Richard Dawkins answers questions at Randolph-Macon Woman's College

[loco]

Though Harvard is mostly secular today, many people forget that it started off as a Christian College.

Same with Yale:

Yale’s roots can be traced back to the 1640s, when colonial clergymen led an effort to establish a college in New Haven to preserve the tradition of European liberal education in the New World. This vision was fulfilled in 1701, when the charter was granted for a school “wherein Youth may be instructed in the Arts and Sciences [and] through the blessing of Almighty God may be fitted for Publick employment both in Church and Civil State.”

http://www.yale.edu/about/history.html

[Dos Equis]

Do they teach that the Bible is a divinely revealed book that contains scientific truths?

I'm fairly certain "they teach that the Bible is a divinely revealed book."  I doubt they teach that the Bible is a science book.  It isn't.

But that wasn't the point.  He said "biblical literalists" are "retards."  I was asking whether he considered Ivy League professors and graduates "retards."     

[Dos Equis]

Are those people literalists?   Or do they see the Bible stories as mostly metaphors and practice their faith much like typical Christians?

I haven't been to divinity school, but I know a lot of divinity school graduates.  They are "literalists."   

[columbusdude82]

I'm fairly certain "they teach that the Bible is a divinely revealed book."  I doubt they teach that the Bible is a science book.  It isn't.

But that wasn't the point.  He said "biblical literalists" are "retards."  I was asking whether he considered Ivy League professors and graduates "retards."     

And I'm asking whether they really teach that the Bible is "divinely revealed."

There are historians who specialize in Ancient Greece and its mythologies, but that doesn't mean they believe in Zeus or teach that the Illiad and Odyssey are divinely  revealed.

[Dos Equis]

And I'm asking whether they really teach that the Bible is "divinely revealed."

There are historians who specialize in Ancient Greece and its mythologies, but that doesn't mean they believe in Zeus or teach that the Illiad and Odyssey are divinely  revealed.

Of course.  Every mainstream religion and divinity school teaches that the Bible is the inspired word of God. 

[suckmymuscle]

  This thread is boring. What "caused' the beggining of the Universe is not even a question, because causality can only explain things after there is matter and energy - because causality is rule-based and only works to explain results of physical interactions. Without matter and energy there is nothing to have a cause. For all practical purposes, the first cause was the appearance of matter and energy, and what originated it cannot be explained by causality. Without matter and energy there are no rules of physcal interaction, and without this there is no cause and effect.

  Now, why is it that people assume that, because the Universe exists in an ordained fashion and is complex, that an intelligence must have created it? Epistemologically speaking, the principle of entropy states that the Universe must exist somehow. Maybe there are infinite universes that are simpler than a game of checkers, and maybe there are universes that don't require logic at all to operate. How would creationists and intelligent designers explain the existence of a universe that has no coherence at all - meaning that it's organization requires 0 intelligence?

  Personally, I believe that the explanation of what gave origin to the Universe is a Human problem. It is based on the fact that our minds were created to operate with inductive and deductive logic, which resulted from natural selection for us to understand our rule-based Universe. So asking what "caused" the Universe doesen't make sense, and it is not lack of intelligence but rather the specific design of our minds that makes us being trapped into assuming that, because cause and effect is so good at explaining the workings of our Universe, that it can explain something that probably does not even require logic.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

 

[Dos Equis]

  This thread is boring. What "caused' the beggining of the Universe is not even a question, because causality can only explain things after there is matter and energy - because causality is rule-based and only works to explain results of physical interactions. Without matter and energy there is nothing to have a cause. For all practical purposes, the first cause was the appearance of matter and energy, and what originated it cannot be explained by causality. Without matter and energy there are no rules of physcal interaction, and without this there is no cause and effect.

  Now, why is it that people assume that, because the Universe exists in an ordained fashion and is complex, that an intelligence must have created it? Epistemologically speaking, the principle of entropy states that the Universe must exist somehow. Maybe there are infinite universes that are simpler than a game of checkers, and maybe there are universes that don't require logic at all to operate. How would creationists and intelligent designers explain the existence of a universe that has no coherence at all - meaning that it's organization requires 0 intelligence?

  Personally, I believe that the explanation of what gave origin to the Universe is a Human problem. It is based on the fact that our minds were created to operate with inductive and deductive logic, which resulted from natural selection for us to understand our rule-based Universe. So asking what "caused" the Universe doesen't make sense, and it is not lack of intelligence but rather the specific design of our minds that makes us being trapped into assuming that, because cause and effect is so good at explaining the workings of our Universe, that it can explain something that probably does not even require logic.

SUCKMYMUSCLE

 

I read the whole post.  I must say, it was boring.   

[suckmymuscle]

I read the whole post.  I must say, it was boring.   

  Ok, "bum".

SUCKMYMUSCLE

[Deicide]

  Ok, "bum".

SUCKMYMUSCLE

I on the other hand enjoyed your post; good stuff!

[suckmymuscle]

  I sometime ask myself why I even bother to write these long posts going in minute detail at a board where no one gives a shit and where I won't get even single reply to my post. How is a guy supposed to debate like that

SUCKMYMUSCLE