the case

Concise oxford dictionary

Hope you won't stand by your phrase because it is not true.

I just wanted you to pick out what I may be misusing as a fact or whatever fact may be misinterpreting as evidence of worsening world events. Don't get depressed with my tone. That is not at all my intention.

[_Stefan_]

By that I meant that not everything that is called a fact, is actually true. Some things can be asserted despite the state of the evidence.

I am trying to explain to you that your belief that things are worse now than they were 2000 years ago is demonstrably false in the developed world. Despite certain phenomena that we currently suffer from, our overall conditions are by far better than they used to be even 100 years ago. Thanks to our living conditions and modern medicine, we are living on average longer and healthier than ever before.

You are biased by the fact that you live in the present and so the disasters the world currently experiences are much more significant to you than those our ancestors experienced. Yet none of the types of disasters you describe are unique to the present, and people 2000 years ago suffered more from them. In this light, the "facts" you have presented do not support your argument.

[demadone]

Yet none of the types of disasters you describe are unique to the present, and people 2000 years ago suffered more from them

I'm think about the world wars and AIDS and shaking my head at your statement. I'm not suffering any of these but I know we have had major disasters of our own and they are much worse than what could be there before. The bible doesn't say they will happen at every square meter of the earth but they would be getting worse. Interestingly, it does too mention that people would refuse to take note.

 For just as the days of Noah were, so the presence of the Son of man will be (days of the end). For as they were in those days before the flood, eating and drinking, men marrying and women being given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark; and they took no note until the flood came and swept them all away, so the presence of the Son of man will be.

[lyner]

Increase in the following is undeniable :
Terrorism

[The Bible is full of it and life on the Northwest Frontier was always that way)

Immorality (including homosexuality, infidelity, pornography industry etc)

(Try Ancient Rome)

Drug abuse

(Laudnum was pretty popular in Victorian times. Hashish has been around for a long time and regularly used. And when was drinking Alcohol first invented?  I think the Babylonians were quite keen on it.)

Lark of regard for others

(On what evidence? Who cared for slaves - ever? Or foreigners, like Samaritans, for instance? )

yet again I'm sure you can finish off the list yourself.

(It's your list and, so far it is zero length)

[lyner]

But was your list devised in order to provide some statistical proof of the existence of a God?
To me, it looks more like a subjective justification. Fair enough, but don't expect it to convince me.

[demadone]

(Laudnum was pretty popular in Victorian times. Hashish has been around for a long time and regularly used. And when was drinking Alcohol first invented?  I think the Babylonians were quite keen on it.)

Things have been bad in the past too indeed. Some were even destroyed for it like in the case of the global deluge. But the warning is that whenever these things will reach great extents, a lot worse than before in magnitude, then the end will come. I mean even scientists can tell that global warming is leaving life on earth on the balance.

[demadone]

Increase in the following is undeniable :
Terrorism

(The Bible is full of it and life on the Northwest Frontier was always that way)

So who were the suicide bombers and did they manage to take on average 25 lives a day?

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is similar to what you are referring to and I am not giving that as example.

(Laudnum was pretty popular in Victorian times. Hashish has been around for a long time and regularly used. And when was drinking Alcohol first invented?  I think the Babylonians were quite keen on it.)

They used to have it yes. Babylon was destroyed by God for it.
Hashish. You may have heard of ecstasy or cocaine which are quite worse (not that hashish is OK).

(Try Ancient Rome)

I decided to remove the comment... It is directed at some other topic of contention.

[BenV]

(Try Ancient Rome)

Try Netherlands with there homosexual population. I mean you must know that this is a really free society we are living in. Even churches now condone.

Here you're just exposing your bias.  There's nowt wrong with homosexuality whatsoever.  If two people are in love, I couldn't care less what gender they are.

I think most people on this site are fairly humanist about this sort of thing, what gives you the right to say that the way someone chooses to live their life is wrong?

[demadone]

I removed my comment about homosexual activity in recent times. Then if you're more comfortable about it, then I will redirect my attention to the pornography industry and how much access people have to such. They may have been quite loose in Rome but now the stuff is all over. Even just in my childhood, pornography was something you just heard about, now even 8 year old kids can quite easily access it.

[_Stefan_]

In ancient times, 8 year old kids were approaching or had even reached marital age.

Your position is not defendable. Few if any of the ills you describe are unique to modern society.

[demadone]

Your position is not defendable. Few if any of the ills you describe are unique to modern society.

They are not unique but they are on the increase. Some may be explained to population increase, global warming and others to moral degradation (and I didn't come up with the phrase).

[demadone]

a large number of persons do not believe that God exists. And since many of these persons are scientists, some individuals jump to the conclusion that to believe in the existence of God the Creator is unscientific. Yet others think to be a real scientists (of astronomical proportions) you have to be Atheist. That's very unfortunate.

[LeeE]

You really shouldn't go back and edit old posts to change their content.  Quickly correcting a typo or re-phrasing the same thing to clarify the meaning is ok, but removing things you've already said some time ago can turn the thread in to meaningless gibberish as people may have already replied to stuff you've removed in the light of their comments.

If you subsequently realise that you were wrong about something, then just say so in the thread, so that the thread still makes sense.  Removing stuff from your old posts really looks like you're trying to hide a mistake and are re-writing history to fit with what you're currently saying or claiming.

[_Stefan_]

Your position is not defendable. Few if any of the ills you describe are unique to modern society.

They are not unique but they are on the increase. Some may be explained to population increase, global warming and others to moral degradation (and I didn't come up with the phrase).

This is nonsense. You have not demonstrated this to be true. You can hardly say that the net amount of ills experienced by each person per unit of time has increased since thousands of years ago. Give it up already.

a large number of persons do not believe that God exists. And since many of these persons are scientists, some individuals jump to the conclusion that to believe in the existence of God the Creator is unscientific. Yet others think to be a real scientists (of astronomical proportions) you have to be Atheist. That's very unfortunate.

You are making an appeal to authority. God-belief is not unscientific because some atheists are scientists, but because a god can not be investigated scientifically - there's just no evidence, and there are so many contradictions between the god concept and what is already understood about the physics of the universe. It's the same reason that belief in faeries and invisible pink unicorns is unscientific.