The God Delusion, by Richard Dawkins

[loco]

OK now for real let's get this thread get back on topic. We have lots of other threads on here that run off topic.

Okay.

"The soft atheists have it in for three bestselling authors in particular: Richard Dawkins (author of "The God Delusion"), Sam Harris ("Letter to a Christian Nation") and Christopher Hitchens ("God Is Not Great"). Though they differ on many points of scripture, all three are passionately antireligious. Mr. Dawkins considers God "a psychotic delinquent." The doomsayer Mr. Harris thinks religion will destroy the world if not stopped, and Mr. Hitchens holds that "religion poisons everything." Mr. Epstein finds these authors rigid and intolerant, which ultimately makes them no different from the religious fundamentalists they condemn. Nor is he alone. As one English dean told the Guardian, Mr. Dawkins is "just as fundamentalist as the people setting off bombs on the tube."
Harvard's E.O. Wilson, another secularist, has also criticized the New Atheists, and suggests their tone is alienating important faith groups whose help is needed to solve the world's problems. "I would suggest possibly that while there is use in the critiques by Dawkins and Harris, that they've overdone it," Mr. Wilson told the AP."

http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=145343.msg2044871#msg2044871

[loco]

According to people like "The Coach," dinosaur fossils are hoaxed perpetrated by no less a figure than God Almighty Himself: He planted them in nature to test our faith.

What a cruel trickster. Surely that great, true deity, our Lord, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, would never do such a thing.

May He bless you all with His noodly Appendage. RAmen.

65 Million year old dinosaur soft tissues are hoaxed planted by Darwin to test the faith of his followers.

[columbusdude82]

I presume you have not read any of these books. If you had, you probably wouldn't agree with this review, or at least not all of it.

1. Sam Harris DOES say that religion may be the end of us. He explains it very clearly. Pakistan has a nuclear program. Iran will soon have one. The nuclear weapons of the former USSR are floating around. Muslim nutjobs who hate the West and think they are doing Allah's work when they kill infidels may get their hands on these bombs. The combination of the Koran and the Bomb may lead to disaster.

Do you agree or do you disagree?

2. Dawkins deals with the "you're just as fundamentalist" accusation in his book. (But you'd know that if you had read it. ) He explains clearly the difference between being PASSIONATE about something, and being a fundamentalist about one's beliefs. RD is PASSIONATE and how could he not be? How can ANYONE not be ANGRY when they see young Children in Gaza being indoctrinated into the cult of suicide bombing and Jew hatred, or when they see the Catholic Church's cover-up of its child abuse scandal, or when they see the Christian Right in the USA prying into people's bedrooms and interfering in their choice to use contraception?

3. As for the accusation of RD being "just as fundamentalist as the people setting off bombs on the tube," whoever said that is an idiot. How many people has RD killed? How many people have gone out and killed because of something they read in RD's book? Does he encourage anyone to go out and kill? Sheer nonsense.

[loco]

I presume you have not read any of these books. If you had, you probably wouldn't agree with this review, or at least not all of it.

1. Sam Harris DOES say that religion may be the end of us. He explains it very clearly. Pakistan has a nuclear program. Iran will soon have one. The nuclear weapons of the former USSR are floating around. Muslim nutjobs who hate the West and think they are doing Allah's work when they kill infidels may get their hands on these bombs. The combination of the Koran and the Bomb may lead to disaster.

Do you agree or do you disagree?

2. Dawkins deals with the "you're just as fundamentalist" accusation in his book. (But you'd know that if you had read it. ) He explains clearly the difference between being PASSIONATE about something, and being a fundamentalist about one's beliefs. RD is PASSIONATE and how could he not be? How can ANYONE not be ANGRY when they see young Children in Gaza being indoctrinated into the cult of suicide bombing and Jew hatred, or when they see the Catholic Church's cover-up of its child abuse scandal, or when they see the Christian Right in the USA prying into people's bedrooms and interfering in their choice to use contraception?

3. As for the accusation of RD being "just as fundamentalist as the people setting off bombs on the tube," whoever said that is an idiot. How many people has RD killed? How many people have gone out and killed because of something they read in RD's book? Does he encourage anyone to go out and kill? Sheer nonsense.

The people doing the criticism are not religious people, and they all read these books.

[columbusdude82]

Here's a novel idea. How about people who want to discuss (or dismiss) a book, read it first?

If no one else on here has read these best-seller books, then there is no point in having a discussion about them, is there?!

[loco]

Here's a novel idea. How about people who want to discuss (or dismiss) a book, read it first?

If no one else on here has read these best-seller books, then there is no point in having a discussion about them, is there?!

Excellent idea.  How about people who want to discuss (or dismiss) the Bible, read it first?

There are way too many people on this board making false statements about the Bible, like

God may have simply been testing Abraham's faith, but he wanted Jephthah to kill his own daughter for God!!!

If he doesn't want anyone to perish, why does his "Son" (also himself) tell his followers to kill those who deny him, in Luke 19:27?

Israel stole the Amalekites' land

None of the above are true and anyone who has read the Bible knows this.

[columbusdude82]

The first of those was statements was sarcastic, as I have told you before.

The second, if I'm wrong, do forgive me. All those names blur together. I had the Midianites in mind.

As for the third, it says so right there in the Bible Read it yourself.

[loco]

As for the third, it says so right there in the Bible Read it yourself.

Be more specific and we'll discuss.   

[loco]

The first of those was statements was sarcastic, as I have told you before.

The second, if I'm wrong, do forgive me. All those names blur together. I had the Midianites in mind.

As for the third, it says so right there in the Bible Read it yourself.

columbusdude82,

You falsely said

If he doesn't want anyone to perish, why does his "Son" (also himself) tell his followers to kill those who deny him, in Luke 19:27?

To which I said

No.  Jesus did not tell his followers to kill those who deny him.  The one who said that was the man in the story that Jesus told.

To that you then said

Yes, loco, I did go to Catholic school, you know
But to the nutjob out there who wants to use scripture to convince his "sheep" to kill, such contextual concerns won't matter much, will they.

So which is it, columbusdude82?  You keep going back and forth with your false testimonies about Jesus.

Let me tell you what Jesus really said about those who deny him.

Luke 9:53-55
but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem. When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them
 
Luke 22:49-51
When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.
 
Luke 23:33-34
When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
 
Matthew 5:44
"But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"

[columbusdude82]

I see no contradiction. I care no more about what Jesus really said, is reported to have said, or did not say than I do about any other figure from ancient history and mythology.

I went to Catholic school. I know all the standard answers and arguments, and I'm bored with them. I'm bored with Jesus and his cranky "father," not to mention his prudish sex-deprived taco-appearing mother.

I also know that the nutjob fundamentalist won't stop at tiny matters of quotation marks when he wants to use scripture to justify his sordid goals.

Now back to Dawkins.

[loco]

I see no contradiction. I care no more about what Jesus really said, is reported to have said, or did not say than I do about any other figure from ancient history and mythology.

I went to Catholic school. I know all the standard answers and arguments, and I'm bored with them. I'm bored with Jesus and his cranky "father," not to mention his prudish sex-deprived taco-appearing mother.

I also know that the nutjob fundamentalist won't stop at tiny matters of quotation marks when he wants to use scripture to justify his sordid goals.

Now back to Dawkins.

You see no contradiction?  You just won't admit that you are either lying or you simply don't know the Bible as much as you say you do.  You are making false statements about Jesus.  Again, yours is a good idea.  Why not read the book before you comment on it or before you dismiss it?

[columbusdude82]

If that's what you need to tell yourself, by all means...

[loco]

If that's what you need to tell yourself, by all means...

Okay. 

You can read, columbusdude82, can't you?  So please do show me where Jesus says to his disciples that they should kill all those who deny Jesus?

[columbusdude82]

Luke 19:27

BTW I haven't read the Book of Mormon, but I heard from people that in it, the resurrected Jesus goes to America and puts lots of people to death.

Anyone know if this is true?

[loco]

Luke 19:27

BTW I haven't read the Book of Mormon, but I heard from people that in it, the resurrected Jesus goes to America and puts lots of people to death.

Anyone know if this is true?

No.  Jesus did not tell his followers to kill those who deny him.  The one who said that was the man in the story that Jesus told.

Luke 19:11-27

The Parable of the Ten Minas
 
 11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable, because he was near Jerusalem and the people thought that the kingdom of God was going to appear at once. 12He said: "A man of noble birth went to a distant country to have himself appointed king and then to return. 13So he called ten of his servants and gave them ten minas.[a]'Put this money to work,' he said, 'until I come back.'
 14"But his subjects hated him and sent a delegation after him to say, 'We don't want this man to be our king.'

 15"He was made king, however, and returned home. Then he sent for the servants to whom he had given the money, in order to find out what they had gained with it.

 16"The first one came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned ten more.'

 17" 'Well done, my good servant!' his master replied. 'Because you have been trustworthy in a very small matter, take charge of ten cities.'

 18"The second came and said, 'Sir, your mina has earned five more.'

 19"His master answered, 'You take charge of five cities.'

 20"Then another servant came and said, 'Sir, here is your mina; I have kept it laid away in a piece of cloth. 21I was afraid of you, because you are a hard man. You take out what you did not put in and reap what you did not sow.'

 22"His master replied, 'I will judge you by your own words, you wicked servant! You knew, did you, that I am a hard man, taking out what I did not put in, and reaping what I did not sow? 23Why then didn't you put my money on deposit, so that when I came back, I could have collected it with interest?'

 24"Then he said to those standing by, 'Take his mina away from him and give it to the one who has ten minas.'

 25" 'Sir,' they said, 'he already has ten!'

 26"He replied, 'I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what he has will be taken away. 27But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me."

[columbusdude82]

Yeah, we went over that. Now if you want to continue obsessing over Luke 19:27 start another thread for it, and keep this thread on topic.

[loco]

The first of those was statements was sarcastic, as I have told you before.

The second, if I'm wrong, do forgive me. All those names blur together. I had the Midianites in mind.

As for the third, it says so right there in the Bible Read it yourself.

columbusdude82,

You falsely said

If he doesn't want anyone to perish, why does his "Son" (also himself) tell his followers to kill those who deny him, in Luke 19:27?

To which I said

No.  Jesus did not tell his followers to kill those who deny him.  The one who said that was the man in the story that Jesus told.

To that you then said

Yes, loco, I did go to Catholic school, you know
But to the nutjob out there who wants to use scripture to convince his "sheep" to kill, such contextual concerns won't matter much, will they.

So which is it, columbusdude82?  You keep going back and forth with your false testimonies about Jesus.

Let me tell you what Jesus really said about those who deny him.

Luke 9:53-55
but the people there did not welcome him, because he was heading for Jerusalem. When the disciples James and John saw this, they asked, "Lord, do you want us to call fire down from heaven to destroy them?" But Jesus turned and rebuked them
 
Luke 22:49-51
When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should we strike with our swords?" And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him.
 
Luke 23:33-34
When they came to the place called the Skull, there they crucified him, along with the criminals—one on his right, the other on his left. Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing."
 
Matthew 5:44
"But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"

[columbusdude82]

I am not going back and forth. You are going back and forth on my words.

Go back and read my posts on the matter. Apparently it falls to me to teach you about your religion.

My point about Luke 19:27 is that when a book is taken literally, and verses are quoted in their own right, as the Word of God, that verse really does stand out. Anyone can take it out of context.

Now before you make Jesus out to be a cuddly teddy bear type, remember Mark 3: 28-29:
"I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."
and Matthew 12:32
"Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

Since I have already denied the so-called "Spirit" long ago, it matters not at all if Jesus in Luke 19:27 wants me dead or not.

If Christianity were true, I'd be screwed either way.

Fortunately, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the one true deity and He's got my back!

[loco]

I am not going back and forth. You are going back and forth on my words.

Go back and read my posts on the matter. Apparently it falls to me to teach you about your religion.

My point about Luke 19:27 is that when a book is taken literally, and verses are quoted in their own right, as the Word of God, that verse really does stand out. Anyone can take it out of context.

Now before you make Jesus out to be a cuddly teddy bear type, remember Mark 3: 28-29:
"I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."
and Matthew 12:32
"Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come."

Since I have already denied the so-called "Spirit" long ago, it matters not at all if Jesus in Luke 19:27 wants me dead or not.

If Christianity were true, I'd be screwed either way.

Fortunately, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is the one true deity and He's got my back!

Jesus is not a cuddly teddy bear.  There, now stop avoiding the issue and give an honest answer.  What you just posted has nothing to do with your original claim.

You said that Jesus told his disciples to kill anyone who denies him.  You have made an accusation and a claim.  Back it up.

[columbusdude82]

Suppose a preacher for a little psycho-Christian cult in backwoods Alabama says (in thick Southern twang):

Now the Bible says in Luke 19:27 "But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me." It says so right there in the Bible, that we are to KILL all of those who don't want the Lord Jesus to be king over them. O Praise Jesus!...

Suppose those people are already primed for hate, like so many of God's chosen ones. Naturally, they aren't ones to question scripture or authority. They won't have you on hand to guide them.

It's right there, in the Bible. Can you deny it?

You can only tell them your interpretation. They can argue that their interpretation is right. They are the nuts. They have the guns. They think they got Jesus.

[loco]

Suppose a preacher for a little psycho-Christian cult in backwoods Alabama says (in thick Southern twang):

Suppose those people are already primed for hate, like so many of God's chosen ones. Naturally, they aren't ones to question scripture or authority. They won't have you on hand to guide them.

It's right there, in the Bible. Can you deny it?

You can only tell them your interpretation. They can argue that their interpretation is right. They are the nuts. They have the guns. They think they got Jesus.

11While they were listening to this, he went on to tell them a parable,

It is clear that Jesus was telling a parable. There is no interpretation needed.

You keep beating around the bush and avoiding the question.  You made a serious accusation.  Back it up.

[columbusdude82]

Telling a parable, you say? No such thing is clear.

Were you there? Did you check to say they copied everything he said right? Were there scribes writing down things as he said them?

It's likely that Jesus never said any such thing to begin with.

If you choose to continue hijacking this thread, I will be forced to make another one for the book.

[loco]

Telling a parable, you say? No such thing is clear.

Were you there? Did you check to say they copied everything he said right? Were there scribes writing down things as he said them?

It's likely that Jesus never said any such thing to begin with.

If you choose to continue hijacking this thread, I will be forced to make another one for the book.

Now you are changing the subject.  We can discuss the accuracy and reliability of the gospels if you wish.  But the truth is that what is written there is written, and it is what Christians go by.

You made a serious accusation that the Christian holy text says that Jesus told his disciples to kill anyone who denies him.

I am not playing games and I am not trying to hijack this thread.  You made a serious accusation.  Now, have the honesty and the decency to back it up and I'll leave your Duck tread alone.

[columbusdude82]

If I cared, that would be my reading of Luke 19:27. The original writers didn't have quotation marks, and it is a reasonable reading.

You can dig up the thread in which I first brought up Luke 19:27, but the discussion about that in this thread is closed.

Jesus is dead, he isn't coming back, and none of his threats can scare me

[loco]

If I cared, that would be my reading of Luke 19:27. The original writers didn't have quotation marks, and it is a reasonable reading.

You can dig up the thread in which I first brought up Luke 19:27, but the discussion about that in this thread is closed.

Jesus is dead, he isn't coming back, and none of his threats can scare me

I threatened you? With what?  I have no intentions of threatening you and there is nothing that I can do to you anyway.

So, Jesus is dead, he isn't coming back and this makes it okay for you to tell lies and makes false statements about him?  Is this what becoming an atheist is doing to your moral compass?  Now being deceptive is okay?

You made a false, dishonest accusation.  Of all the people that I have debated on this board for the past year, you are the first.  Is that really necessary?  Do you have to resort to deception to make your points and to "win" a debate?