Ben Dunne on 4fm

DEFTLEFTHAND

Dunne is advertised to be on Newstalk's Lunchtime show today where's he's going to talk about men using hairdryers to dry their private parts in his gyms.

Mr Benevolent

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

Dunne is advertised to be on Newstalk's Lunchtime show today where's he's going to talk about men using hairdryers to dry their private parts in his gyms.

In other news: It's a VERY slow news day.

Biggins

DarkJager wrote: »

Anyone else hear this ****ing imbecile on David Harvey a while ago? Ranting about giving 2 fingers to Europe because "they're trying to take our Christianity" and "only the Lord can save us".

He managed to make himself sound like a religious fascist with the talk out of him. I despair for this country with indoctrinated assholes like this spouting this bull**** rhetoric.

He doesn't get the award "Bad Rant Of The Week" though!
That Mel Gibson initiated award goes to this guy: Cardinal George Pell.

Australia's most senior-ranked Catholic says Jews 'intellectually and morally inferior'

Source.

Needless to say, someone quickly tried to spin his thoughts later as something else!
DOH! :pac:

Biggins

Confab wrote: »

In other news: It's a VERY slow news day.

...Which is ironic as this week we are giving away 1.5 BILLION to bondholders yet again - and not even a protest is being done about it - meanwhile there is protests over 160 million household tax continuing!

Welcome to Ireland!

veronymus

philologos wrote: »

I can't believe as many people thanked this post.

Firstly - most growth in happening in countries which are traditionally non-Christian. Why would they be "forced" to follow Christianity by anyone.

Secondly - from knowing a number of missionaries who've been sent out to countries as varied from secular Europe, to the African content, and South East Asia (China, Japan, South Korea), for the most part these are just regular people like you and I who simply want to tell people about Jesus Christ. Many of them going to the lengths of immersing themselves in a new language and culture to do so. By the by, I don't see why these people are any less "enlightened" than any atheist. That's just idle rhetoric, which can and IMO should be ignored.

Thirdly - The idea that people are forced to become Christians in these areas is about as silly as saying, well because people were forced to become atheists under communist regimes, that atheism grows through coercion. It's bad logic.

Fourthly - The freedom of expression argument is null. In many of the countries I'm speaking of, it's actually illegal to openly practice Christianity. In China for example Christians have been killed for their faith in Jesus, yet it is still estimated that about 10% of the population believe and trust in Him. Is that coercion? No, of course not. The same is true of what I've heard about Christianity growing in parts of the Middle East, but it is a little bit more difficult to gauge the exact numbers there.

Simply put there are quite a few flaws in your argument, and I hope you could address them if you get time. If not no worries.

I'll respond in spite of the fact that you did not take the time to answer the question I put to you.

In no part of my post did I say the word 'forced'. Hell, yes, I think there is a degree of coercion. It may be gentle but it exists nonetheless.

When I talked about 'these people', I was actually referring to those being preached to and not the Missionaries, whose enlightenment or lack of, I have no way of measuring. However, since you agree that they are there to spread the word of God, it's quite clear that their agenda is to swell the Christian following. Otherwise they are no more than story tellers.

I have no issue with Christians, or at least those who have arrived there having made an informed choice.

How many of those being preached to in the Third World can access the same kind of research materials that we have at our disposal? Where can they go to for an unbiased response to a question? How many children in Uganda or Nigeria can hop on their laptop at home and look up Wikipedia (for all it's faults, it's a wonderful source of information) or watch a documentary online? An awful lot of these people have a much narrower view of the world than we do.

Your final point only serves to reinforce what I wrote about lack of freedom of expression, so I'm confused about the point you are trying to make. I hate to hear of anyone persecuted for their religious views or lack thereof.

Suzie4

yeah heard the ranting lunatic..

to be honest i wasnt surprised,hes probably on the high of a manic depressive wave.

thats what it sounded like.

of course if david harvey had of at least picked him up on the garbage he was spouting that would have been interesting,but no, harvey going for the cheap audience loving take on things.

an if they werent such a cheap outfit ,they would have a listen again feature on their site, which they used to have but now dont.

ToddyDoody

Sounds like he was really giving it (st. Bernard brand) socks

philologos

veronymus wrote: »

I'll respond in spite of the fact that you did not take the time to answer the question I put to you.

Sometimes its hard to do that when there is a lot of other questionable material in there.

Societies shift and change in how receptive they will be to Jesus. A key factor I guess is how reliant we are in human ability. Are we willing to take a look beyond our mere material possessions and see that there is more to life than this? I find most people in Britain and Ireland run from the topic, in particular of the reality that we've all sinned, and that Jesus came into the world to forgive us.

The idea that people only become Christians because they are forced to is absolutely ridiculous.

veronymus wrote: »

In no part of my post did I say the word 'forced'. Hell, yes, I think there is a degree of coercion. It may be gentle but it exists nonetheless.

The question is you might think there is coercion, and having responded to the rest of your post before writing this bit, you've not addressed it once.

veronymus wrote: »

When I talked about 'these people', I was actually referring to those being preached to and not the Missionaries, whose enlightenment or lack of, I have no way of measuring. However, since you agree that they are there to spread the word of God, it's quite clear that their agenda is to swell the Christian following. Otherwise they are no more than story tellers.

Why wouldn't their agenda be to increase those who are following Jesus. They do this simply because they care about the people they are witnessing to. I wouldn't support missionaries unless they were teaching people about Jesus and God's word. That's the main point why Christians send them out, you're right so that people might be saved through God's grace.

Edit: By the by, here's why missionaries go out and why active Christians speak about Jesus to others:

Matthew 28 wrote:

Now the eleven disciples went to Galilee, to the mountain to which Jesus had directed them. And when they saw Him they worshiped Him, but some doubted. And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

I fail to see where the coercion is in that. You've also misunderstood the concept of mission. Christian mission is not confined to the third world, indeed I know missionaries in Ireland and Britain, as well as continental Europe. There's varying means in which it can operate. While I was a student, I was involved with student mission. Now, if God gives me an opportunity to speak about Him to others at work, I.E if people ask me about my faith or things, I will answer in the hope that they might be interested in hearing more. In a sense I'm a missionary to others. Others are involved in church planting. Large churches planting smaller ones generally (e.g my church in London has been involved with planting 17 smaller churches in London now with healthy congregations, one in Paris, and another in Brussels), others simply witness to people and try to speak about Jesus to them.

veronymus wrote: »

I have no issue with Christians, or at least those who have arrived there having made an informed choice.

How many of those being preached to in the Third World can access the same kind of research materials that we have at our disposal? Where can they go to for an unbiased response to a question? How many children in Uganda or Nigeria can hop on their laptop at home and look up Wikipedia (for all it's faults, it's a wonderful source of information) or watch a documentary online? An awful lot of these people have a much narrower view of the world than we do.

Where's coercion involved here? - Just curious. People are telling people about Jesus and about His word. If people don't want to hear, they don't have to hear, they can go away. That's the same in the case of any missionary work that I've seen or heard of.

veronymus wrote: »

Your final point only serves to reinforce what I wrote about lack of freedom of expression, so I'm confused about the point you are trying to make. I hate to hear of anyone persecuted for their religious views or lack thereof.

You said lack of freedom of expression forces people to believe in Jesus. I'm saying, how does that happen in the case of non-Christian countries. You've not answered as of yet.

Your claim originally heavily implied that countries forced people to become Christian. That couldn't be further from the truth in countries like China, where people are actively persecuted precisely because they have already decided to follow Jesus.

That's simply not a very logical point in respect to this.

You've not shown once how people force Christianity into peoples lives as opposed to simply sharing it.

theg81der

Don`t know what anyone who says they`d be mortified if other Europeans heard this are thinking - there is a fair amount of Euro sceptisism throughout Europe, more so than here I would think.

And yes he seems a bit of a few baskets short of a picnic, but I always knew that - have you heard the ads with his big spud accent!

Soundbraid

Hi, in my opinion, we've got no right to judge this guy. I didn't hear him - just missed him - but my sister says he was brilliant! Finally, somebody stands up for what they believe in, and you dig up everything, every last mistake they've ever made, and judge them for it.

Do you not think all the stuff he's apparently done in his past makes it HARDER for him to come on air and defend his faith, a faith which is so brutally, viciously and relentlessly attacked today?

I am an 18-year-old boy, studying for his Leaving Cert, who has in the last two years rediscovered his Catholic faith. I've had to endure people making fun of me and picking on me for my beliefs ever since. And I think what that man has gone and done, to have the balls to say on the radio tonight the stuff he did, is inspiring.

We all make mistakes. You do not have the right to say this man can't try and start again. So have some cop-on, and leave him alone. Don't be a complete hypocrite. And thanks for reading this!

Pottler

He was on with Antoine de Smoothiechops who was standing in for Matt De Cooper on Today FM -De Larst Wurd- and came across as a bit of a twat tbh with his line on the Lads drying their netherhair with his dryers. Disgusted he was - which is a laugh from a lad with a past like his. I'd imagine he has seen a fair few blowdryers attatched to his own flute to be so "shocked" at the depravity of it all....

ThinkingTom

milnerrm wrote: »

I was infuriated by Ben Dunne's moronic rant on 4fm yesterday afternoon and couldn't believe the support that was evident in the response from the listeners of the show! Very disheartening...

I was reminded of this Bertrand Russell quote; 'The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubt.'

But it's funny how some are fanatics about their doubts to the point that any person who doesn't have doubt but has conviction is a fool and unwise. hmmmmm doubt is now more virtuous than people with a sense of conviction. Oh conviction misplaced is not good in any person. Including I believe the conviction of doubt as being of some higher virtue.

To say someone was a moron or more intellectually put 'moronic' doesn't help one's argument. It's just simple labelling and name calling. The fact that many (of course they maybe moronic too or fools or less wiser) did give support to something that is somewhat against the grain on the media, should make us listen and see if there is any validity to their passionate rant. Lets get past playground name calling and listen, maybe we might accurately learn their point of view so as to either agree or correct, then we all win. Doubt is not necessarily a virtue but humility is.

Wattle

Would Jesus have dried his balls with one of Ben Dunne's hairdryers?

grindle

ThinkingTom wrote: »

But it's funny how some are fanatics about their doubt...doubt...doubt...doubt...Doubt is not necessarily a virtue but humility is.

doubt
verb
to be uncertain about; consider questionable or unlikely; hesitate to believe.

Agnostics have doubts, atheists have conviction.

humility
noun
A modest or low view of one's own importance; humbleness

Atheists also come with a galaxy-sized smattering of humility which the religious should take note of, as we don't have to make up tall tales to make ourselves or our species feel superior.

ThinkingTom

grindle wrote: »

doubt
verb
to be uncertain about; consider questionable or unlikely; hesitate to believe.

Agnostics have doubts, atheists have conviction.

humility
noun
A modest or low view of one's own importance; humbleness

Atheists also come with a galaxy-sized smattering of humility which the religious should take note of, as we don't have to make up tall tales to make ourselves or our species feel superior.

Humility, not to think to highly of ones self with the ability to learn.

I know Atheists who would agree with me concerning the 'conviction' of the Agnostic and those who would even argue with great conviction that both Atheists and Theists should be like them on the position of endless doubt and not possibly have such strong convictions. I also know Atheists who say Agnostics are those who sit on a fence and lack the courage of those who pin their flag to a post.

I get the impression that you think I said or implied that Atheists are not humble. You wrongly presume. I have met my fair share or Atheists and agnostics who were just augmentative and used sarcasm, that oozed with intellectual pride and belittled so called lesser intelligent people than themselves because they have faith. So the pride I do refer to is an view of intellectual snobby above lesser mortals who are of cave man mentality due to belief in metaphysical nature which often includes a Theistic view. But I have met, thankfully, well thought and respectful Atheists too. One's with which you can have dialogue. Such conversations have been refreshing, stimulating and ones where I can learn from - even if unconvinced of their faith statements. So no I don't think all Atheists lack humility. But to live with a view that one is minuscule in light of the galaxies yet still with a sense of superiority over another person just because they express some faith, is still lacking in humility towards their fellow man no matter how you slice it. But is it wrong of me to point out those who do? Nor do I think all those who call themselves Theists of whatever persuasion are humble. But humility can be a virtue by any who desires truth rather than just winning an argument. Truth will set us all free, then we all win and become more of who we are-our full potential.

As to tall tales that goes way beyond this tread and its initial beginning point

As to trying to make ourselves feel superior, that goes against the Theist view of a superior being to which they call for personal submission to or the Atheists acknowledgement that there is a great probability that in the many galaxies a number of beings of greatness beyond that of humans may exist (a kinda faith if you will). But this too goes beyond the thread and its initial point.

So getting back to the point of Ben Dune and others who passinatly speak out for their faith and to simply label them and name call people - is not helpful. Nor to presume what I think about Atheist as a group when I never said the such.

plein de force

hmmm ben dunne? after the prostitutes and the cocaine it's a bit hard to imagine him being very christian

the groutch

Ben Dunne, Cork's answer to Dick Roche

grindle

ThinkingTom wrote: »

...what I think about Atheist as a group when I never said the such.

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. You just kept needling the 'doubt' word, atheists and theists are both doubtless. Carry on!

"Grrrr, Ben Dunne..."

Yamanoto

Wattle wrote: »

Would Jesus have dried his balls with one of Ben Dunne's hairdryers?

What with attending to his beard and magnificent mane, I'm guessing he'd have let the holy trinity drip-dry.

ThinkingTom

grindle wrote: »

Okay, thanks for clearing that up. You just kept needling the 'doubt' word, atheists and theists are both doubtless. Carry on!

"Grrrr, Ben Dunne..."

funny no doubt :-)

Dave!

philologos wrote: »

Sometimes its hard to do that when there is a lot of other questionable material in there.

Societies shift and change in how receptive they will be to Jesus. A key factor I guess is how reliant we are in human ability. Are we willing to take a look beyond our mere material possessions and see that there is more to life than this? I find most people in Britain and Ireland run from the topic, in particular of the reality that we've all sinned, and that Jesus came into the world to forgive us.

The idea that people only become Christians because they are forced to is absolutely ridiculous.



The question is you might think there is coercion, and having responded to the rest of your post before writing this bit, you've not addressed it once.



Why wouldn't their agenda be to increase those who are following Jesus. They do this simply because they care about the people they are witnessing to. I wouldn't support missionaries unless they were teaching people about Jesus and God's word. That's the main point why Christians send them out, you're right so that people might be saved through God's grace.

Edit: By the by, here's why missionaries go out and why active Christians speak about Jesus to others:


I fail to see where the coercion is in that. You've also misunderstood the concept of mission. Christian mission is not confined to the third world, indeed I know missionaries in Ireland and Britain, as well as continental Europe. There's varying means in which it can operate. While I was a student, I was involved with student mission. Now, if God gives me an opportunity to speak about Him to others at work, I.E if people ask me about my faith or things, I will answer in the hope that they might be interested in hearing more. In a sense I'm a missionary to others. Others are involved in church planting. Large churches planting smaller ones generally (e.g my church in London has been involved with planting 17 smaller churches in London now with healthy congregations, one in Paris, and another in Brussels), others simply witness to people and try to speak about Jesus to them.



Where's coercion involved here? - Just curious. People are telling people about Jesus and about His word. If people don't want to hear, they don't have to hear, they can go away. That's the same in the case of any missionary work that I've seen or heard of.



You said lack of freedom of expression forces people to believe in Jesus. I'm saying, how does that happen in the case of non-Christian countries. You've not answered as of yet.

Your claim originally heavily implied that countries forced people to become Christian. That couldn't be further from the truth in countries like China, where people are actively persecuted precisely because they have already decided to follow Jesus.

That's simply not a very logical point in respect to this.

You've not shown once how people force Christianity into peoples lives as opposed to simply sharing it.

You've not addressed the poster's central point, which was that the developing nations where Christianity is on the increase generally don't have as ready access to information as we do in Europe and North America. Their point I gather is that exposure to alternative views, information, research, arguments, perspectives, philosophies, etc., is playing a big role in the decline of Christianity in the west.

Soundbraid

Pottler wrote: »

Disgusted he was - which is a laugh from a lad with a past like his. I'd imagine he has seen a fair few blowdryers attatched to his own flute to be so "shocked" at the depravity of it all....

The whole point of Christianity is that it's for sinners! Normal people! Jesus didn't roll up looking for do-gooders.

People can change. I will say again, we have no right to judge this guy.

Why don't we just listen to what he has to say, and judge the value of his words on his words alone? What are we so afraid of, that we have to drag up his past instead of thinking about what he's actually said?

awec

Soundbraid wrote: »

The whole point of Christianity is that it's for sinners! Normal people! Jesus didn't roll up looking for do-gooders.

People can change. I will say again, we have no right to judge this guy.

Why don't we just listen to what he has to say, and judge the value of his words on his words alone? What are we so afraid of, that we have to drag up his past instead of thinking about what he's actually said?

What?

Ben Dunne coming across as morally superior to everyone else, and you are telling us to cop on?

Time to remove your head from your rectum.

Stercus Accidit

F*ck, and I was just about to join his poxxy gym. He sounds like a complete c*nt.

Soundbraid

awec wrote: »

Ben Dunne coming across as morally superior to everyone else, and you are telling us to cop on?

I think of all people, Ben Dunne is going to be the last guy who's going to think of himself of 'morally superior'. I think we've pretty well established by now that this guy has had some dark times in his life? Isn't that the whole point of the endless vicious insults he's been attacked with on this thread so far?

For once, somebody stands up for an increasingly insidiously persecuted religion, yes that's right - Christianity - deal with it - and we ridicule him.

Someone expressing regret at the abandoning of Jesus Christ in our country today is drastically different to someone blowing their own trumpet.

grindle

Soundbraid wrote: »

Why don't we just listen to what he has to say, and judge the value of his words on his words alone? What are we so afraid of, that we have to drag up his past instead of thinking about what he's actually said?

If we judge the value of his words by their own merits, he should probably be committed to St. James' Psychiatric Hospital.
Replace all mentions of Jesus with Mickey Mouse, and he'd rightly be considered mentally incapacitated... Because he is.

awec

Soundbraid wrote: »

I think of all people, Ben Dunne is going to be the last guy who's going to think of himself of 'morally superior'. I think we've pretty well established by now that this guy has had some dark times in his life? Isn't that the whole point of the endless vicious insults he's been attacked with on this thread so far?

For once, somebody stands up for an increasingly insidiously persecuted religion, yes that's right - Christianity - deal with it - and we ridicule him.

Someone expressing regret at the abandoning of Jesus Christ in our country today is drastically different to someone blowing their own trumpet.

He wasn't expressing regret. That was not the tone of his little rant.

I wonder if you'd be so defensive of say for example, Bertie Ahern having a rant on the radio about financial austerity and the lack of it over the past few years.

Or is this hypocrites rant ok because he's religious these days?

Soundbraid

grindle wrote: »

Replace all mentions of Jesus with Mickey Mouse, and he'd rightly be considered mentally incapacitated... Because he is.

That's ridiculous. He wasn't talking about Mickey Mouse. He was talking about Jesus. So you can stuff your mental institution.

He's got passion, and love for Jesus Christ, as a real person who's changed his life. Deal with it.

grindle

Soundbraid wrote: »

That's ridiculous. He wasn't talking about Mickey Mouse. He was talking about Jesus. So you can stuff your mental institution.

He's got passion, and love for Jesus Christ, as a real person who's changed his life. Deal with it.

He was talking about the theological Jesus, not the historical Jesus. The historical Jesus was just another doomsday-saying vagrant living through hard times, trying to make the world a little bit better in his own way, and promising an afterlife to those who needed to think there was something better than the squalid/dangerous/meaningless life they currently had.
Ben Dunne insists that I take the theological Jesus into my heart. I insist he watches all recorded seasons of Barney and Friends.
The same message, and both performed by a fictional creature.

Soundbraid

awec wrote: »

Or is this hypocrites rant ok because he's religious these days?

Yes, it is freaking ok! The word 'hypocrite', would be all well and good if it weren't for the fact that Christianity, I will say for the 3rd time, is FOR sinners!!

Also, we have a little thing called 'free speech' here in the Western world. And he's not persecuting non-Christians in this country by using the word Jesus. He's trying to speak to those who are Christian in this country (about 85percent of the population) who have forgotten about Jesus, the real living person and hope in our Church, the main character!!

We are living in despair today, and our media constantly uses omission and misquotes to promote an image of a Church past the sell-by date. We're in the 21st century here, so they do it nice and subtle. I don't know why they do it, but they do. They want the end of Christianity in this country. Already, EU-pushed laws pave the way for wearing of crucifixes, and prayer in public, to be made illegal. I'm an 18-year-old LC student, not some old ranting fogey, and I've done my research. This is really happening.

So if someone if willing to stand up for an increasing persecuted Christ in our country today, I will stand by him, whatever his mistakes in the past. I believe in second chances, and I believe in hope. And I believe we can all get along in this country, all of us with different faiths or none, without there being a need to destroy one religion to pave way for another.

(And Atheism has enough stringent doctrines and dogmas, in my experience, to be a religion by the way. )