Faith and religion are incompatible. Religion is about belief and faith is a trust that the Universe is benevolent.
Religion is like a boat
- Thread starter Cliffy
- Start date
I had Faith once...OK I had her a bunch of times before she moved for college.
You a prophet now that you know my reply before I give it?? I don't doubt you read them but did you just agree withnit all or did some parts strike you as being in error.
What do you thinks the passages are for if not to help a person understand the book. Dawkings certainly doesn't and he's not an idiot but that doesn't mean he can grasp the concept of the book. The same goes for you, you read and take it in but there is no sorting about what is good knowledge and what is flawed.
I'm not going to do all 359 quotes but I certainly could and it would look no different from this sample starting at1 so you don't accuse me of cherry-picking.
https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/3044365-the-god-delusion
“We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
We start off that way and in my case I didn't become a believer until about 35 and reading the book has only supported that feeling. If his views don't line up to be close to mine then that means I would be a atheist if I had his knowledge level. I know quite a bit more about the book than he does. If he heard my version and he couldn't come up with a better argument than you do would he have to accept that my version does fit in with a single God who is as literal as it gets. I'm at one God, he is at zero Gods.
Notice how he used the 'believed in' to lump the Bible in with Greek and Roman and Egyptian myths. (and a lot more so he is saying since all of them are myths then the God of the Bible has to be also.
One big difference is none of the other Gods left any books behind that take us from the beginning of the Universe to well past the end of the created heaven and earth from Ge:1:1.
“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
This is where you admire him and it shows that neither of you have a clue. Ge:6 and the grief he felt for what was being done to mankind by fallen angels. Even then He didn't interfere until Noah and his wife and 3 sons were the last 5 fingered people on the planet. Had he killed them there would have been no 'seed of Eve' to complete the bruises from Ge:3:15. How does that fit in with 'your version'?
The exodus wars are an area where people were being killed. Any Tribes that were 6 fingered giants were exterminated right down to their livestock. That was done to end the rule of law that govern the earth under the fallen angels. They were bound by the law given in Re:21 and the extermination allowed the 10 Commandments to become the law and it only applies to the time it takes to complete the two bruises, Jesus completed the bruise to the heel on the cross and that verse is what He was referencing when He said, 'It is finished.' moments before He died. The completion of the other bruise will happen on the day the 7th trump sounds and the 7 vials are poured out on the sinners on the earth, human and angelic beings are involved, men go to the grave but remain awake, Satan is sent to a place where the men can look on him but there is a locked gate between the two.
The people that were killed in the exodus wars has virgin females captured and after being raised as children they would be married into the Tribe by becoming a wife of the husband whose family raised her of the man broke her hymen with a finger and then she was free to marry any boy from the 12 Tribes. Natural daughters were virgins when they marries and it was an arranged marriage rather than a free-will one. The families and relatives of all those children will have their tribes resurrected at the same time the 12 tribes are and both will be 'one family' as the girls that married into the Tribes are spared the grief of them not being alive and near them for eternity. That would include all of Egypt as God hardened Pharaoh's heart so he would not give in before all the plagues were completed.
Sodom was destroyed by the same fire that God allows Christ to use on Satan's Babylon when that day comes along. Because the people were killed as an example they are also resurrected because of the Re:20:4 verse that says the ones killed because of the word of God will be included. Fire from Heaven only happens when God says something to that effect, that part also applies to the exodus wars as those were done after God commanded it be done.
“There is something infantile in the presumption that somebody else has a responsibility to give your life meaning and point… The truly adult view, by contrast, is that our life is as meaningful, as full and as wonderful as we choose to make it.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
It would have been how wonderful for Adam and Eve to see most of their children carried away or killed, They would have mourned Able for about 900 years. Our like is about 80 years at best and all sorts of heartache is included in that span of time so the wonderful life he is talking about is himself and his family and friends that are in the same group of people. He cares nothing tor the 90 of mankind that doesn't eat 3 times a day or even have a pair f shoes to wear, That is also who his books were written for. People who are rich and don't really want to share anything with the poor of the world let alone have to lower their lifestyle standards so others can have a better life. The elite caring for just the elite so there is nothing noble about him or the way he lives life. It is self-centered.
“More generally, as I shall repeat in Chapter 8, one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
If there was no need to understand God would not have arranged a book to be around. That same book is used by the (rich) Clergy to keep the people in darkness about God. God promotes universal salvation so there is nothing a person can do on this earth that can alter them not being alive at the beginning of the new earth. Churches are in the money business, authors about religion are in the money business so both he and the Clergy are in the same racket, deception rather than enlightenment about what the bible says about God.
“A child is not a Christian child, not a Muslim child, but a child of Christian parents or a child of Muslim parents. This latter nomenclature, by the way, would be an excellent piece of consciousness-raising for the children themselves. A child who is told she is a 'child of Muslim parents' will immediately realize that religion is something for her to choose -or reject- when she becomes old enough to do so.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
Neither of those terms means anything, the comning time is for all Gentiles and out religions (or lack of) has nothing to do with the judgment. The 7 letters to the 7 Churches define what a good relations with God looks like and the other parts are about the bad relationships a person can have with God. That is how He will judge people, the version you present is how man judges man as one is good and the other is bad so the misery that caused is by their own handiwork rather than it having anything to do with God. The separation He introduces is the 1,000 years because at the Great White Throne that separation ends.
“Let children learn about different faiths, let them notice their incompatibility, and let them draw their own conclusions about the consequences of that incompatibility. As for whether they are ‘valid,’ let them make up their own minds when they are old enough to do so.”
― Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion
About 30 would be the age people should take up religious studies as it saves them having to back-track what they accepted that they were not ld enough to question. That could even apply to you to some degree, you accept Dawkins and anotehr view might be better but you won't be able to change your view. (it doesn't matter why it only matters that you can't.
That was as fast as I can type so there is no big mystery about what he got wrong and why in some cases. Without the passages you won't learn a thing from this.
It's Richard Dawkins, evolutionary biologist, a very original thinker in the field, invented the concept of memes and the idea of the selfish gene, first Professor of the Public Understanding of Science--the Simonyi chair--at Oxford University, now retired, one of the pre-eminent public intellectuals of our time, and author of such works as The Selfish Gene, Climbing Mount Improbable, Unweaving the Rainbow, The Ancestors Tale, and, perhaps most famously, or infamously depending on your point of view, The God Delusion, in which he lays out the case against religion. He's a public and very vocal atheist.
Wrong again, as usual. It does indeed matter why, because that's the reason that I can't. That whole post just underlines again what I believe is wrong with your position: you think the book is all true. I don't, I know of no convincing evidence or arguments that would justify accepting your position as correct, and until somebody produces them I will continue to view the Bible as allegory and mythology. And the evidence and arguments cannot be self-referential, you cannot use the book's claims about itself to justify your views, that's not a valid argument.
The God Delusion is based on a lot of arguments that were out long before he wrote that book.
Except for all the false aspects about the Bible, He blew it, out of his league so to speak.
If you can't make money praising God I guess you can do it by mocking him. Do you really think atheists needed another book about God or was he cashing in on a trend that was already there and a lot of the books were as shabby as his is. That it impressed you doesn't make it an infallible book. You read it but you forgot to think about it. Your post shows you don't have an argument for any of his points and that would apply even more about my view of the book.
You like to add little snide comments that should be hard to reply to don't you?
The difference is I can move around in the book and still not be lost about what is being said. So far I have given you easy stuff, even that is too big of a leap as you already have your version and to break that would probably mess up your whole world.
lol, pretty sad that the argument you were looking for just passed you by, perhaps it should have come from a book rather than from somebody who can interact with you.
You ever read a mystery novel where you had to look up things in other books to understand some scene?? Perhaps you are just mad you aren't smart enough to have come up with the same arguments that is have.
Not an very adult way to reply but it is a common form used.
If you don't want to chat about God, perhaps you would be interested in finding out who I come out with answers that are different than what most would reply. (like the theme that Pluto is shrinking because her core and mantle are getting colder) You pick the topic then?
Nice to see you have made a friend in the forest. I won't even tease you that she is pretty young as she is still the smart one right?
We all know who will be wearing the bruises from being kicked. If inter-racial sex can get tongues wagging imagine what inter-species will do??
Now you are admitting the boy moose is even underage, wow. That is just evil from start to finish.
Slip in the question, 'What grade are you in?' and if any number comes back you should probably run away. At 63 a woman of 50 is a 'younger chick', nor forbidden fruit though.
And how would you know? Are you really so insufferably self-righteous that you don't perceive the arrogant condescension that drips out of most of your posts directed at me? Speak to me with respect and courtesy and you'll get the same from me, tell me that in my ignorance and arrogance I just refuse to get it and you'll get that back too.
Obviously I am observant and intelligent.
You might want to compare those posts to the ones to my trolls if you want to see what those kinds of posts actually look like. Some of the political themed threads can get heated and that ends debate but in the years I have posted here about God you replies basically state God is a myth and if you believe in the book in any form you are a mental midget and if you are a 'literal futurist' (very rare people BTW) then I am even less qualified in the intelligence dept. You version carries it on to include that as being true for any topic that I have ever touched on. You wouldn't even debate the 'How the Earth was Born' series when I offered to put down the time-stamp to some theory they had and why I disagreed with based on physics rather than 'faith'
Why do I get the feeling that is a one way street where you get all the benefits and any topic I bring up the reply will be about why you won't be replying. At some point it stops annoying me and I actually find it amusing to a certain degree. I'm ready to debate any topic with anybody, if you have a list of conditions before that can happen then so be it.
Except you seem to be having trouble coming up with any specifics because when you do try to form a 'rebuttal' it is quite clear that your version is the one that is sloppy in form a void of any 'thinking' that would help people understand the large volume of text that is known as the Bible. If your version was correct I would shy away from posting on any topic, as it is I can spot your flaws and offer a 'solution'. You and 'the others' can't do either yet I am supposed to view you as the expert. You can see that isn't about to happen anytime soon and if the quality of your replies doesn't improve that will only confirm that you are clueless about the subject and your posts are meant to shut down debate rather than promote it like it should.
More than once I have 10 post in the top 10 positions and all are on topic and follow the rules of science or is consistent with the way society can work when it is used as a control device used to keep people in the dark compared to enlightening them to the 'real facts'.
When you are 'studying me' why is it you that is always the most confused? No examination of you is need as your replies show quite clearly that you hang on other people's coat-tails.
More than once I have 10 post in the top 10 positions and all are on topic and follow the rules of science or is consistent with the way society can work when it is used as a control device used to keep people in the dark compared to enlightening them to the 'real facts'.
When you are 'studying me' why is it you that is always the most confused? No examination of you is need as your replies show quite clearly that you hang on other people's coat-tails.