“We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in..” - says Richard Dawkins

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meh, he’s repeatedly said he likes Christianity. Dude is either lying or grifting about his atheism. Probably grifting.

The people who complain about donating money to a charity or tithing to church should examine the cost of listening to Dawkins talk for an evening. With taxes and fees and parking it’s probably about $75 per hour, if he speaks for 4 hours, which is highly doubtful.

You think offering tickets for what is essentially a public performance that people can choose to attend and being told that you need to send a large percentage of your income to a preacher if you want you and your family to go to heaven are the same thing?

That's some TWISTED logic right there.

This isn’t true except in the case of a few scoundrels

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This all seems heavily influenced/based on Christianity, and then using that to condemn all religion.

Also, sadly a fundamental misrepresentation of the teachings of Jesus in the Bible.
His thing about trying to “be good” because Gid is watching. That describes a more Catholic worldview of “good works” being required in order to earn your way into heaven.
But—spoiler alert—the Bible says none of us is good enough to earn our way into God’s presence. That requires perfection—and we ALL fall short.
That’s where GRACE comes in.
God is a JUST God and we are all guilty of sin. And guilt requires punishment.
But thankfully, God sent his only Son, our Savior, to take on our punishment FOR us and through faith in him alone, we are saved. He took OUR punishment so we don’t have to!
That has already been done.
All we need to do is accept this gift of grace through our faith.

And it’s our faith that leads us to share the Good News of God’s love for us and for the world!—and the “good works” are an outpouring of gratitude and commitment to be a vessel whenever and wherever we can to spread God’s love to our fellow man. We’ll fail for sure…but we’ll also succeed in that sometimes…sharing the love of God is messy and beautiful and contagious!

May God bless each of you with the beauty of His truth this morning!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:From J. Warner Wallace of Cold Case Christianity, who is a former detective:

“In every criminal trial, a jury is asked to evaluate the actions of one defendant related to a particular crime. While there are millions of other people in the world who could have committed the crime under consideration (and indeed, millions of these people were actually available to commit the crime), only one has been charged. If the jury becomes convinced this defendant is the perpetrator, they will convict him based on their beliefs. They will convict the accused even though they haven’t examined the actions (or nature) of millions of other potential suspects. They’ll render a verdict based on the evidence related to this defendant, in spite of the fact they may be ignorant of the history or actions of several million alternatives. If the evidence is persuasive, the jurors will become true believers in the guilt of this man or woman, even as they reject millions of other options.”

Not sure what your point is. Can you elaborate?

For the record, anyone who has seen a half-episode of law and order knows this is not accurate. What a jury is supposed to do is examine the evidence, and decide if the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. That does not mean they think he is innocent. There is no verdict "innocent". They do not reject "millions of other options" because they are not tasked to evaluate those. Defendant may still be GAF but the burden of proof is on the prosecution who is making the claim. Not Guilty simply means they have not met that burden.

[Anonymous]

An atheist talks about being an atheist. News at 11.

I find his perspective interesting and have found the other threads on him interesting and thought provoking. This one is odd. OP, do you agree of disagree with his point of view? Unclear what you’re trying to say. You find it noteworthy that an atheist is talking about disbelief in God?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s up with all these Dawkins threads

Two of them were started by atheists, this one and the science one

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Meh, he’s repeatedly said he likes Christianity. Dude is either lying or grifting about his atheism. Probably grifting.

The people who complain about donating money to a charity or tithing to church should examine the cost of listening to Dawkins talk for an evening. With taxes and fees and parking it’s probably about $75 per hour, if he speaks for 4 hours, which is highly doubtful.

Ooh, the godless heathen and his devilish scheme to make you pay for PARKING.

Tickets prices start at $75, and of course you can see him free on YouTube or pay $5 for copy of one of his books.

Not sure what you think is free in a church?
But unmmm….if you choose to attend a church that meets in a pretty building on land with a parking lot, then they need some income (donations in the form of tithing from parishioners who attend) to pay for mortgage, upkeep of grounds and facility, janitors and maintenance crew salary, caregivers for childcare in nursery, supply of Bibles and hymnals, printing costs for weekly bulletins and newsletters, office staff salary, preacher salary, organist salary and investment in instrumentation that all attendees enjoy,…. and the many, many, many, many community outreach programs that are started by and/or funded/maintained by the church—including feed-the-homeless programs, support for clothing supplements to local schools, supplies provided to encampments, reading materials bought and donated to libraries…there’s just a ton of need that is addressed through church programs that you are probably unaware of unless you are benefitting from it directly OR you attend that church.
But yeah—I think if you attend a church regularly, you are Biblically obligated to tithe. 10% is not that much, honestly. I pay waaaaaay more in taxes to the government—and half the time, they spend it on really ridiculously unjustifiable things.
Where your treasure goes—there goes your heart also.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This all seems heavily influenced/based on Christianity, and then using that to condemn all religion.

The quotes don’t put Judaism in great light either (the stuff about the OT). And we know what Dawkins thinks about Islam. So I guess that leaves Buddhism and Hinduism (of the major religions), but we don’t know Dawkins’ thoughts on those because OP was cherry-picking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
…

“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

..

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

…

These are straight-up wrong. Most faiths-Judaism. Islam, most of Protestantism, Catholicism- encourage science including belief in evolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
…

“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

..

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

…

These are straight-up wrong. Most faiths-Judaism. Islam, most of Protestantism, Catholicism- encourage science including belief in evolution.

Find it odd you had to say “most” twice? And that is for one scientific topic only. Evolution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
…

“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

..

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

…

These are straight-up wrong. Most faiths-Judaism. Islam, most of Protestantism, Catholicism- encourage science including belief in evolution.

So many great, groundbreaking scientific research and discoveries by Catholics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
…

“I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world.”

..

“Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is the belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence.”

…

These are straight-up wrong. Most faiths-Judaism. Islam, most of Protestantism, Catholicism- encourage science including belief in evolution.

So many great, groundbreaking scientific research and discoveries by Catholics.

True! Like Galileo, he was a Catholic!

In 1632 Galileo published his Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, which defended heliocentrism, and was immensely popular. Responding to mounting controversy over theology, astronomy and philosophy, the Roman Inquisition tried Galileo in 1633, found him "vehemently suspect of heresy", and sentenced him to house arrest where he remained until his death in 1642.[2] At that point, heliocentric books were banned and Galileo was ordered to abstain from holding, teaching or defending heliocentric ideas after the trial.

.....ooooops.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair#:

[jsteele]

There is no need to turn this into Richard Dawkins forum. Please join the earlier discussion:

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1200450.page