Neville Southall: A Man Too Good For This Cruel World

What foolishness exactly?

Not backward in coming forward, he tells it like it is, forceful but compassionate. A good man and a great Evertonian, l'm proud he is one of us.

So many great former footballers become footy commentators, managers or PR flacks for their old clubs. Big Nev left the game far behind and is trying to make the world a better place. Good for him!

I remember the big fella spending about 20 minutes with my lad who thought (wrongly) that he was a decent keeper.

Hope he doesn't read this – my son, not the big fella!

Not a phony bone in his body. He will do me.

What part of Nevilles viewpoint do you consider to be politically correct?

Contrast Nev to Jamie Carragher.

People are scared of strong personalities, especially when they are off the wall, like Big Nev. I hated what he did against Leeds Utd but read his book and he comes across as one very honest man, which is very rare imo?

He said he only carried on like a divvy because his head was gone at how quick the demise of our great team happened, but he's way too powerful an individual for people to want to employ him at a football club.

Don't rock the boat, especially when too many people have got it way too cushy, has got to be the reason why one of the world's greatest ever goalkeepers has never been given a job teaching his trade.

To paraphrase....."a lunk-headed footballer has something between his ears!" Shock horror!

To be fair, if he now sees himself as a mentor and activist, then I guess he is just trying to reach out.

Do you genuinely believe that Neville Southall has "tarnished his legacy" by placing on the record that he supports Labour, supports the NHS, supports the rights of LGBT people to live free of discrimination and prejudice, supports safety for sex workers, is against racism, against domestic violence and against cuts in mental health care?

In the UK at least, those are mainstream views. Roughly half of UK citizens support Labour and other parties of the left, and I'd hazard a guess that most if not all the other issues on his "social justice list" would have majority support regardless of political allegiance.

You've used “politically correct” as a pejorative to signal your disapproval of his worldview. I accept that you are entitled to your own political viewpoint and accept that you may have a philosophical problem with universal healthcare. But indicating that his support for the fight against racism, homophobia and domestic violence has tarnished his legacy suggests that you are at best indifferent to such acts.

Was that really your intention? If so, personally I think you should keep it to yourself. That would be the politically correct thing to do.

I mean :

"Hate domestic violence" – I've yet to meet anyone who actually declares themselves a fan of it.

"Hate the fact we have any homeless" – again, I don't think you'll hear many people tweet "fucking love seeing poor bastards kipping on the streets".
"Hate racism" – join the queue mate, I reckon that's 95% of us.
"Support the NHS" – yet again, even those who think it needs reforming tend to be believers in the concept of universal health care.
"LGBT people are great" – What all of them? Even the wankers? Just because they're gay? Give over Nev, you're being a bit patronising there, mate.

So, yes, great to see him engaged, but is he virtue signalling? Well, yes, but probably no more than Gary Lineker. Does Nev do anything practical for society apart from tweet? If so, then brilliant, well done Nev. A true blue... err, I mean not blue – that's tory; he's a true red... oh shit... you know what I mean.

Greatest goalie I've seen in an Everton shirt. Never felt safer than with him between the sticks.

I know the following will likely be deleted, but since the issue has been raised I can post it anyway and let it sit until the inevitable happens to it.

You invoke "mainstream views" as the basis of your moral position; if I apply that logic to the UK of 50 years ago, or where I live in eastern Europe today, then the correct moral position is that homosexuality is depraved and repulsive. You would say previous generations of Brits and the present generation of people here are "homophobic". They would say you are "morality-phobic".

But of course, I do not invoke "majority morality" because it is just another form of moral relativism and as such, subjectively defined by whatever region or culture or era one is immersed in and, very importantly, is vulnerable to being the product of agenda-driven social engineering efforts to shape public opinion.

Instead, I derive my view on morality on something that transcends regions, cultures and eras: a Moral Absolute, immutable, immovable, incontestable, superlative, objective and final. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the Word of God. And that Word says that homosexuality is a "vile affection", a sin against nature, that those who practice it shall not see Heaven, and that it is a curse from God on certain enemies of His (Romans 1).

And sure, you don't believe any of that and might roll your eyes and call me a bigot; by the same token, I could call you a facilitator of societal ruin.

Now I believe we live in a time of universal deceit in the West, where up is down, back is front, black is white, male is female, wrong is right, good is evil and evil is good. But I also believe it will get worse and today's generation might be castigated by the next one for being so unkind to those who are attracted to little children. Eventually, however, I think it will lead to wave after wave of judgment, maybe even nuclear war.

On that final note, in Russia (which borders Latvia where I am) a large part of the anti-West narrative ongoing at the moment is that westerners are utterly depraved defenders of filth and all manner of perversion and are thus worthy of suffering in the coming war the Russian media and politicians speak about endlessly. Yeah, the Russians think we have it coming, not just because we're framing them over Skripal and a host of other issues, but chiefly because we have embraced perversion. Sadly, though, from my perspective, the Russians invoke the light of nature rather than the Word of God for their stance on homsoexuality, but it's still better than denying that light of nature for the sake of Facebook likes and going along to get along.

As for domestic abuse and racism points, I was not objecting to Nev's position on those - just for the record.

In 21 posts, from a report about a Neville Southall Tweet to the suggestion that mildly liberal ideas 'will lead to wave after wave of judgment, maybe even nuclear war' because Russia considers westerners are 'utterly depraved defenders of filth and all manner of perversion and are thus worthy of suffering in the coming war.'

BURN 'n HANG 'EM ALL!!!

Cracking stuff!!!

Your in God company there Jay (Lat)

Although the other one probably had you excited Jay.

And the carnage wrought by a tsunami that wiped out plenty of depraved western tourists.

That's why the insurance companies call them Acts of God, I suppose? What a wonderful god it is that you worship.

However whilst I understand Nev's search for answers to tricky issues, I also would defend the right of the "morally certain" to express their views ...even if I think they may struggle for evidence in the last 2018 years!

I mean...Jaysus!

If a white male were to chin a black woman - that would not be cool, as accusations of racism/ misogyny could surface.

BUT... if she were gay: then no big deal!!

.Because his invisible friend told him so...

I thought homophobic comments were unacceptable these days – why are they on TW?

There is only one Holy Trinity.
As you well know.

Ball, Harvey and Kendall

Now it is fashionable to "come out" there is more of a movement of hate or sympathy. My views are not relevant but collected with millions of other keyboard warriors they count.

Such is life in the modern world. Oh for a return to the simple life where people had to use their head instead of a square box connected to space.

Oh, and back to the original post. Well done, Neville Southall, for not being in anyone's pocket and helping those who really need it. The poor minority need a spokesman and I can't think of a finer man to help them.

Thank you for doing so much to educate TW readers about God's Law. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some other elements of God's Laws and how to follow them:

1. Leviticus 25:44 states that I may possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to the Irish, but not the Scots. Can you clarify?

2. My neighbor would like to sell his daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

3. When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odor for the Lord – Lev.1:9. The problem is, the fella next door. He claims the odor is not pleasing to him. Should I smite him?

4. I have a friend who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself, or should I ask the coppers to do it?

5. Another mate of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination – Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this? Are there 'degrees' of abomination?

6. Most of my mates, who still have hair, get it trimmed once in a while, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

I know you have studied these things extensively and thus enjoy considerable expertise in such matters, so I am confident you can help.

Thank you again for reminding us that God's Word is eternal and unchanging.

That said, he was and still is the best bloody 'keeper I've ever seen!

Legendary player, better human being.

Jay – if this is what you truly believe, I feel for you on two counts:

1) It must be really hard work to hate LGBT people who you know nothing about and have never met; and 2) You are totally, completely and utterly wrong in your interpretation of the Bible. 100s of years of scholarly study have firmly established that nowhere in the Bible does it say homosexuality is innately wrong. It does say it is an abomination, this actually means it was non-ritualistic for the people of that time (they needed to grow their population) but not morally wrong. I suggest you watch a film called 'For the Bible tells me so', it will tell you all you need to know.

Big Nev was my hero as a kid (along with Kevin Sheedy), and if he is talking up gay rights, as a gay man I applaud that, especially in a football world where players still feel they can't come out.

😂😂😂😂😂
That is a contender for the finest post I have read on ToffeeWeb.

Bit skint this week. Twatted at Aintree. Any chance I can send you half a dozen bottles of Volvic and you can turn it into a fine claret?

It made me and my missus weep with laughter.

Essentially that's why they fear Nev. He and others like Kevin Ratcliffe and Derek Mountfield don't play the board room game of polite deception. For these fellows NSNO still means something and they're not prepared to compromise. We need more, much more, of this attitude at the club.

A few years ago I played a part in helping set up the Everton School. Before becoming a steward I'd held various senior roles in education, but it was in my role as a steward that the following story played out:

Mrs Barrett-Baxendale asked me one match day to attend her office as soon as practicable after kick off as she was expecting a visitor who could be “unpredictable”.

I got there at 3:10 pm and saw Nev sitting outside her office. I said hello and wished him well, not thinking for a moment that HE was the visitor for whom she felt she needed the help of a steward.

Before asking Nev to step in, I asked her with some incredulity if she knew who Nev was. “Well I know he's an ex-player.” Explaining that, to most of us, he's a bit more than that, would have been sowing seed on stony ground. (Couldn't resist a theological reference for this thread!)

Without going into detail of the meeting, Nev had developed himself a fully accredited NVQ Level 2 qualification, which he felt might be of interest to the Everton School. I was totally impressed.

There were two main reasons why I severed my involvement with the Everton School. The fact that this proposal with all its pedagogical legitimacy coming from an Everton great was deemed unworthy of even cursory consideration was one of those reasons. Nev probably thought his proposal had been looked at in detail before being rejected. As I say, polite deception.

It goes on everywhere in every company at every level.

Moshiri needs to boot the lot out, except Dr Keith Harris and Ryazantsev, they being the only people in the boardroom or at Finch Farm that aren't Kenwright's lackeys.

As for his political views I'm with him all the way. God help us all if we ever need to learn Russian. I'd be with him in Snowdonai fighting a terrorist campaign against them and all walks of life would be with us. More power to him for speaking up for those who need support most. Jesus would be proud – don't you think, Jay ?

Gerry - great moment on TW. Well done that Man.

That said, fuckin brilliant, Gerry.

The difference is that no country is arresting, hunting, killing Christians for their anti-gay views. But Christians sure as hell are doing those activities throughout the world, as are other “religious” folk. Gay people aren't demanding everybody be gay, simply to be allowed to exist as equals.

I wouldn't dare walk around Moscow this summer hand in hand with my boyfriend... For one thing, my missus would murder me!

So why am I regarded as a law breaker if I dare to say anything against something that was illegal for half of my life? It seems to me that freedom of speech is okay so long as it doesn't upset a minority section of the people – so much so that homophobia is considered more serious than theft, assault and who knows how many more "crimes".

As a great goalscorer and his dummy with a Scots accent used to say "it's a funny old world".

As it is, I don't see any (published) posts which attack Jay personally or excessively, or anyone taking an extreme stand to (for me) his reactionary Old Testament world view.

I do see a lot of people engaging in some light-hearted banter at Jay's expense and I think Michael as editor merits credit for allowing Jay's post to remain undeleted and uncensored, when Jay himself anticipated it would quickly be deleted.

On a more serious note, on one of the issues flagged up by Neville Southall (remember the original post...?), I see the diver English diver Tom Daley has called for more Commonwealth countries to decriminalise homosexuality.

Astonishingly, in 70% of the 53 countries competing at the Commonwealth Games homosexuality is a criminal offence. In Brunei, it even carries the death penalty as this BBC story on Daley's statement reports:

Link

So sorry Eric, but I'm always a bit wary of people who advocate passivity and the "I don't agree with people attacking others for their views" line as you introduced into the thread.

My view is just let have everyone hold their opinion. No-one here is actually doing anything that damages you. They're not stopping you from getting a job or functioning in society.

It's just an opinion expressed. And don't tell me you're "offended" by it. If that's the case then I suggest you ditch the Internet because life is going to be a bit tough for you.

On Neville, he comes across as one of the most genuine people around. Says what he thinks, and actually thinks about what he says.

Not when, according to one renowned Christian authority on the subject, 'homosexuals rarely live past 40 years old' anyway, and 'a tongue round the ringer will defo do the remainder in within a week as long as antibiotics are kept out of reach':

Link

A few years back, Lorimar Productions were forced to put their hand in their pocket to compensate J. Kent Ashcraft after they lifted portions of the very same 'Dr Laura' letter for use in an episode of The West Wing.

One of my favourite episodes. That's what sent me to Exodus and Leviticus in the first place. Comedy gold.

I'm buggered/fucked/shafted if I can find the right word for Kenwright's conduct since he got control though, probably because I've always supported anybody other than him (including even Darren Hind! - no offence Dazza!) who's HEART is genuinely 100% behind Everton.

Unfortunately I suspect people like me, in my 60's like many a ToffeeWeb'er, are seen by those in charge of our club as fundamentally irrelevant by way of mere age. Knowing Scousers like I do they couldn't be wider off the mark.

"I can't wait to get old. Specifically, I can't wait until I'm old enough to stop learning. It happens to everyone; you spend your whole life soaking up knowledge and then, one day, your mind snaps shut."

Perish (actually reject) the thought! As the saying goes we are never too old to learn.

At the ripe old age of 69, I think I am still learning and that has a lot to do with reading and listening and looking at the world and people around me and then making my own mind up on issues both new and old.

In doing so, I sometimes I even discover that I am wrong, resulting in a change of belief.

For the record, that author is James M Kauffman, Professor Emeritus at the University of Virginia. He wrote it 15-20 years ago in response to one of America's leading right-wing radio bigots, Dr Laura Schlessinger, preaching that homosexuality is an abomination (per Leviticus 18:22).

For you Yanks who remember the TV show The West Wing, President Bartlet extensively quoted Kauffman's post in a famous scene.

John, I seem to remember that the aforementioned J Kent Ashcraft claimed to be the author and to have been paid by Lorimar, but Aaron Sorkin never publicly confirmed that. And I have an ancient piece of paper with the original post that lists Dr Kauffman as the author.

That's what I get for reading these strings chronologically.

When the president stands, no-one sits. It was in fact President Bartlet who was my inspiration. Point taken.

My favorites:

"Decisions are made by those who show up." (Variously credited to Harry Truman, Woody Allen and Sorkin himself.)

"All you ever have to do to make me happy is come home at the end of the day." (Which I stole and said to my wife. Good move.)

Think I will blow you up. I'm the only one who does funnies like that.

Nice to see freedom of speech (which is rare these days) on here and no abuse. I think Nev is pretty spot on – though I don't vote labour or tory so disagree there

I love the tale from Mark Ward when Mike Walker was manager, on another day when Walker strolled into training very late. Nev pipes up "Fair play gaffer, you must have the warmest bed in Liverpool!" It summed up Walker as a lazy manager and Nev as a bloke who spoke his mind regardless of who he addressed.

“So why am I regarded as a law breaker if I dare to say anything against something that was illegal for half of my life.”

I don't think you are a law breaker for daring to say anything, but just because it was illegal for half your life it doesn't add weight to it being correct. Perhaps it impacted your views and you are reassessing; if it makes it easier, apply your statement to the Apartheid laws, do you have a case for racial segregation, land ownership restrictions, education, inter racial marriages just because they were illegal for half your life? Come on...

The world does change, understanding advances that change and education brings acceptance.

It is a disgrace there are homeless on our streets, that domestic violence is hidden and that religion is still used to condemn and kill.

Apathy breeds contempt, yet dogma breeds violence and hate. Big Nev shows the trait we all have, but many ignore, the desire to learn and understand and to improve the world we live in.

There are, I think, 8 books of the Bible, at least, that are no longer included in modern versions. Some of the teachings were deemed unworthy.

I don't mind you having a code to live by, but the problems in our world are made worse by people who think that all others should adhere to their specific set of rules.

Live and let live.

Nev Southall is a very nice man.

When you're in our age group you're never wrong, just not quite as right as we could be.

Now don't get me wrong, I like pretty much most of you and consider you decent people by and large, and wish you all the very best. But it would be remiss of me to waste the opportunity to point out that your tolerance and embracing of that which was viewed as abominable for many generations in our country is essentially Satanic. A key doctrine of Satanism is the denial of objective reality and the Moral Absolute, replacing them with a subjective interpretation of reality and moral relativism.

I'll close with a quick example from Nazi Germany. One doctor was asked how, he, having taken the hippocratic oath, could justify the regime's cruel treatment of the Jews. His answer oozed moral relativism from every pore: "The Jews are a tumour on the side of the German nation and must be excised". In sum, he was going along to get along, towing the party line, following the multitude to do evil. And you, my Toffee friends, are doing the same with your homophilia.

Really?

And that is the will of your God!

Pass the popcorn Mike...

A Bronze Age culture that considered slavery to be acceptable and publicly stoned women to death, wrote a book featuring sadistic violence, supernatural events that defy the known laws of physics, a talking snake and a number of highly-implausible plot lines... take biologically-impossible pregnancies, alchemical wine, rivers of blood, giants and some middle-aged dude single-handedly rounding up penguins from Antarctica, Panda's from China and bison from the USA to live on board his Persian boat for a bit..

Oh... and some of the authors also disapproved of gay people.

20 centuries later and, minus a single shred of credible proof, some nut still believes in it's legitimacy, claims it as the unimpeachable values of the universe's creator – then chooses to spread the ‘good word' onto a football forum!

Imagine being stuck next to him at the match!!

It never fails to amaze when cranks like this put the supernatural elements down to ‘metaphor', ‘analogy' or ‘parable'. Yet, when it comes to the gay issue, “Noo – I believe this is definitely the Word of the Lord!!”

Jay, I GUARANTEE you that, if those authors, or Jesus himself, had instead decreed that homosexuality was perfectly acceptable and I came on here and viciously-condemned their behaviour – YOU would defend them 100%!!

Ice-dancers? Great shopping partners? The chorus boys in one of Blue Bill's musicals, perhaps? Nope.

Two men having sex. That's the abomination (God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve!) fellows like Jay rail against, condemn to eternal damnation, etc.

Two naked men (Minimum. Prone to orgies, that lot) with erect penises, rubbing against each other in a variety of ways. That's the thought of men who can articulate well, which Jay does, why they feel (KNOW) homosexuality is so wrong.

Who else has these thoughts? Just on percentages, a few heterosexual men, I would guess.

But an absolute on who has these thoughts of "Two naked men (Minimum. Prone to . . . . . " are openly homosexual men. They think EXACTLY as Jay does.

So, Jay Woods. Just come out of the closet. You'll still be YOU. You can still have the same thoughts, but with a clear heart. Not the cruelty and meanness running thru every sentence you wrote here on this subject.

Kevin Hudson: Presumably you believe you're descended from newts or fish (as you must if you don't believe the biblical account)?

That aside, I didn't go out of my way to evangelise on this site or whatever else you're accusing me of; I'm merely responding to the lavish praise being heaped on Neville Southall for doing something that I regard as objectionable and immoral.

Most of you have outlined your reasons for your view on the subject, so I in return have done the same for my counter view. At no point have I been abusive or insulting (unless you want to construe not agreeing with you as both of those things).

I say!

I love reading his strong views on Twitter, that are often against bigotry and inequality.

Strange how many 'religious' people have issues with those who are different to them, in contrast to the love allegedly attributed to their deity/faith.

Political correctness my arse. People want to be treated equally and fairly.

It is your right to believe in the teachings of the Bible and the 'absolute morality' you claim it teaches (or is it, commands...?).

In doing so you are presuming a great deal about the legitimacy of the multiple authors who compiled it at different times, over hundreds of years, more than 2000 years ago, and their rationale and motives for writing what they did.

You have no idea if their chapters were written from 1st, 2nd, 3rd (ad infinitum) hand experience and knowledge of the events they record. You have no idea if their writings were even contemporary, or written years-decades-centuries after the events.

With religion, I respect another's faith and do not mock them for their belief. However, if someone persists in imposing their beliefs and dogma on me, I will push back.

You have 'outed' yourself in this thread and are now basically saying anyone who even mildly challenges your views are Satanists.

It strikes me that you are not particularly well-read on other major world religions, each of which have their own Holy Scriptures and 'moral teachings'. As such, the different scriptures from different religions contradict each other.

Is there a single all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful God - monotheism, as taught by Judaism, Christianity and Islam - or a whole pantheon of Gods - polytheism, as taught by Hinduism? Is life linear, as the Western religions teach, or cyclical, as the Oriental religions believe?

As stated in my opening, It is your right to hold the religious beliefs you do. I live in a country with one of the highest crime and murder rates in the world, where corruption is rife on every level of life. And yet, nearly every Brazilian you meet or hear in interview, their very first words are "Gracas a Deus" - "Thanks to God."

Where is God's guiding hand in the violent and corrupt Brazilian society that brings grief to so many when the majority are regular church-goers?

Indeed, in any Brazilian official national census, when it comes to listing your religion, there is no option to declare yourself non-religious, atheist, whatever, at ALL! You HAVE to declare a religion.

Again Jay, I respect your beliefs. But personally, I have considerable doubts about the morality of an omnipresent, omniscient and omnipotent God who stands aside and allows widespread grief, suffering and hardship to 'his' chosen creature - men, women and children - in 'his' created world.

And he does so because the scriptures you hold so dear tell us it is punishment for a woman plucking an apple on the advice of a talking snake, which she and her partner then ate, at the dawn of creation.

Since then, God's world has been a 'testing ground' of our moral fibre by which we will be judged when we turn up our toes: to be elevated into paradise, or cast down into eternal hell.

Doesn't sound like a particularly benevolent, tolerant, empathetic, moral or loving God to me that.

This god seems like a real dick, right from the start – or maybe he's just been made up by people who were real dicks.

Jay (92)

In (genuine) answer to your adolescent response, I personally have no idea of whether or not I'm descended from a fish However, the scientific community is unanimous in it's assertion that I share 96% of my dna with chimpanzees, 84% with canines and 35% of it with daffodils! They tell us that this has been studied, tested and proven and have presented abundant evidence to support such claims.

Now I haven't personally tested this, but surely you would agree that when multiple biologists have carried out such research and no one refutes the claims, claims which can be tested by anyone with the correct apparatus, then clearly these statements aren't outlandish?

You must know that the critical distinction between science and religion is that whilst science asserts the things we know to be true and speculates on ideas yet to be proven, religion remains largely obstinate to change.

Science re-orientates itself when evidence is uncovered or discoveries are made, discarding theories when contrary data comes in, helping to advance society. It's why we now have antibiotics, microwave ovens and can speculate that the Jovian moon, Europa, has a liquid ocean underneath it's icy crust.

Religion, on the other hand remains largely rooted in the Bronze Age. But you're already testament to that.

Here's an example:

Giordano Bruno was an early cosmologist who believed in the as-yet unproven Copernican model, which was disputed by the Vatican, but turned out to be true.

So rather than encouraging him to explore his ideas further, they burned him to death at the stake. Presumably, it was a ‘moral absolute' for planet earth to remain at the centre of the universe?

Speaking of absolutes and hinting back to the legendary Josiah Bartlet monologue, don't you believe Association Football was fundamentally immoral when it's early pioneers used to kick around (possibly unclean) animal bladders back in the day? Pig skin, anyone?!

Or the later vulcanisation process that made the actual footballs more reliable? Surely a scientific process named in honour of the non-Christian, Roman God of fire is abhorrent to you?

Since you ignored the question earlier, please own up to this query:

If Jesus was directly quoted as saying that there's nothing whatsoever wrong with homosexuality – would you still consider it an abomination?

Before you contrive a response, a word of advice:

Don't become ToffeeWeb's version of the the ‘bus nutter'.

Would you condemn the hundreds upon hundreds of clergy abusing children?

They presumably hold some of the same beliefs as yourself.

Fair play to Nev. A true Evertonian and man of conviction, someone who doesn't care what people think and always speaks from the heart. Probably to the detriment of forging a managerial career after retiring.

Jay Woods. Sounds like living in a country like Latvia is the best place for a guy with your beliefs.

And as for the Old Testament creation stories – well, there's two. They can't both be true. Bit of a problem for the "literal truth" brigade...

As for Nev? Top man.

In my opinion, religion is the biggest confidence trick ever played on the working class. "Don't sin, live a clean life and you will get your reward in heaven."

In other words, leave us tiny minority of ruling class to make all the money, gather all the profit out of the vast majority of working class people. Rule with the fear of eternal damnation.

That must be the biggest indictment of something that claims to be the same, yesterday, today and forever, yet has to adjust with changing social mores as the tail wags the dog. Shellfish, human sacrifice, slavery, geocentrism, divorce, women as equals... why not gays next? You know it's going to happen...

You've asked me to point to where you said the Nazis were right to brutalise homosexuals. I can't, but then again I didn't say you did. You did, however, introduce the Nazis and their mistreatment of the Jews and I'm sure you're aware the Nazis also oppressed homosexuals. I drew a parallel between two equally cruel actions.

I'm better informed today as a result of this discussion and have learnt that Leviticus 20:13 tells us not only that homosexuality is an abomination but also that homosexuals “shall surely be put to death”. If you believe the Word of God is absolute, to be taken literally and in its entirety, I think logically that means you must believe the natural punishment for homosexuality is death.

Of course, the Nazis butchered homosexuals because they considered them degenerates incapable of contributing to the growth of the Aryan race. You may not agree with their motivation but, in commenting as I did, I assumed you might be less troubled by the Nazis' persecution of homosexuals than you clearly were by their persecution of the Jews. I might even have suspected you considered their abuse of homosexuals to be part of the natural order as the "Will of God". That does seem to be a logical inference to draw from your comments. Was I wrong to assume that?

Yes, you're quite right. I was wrongly lumping Latvia in with Russia there. I was definitely making a broad generalisation there mate. While Russia has very negative views on LGBT issues. Many of the former Eastern bloc countries that were formerly part of the USSR are trying to differentiate themselves and become more westernised, to varying success with constant interference from Russia.

Much of the Torah was written in ancient Aramaic, a language that died out 2,300 years ago, and Biblical Hebrew, which hasn't been spoken in nearly 2,000 years. The first translations were into ancient Greek, a very different language to either. And virtually all translations of the New Testament were based on Greek as well.

Imagine how many languages the Bible went through, and how the translations changed over the centuries – English itself is very different from just 500 years ago – and you realize that the actual wording of the Scriptures is as impossible to determine as authorship and era.

And you can add to that the fact that English today varies from one side of the Atlantic to the other, and then differs again in Australia and New Zealand.

In the USA, there are issues with trying to live by the outdated words of the “Founding Fathers” and the constitution. The problems grow exponentially when people live by the supposed words from thousands of years ago.

It may surprise many to hear that the head of the Human Genome Project is a Christian.

The Language of God

I am going to read that book.

I like the way John Lennox, Professor of Mathematics at Oxford, talks about Science and God:

The genetic code and the big bang

His credentials are impressive:-

Link

Thanks for taking the time to share those links, I found them quite interesting, much obliged.

As scientific knowledge increases & provides those explanations, it will also raise new questions for which we won't immediately have the answer & the very existence of those questions will be used as proof of "god". What nonsense.

"We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”

Apart from that, The church has long been a recognised refuge for paedophiles to carry out their vile crimes against children in the name of 'God'.

I would like to see Walter Smith return and bring back the good times.

Power drunk peace officer in a fancy uniform brazenly speeding (probably after beating up on street bums Link)? Nobody would bat an eyelid. Not unless JLA stood for 'Jaguar Lad's Arse' and then the kryptonite would be out faster than Jay could say "Fuck off, Lex Luthor, he's mine!"

After Walter, there were also some cracking times in the Moyes years:

Everton 0 - 4 Bolton (Huh, Big Sam being Bolton manager)
Everton 1- 4 Blackburn
Everton 1 - 4 West Brom
and of course Shrewsbury 2-1 Everton (the year Shrewsbury were relegated to the Conference)

John – that video is just brill!

For Laurie and Kevin, if you are interested, here is a link to a fine debate on the science vs religion question between John Lennox (a Northern Irish lad, Jay Woods...) and the now sadly departed Christopher Hitchens.

Link

One of the many questions I have about the validity of religion is one Hitchens poses early on in the link above. Namely, there are only 3 possibilities. Either:

* ALL religions are true
* ALL religions are false
* Only ONE religion is true

Now the first can be dismissed because the teachings and dogma of ALL religions are not consistent. They contradict each other.

If only one religion is true, which one and which format of it is true? Judaism offers Orthodox, Conservative and Reform (and others). Christianity - phew! What to list? Islam Sunni and Shia. Hinduism - also very diverse. Buddhism - Theravada, Mahayana, Vajrayana and Zen. And there are literally THOUSANDS of other religions outside the above mainstream practised around the world.

Now society, science, technology and our knowledge have all evolved and continue to evolve since the Ancient Egyptians built the pyramids whilst following a broad polytheistic belief.

By contrast mainstream religion, I suggest, tied as it is to a dogma and 'moral absolutes' established 2,500-1,500-2,000-1,400 years ago (depending on your faith) is resistant to change and evolution.

That said, new religions do continue to emerge. Muslims share many of the Jewish and Christian prophets, but for them, Mohamed is the final and absolute prophet of God. If we accept that as true, as Islam and Mohamed's dialogue with God is more recent than the words of the prophets of the Jewish Torah and the Christian Bible, doesn't the Koran usurp both?

Or is Joseph Smith who founded Mormonism in the 1820s the most contemporary of God's prophet on earth? He is if you believe that he was guided by an angel and the voice of God to excavate some golden plates written in ancient Egyptian, buried in a hill near his home in Palmyra, New York, which over a number of years he translated to create the Book of Mormon before returning the plates to their original place.

This link shows just how many religions continue to be created, even to this day:

Link

I'll close by quoting the prophet Mohamed who advised his followers: "The person who questions and seeks answers is more likely to enter paradise than the one who passively and mechanically prays to God five times a day for their entire life."

Unlike the author Stuart Heritage who penned the original piece about Big Nev that provoked this discussion, I can't agree with the opening lines of his article:

"I can't wait to get old. Specifically, I can't wait until I'm old enough to stop learning."

I hope and believe I will never EVER be so old that I will stop learning. All power to the inquisitive mind.

Go 'ed, tell me the story of the lad who commanded the sea to open? No?

How about Jesus feeding 5,000 people with six fish? Each to their own of course.

I would add something else to that. As well as the fragments that became The Bible being translated, they also had to be hand-written countless times over the years. The printing press, which allows for the same copy to be reproduced consistently, is a recent invention in this scheme of things.

The chances of exact copies being scratched out by hand each time, mostly by people who did not understand the scratchings, are virtually nil.

Well it would depend on how many portions of chips there were too?

Are you suggesting Jesus was probably just the Sam Allardyce of his day?:

"Fantastic spread I just put on there, eh lads? 6 whole fish? Phwoar! We should all be satisfied with that given the dire scran situation before I showed up. Eh? Discontent among the disciples? Don't know what you're talking about. Look, the vast majority of diners are well and truly behind me and went home happy, appetites partially salved. Those who aren't, or didn't, probably amount to 11 dickheads with Papyrus and pens made of dried reeds, ranting about malnourishment and energy deficiency. Piss and moan about anything once someone has shown them how to scrawl. Bent as a nine bob note most of them, as well".

Percy: Well, you won't be able to fool everyone! Look (he takes a red cloth from his sleeve): I have here a true relic.

Edmund: What is it?

Percy: (unwraps the cloth) It is a bone from the finger of Our Lord. It cost me 31 pieces of silver.

Edmund: Good lord. Is it real?

Percy: It is, My Lord. Baldrick, you stand amazed.

Baldrick: I am — I thought they only came in boxes of ten. (he opens a box of finger bones) (??????????)

Mike # 109, about your comments on errors occuring during the handwritten copying of the bible. You might find this site of interest - I did. It talks about those errors and the history of this fourth century document.

What a monumental task to undertake. The handwriting art is amazing - sad to think we are teaching our kids to "tap".

Link

This gentleman must have a death wish. As the biggest and last lesson of all is on that day we pass on.

Such a daft and unconsidered opening to the article shredded into insignificance the text that followed. Lots of eulogising about the former keeper that were for me over the top and would have embarrased the straight talking Everton player in a former life. Maybe he would have tied himself to a goalpost to protest at such a load of presumptuous bolox.

My own view on Neville is great keeper, a bit dim and out of his depth in the world he is inhabiting now.

The LGBT acronym is apparently obsolete, and it is now referred to in the media as LGBTIQ

I confess that I'm not exactly at the cutting edge of modern political correctness and have absolutely no idea what the "I" stands for .

I saw a recent extract from a Ricky Gervais interview with Stephen Colbert where the host was trying to make an issue of Ricky's oft-stated atheism.
Ricky confirmed that Colbert believes in the "one true God" thing, but pointed out that there are roughly 3,000 gods, all worshipped in one form or other, and therefore Colbert doesn't believe in 2,999 of them.
Ricky then pointed out "I just don't believe in one more than you".

I am sorry if my view on the subject was not what you think it should be, perhaps we shouldn't have the right to not like something that a minority say we should like?

I don't like Wine, Garlic, Peppers, Liverpool FC, Tory Governments, Muslim Extremists, plus a colossal amount of other things too many to list but soon will I not be able to state my preference if it upsets somebody?

How the fuck is anybody supposed to know what is and isn't offensive these days when what is unacceptable one day has been "reclaimed" the next?

Ludicrous and ridiculous!

Not sure how old you are so ask either your kids or your grandkids. Listen to the music lyrics, if they listen to black recording artists, for what they call each other. A word I as a white man wouldn't dream of using.

I have to warn you, Len, that I enjoy white wine immensely and am deeply offended by your dislike of wine, so much so that I am reporting you to EOBPWDAWM.

Expect a knock at your door soon...

No offense 😁

In my defence I had shaky hands!

Know what you mean about the music (if you can can call it that).

'Intersex'? What does that even mean?

Victorian Dad here

Dave (#145). What does intersex mean? Well, I know West Ham used to have their intercity firm, dunno if it's anything to do with that.

Or maybe it's a case of "Met this great girl and thankfully she's really intersex."

Also, if there is a God, why is he a RS fan?

Absolutely spot on!

Apparently, there are over 3000 gods of various sorts but my god is the only true god.

If you don't follow my true god of love and peace, the only true god, then I will kill you!