I can understand that point, thankyou for taking the time to explain it.
I thought the debate we were having was between athiesm and christianity, not just christianity.
But, my point is, it isnt really a christian answer, it is just your personal answer to life as a whole, as, im sure you know and are even more embarassed about this type of behaviour than athiest, Even some christians can lead a very VERY bad life, and do alot more harm than good.
I do, however, know you to be a good person, and i am sure you do live a very good life, regardless of whatever religion you have chosen to follow.
You mean I'm embarassed when I see people who are Christians doing deplorable things? Not really. I know that the world already looks at Christians with a great deal more scrutiny than other religions. This undeniable fact is simply due to how Christians are SUPPOSED to live their lives, in addition to how many of us there are out there. It's the same reason everyone looks at the United States with such scrutiny. I don't feel embarassed because I do not hold myself to the same standards as those others. In fact, I don't hold them to any standard. When I was having trouble with my woman friend a month ago, I was not embarassed by her behavior because she is a Christian, I was deeply troubled and hurt by her behavior. The thought that someone may look at her and go "and she's a Christian? pshh" didn't even cross my mind. I think that to be embarassed by the sins of others, would lead me to a life of constant and utter embarassment. People are constantly screwing up, myself included. If I wasted time feeling embarassed for all of them, I would never get anything done. Now, when I hear creationists using arguments like "well evolution can't be true because they say humans evolved from apes and there are still apes" I do feel slightly embarassed for them because they just don't know what they believe well enough to be talking about it. But when I do hear something like that, I always take the time to explain to them why that is not a valid argument against evolution. I would rather set someone straight than just sit and be embarassed or angry.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
I find it VERY amusing that you call Richard Dawkins a fool while at the same time not even slightly understanding why he gave that answer. Richard Dawkins gave that answer to make people THINK for themself, so they can answer the question themself. That is what Atheism is about. To think.
I mean, the answer is quite clear isn't it? If you're wrong, you're screwed.
Dawkins is no more arrogant then any other christian, he is simply just as passionatly about his belief. He is no more arrogant then any priest or follower.
There is nothing foolish about not believing in God. especialy considering the serious lack of evidence that support the existance of a God, let alone the Bible. In fact, the Bible contains just as many miracles and wonders as the average fairy tale.
Of course I understand why he have gave the answer...what I find VERY amusing is that you simply assume that I have no idea why he gave the answer. In truth, there are many reasons why Dawkins gave the answer that he did. For you to sit there and give only one, completely misrepresents Dawkins as a person, and why he answered the way he did. If it was simply a matter of wanting people to think, he wouldn't make constant snarky remarks about religion.
I'm not going to get into whether or not atheism is foolish. If you want to start a thread about the senselessness of atheism, Christianity, or any other belief, go right ahead.
Then why do you find it funny he didn't answer the question? Thats just plain silly, as I pointed out, the answer was obvious. he wanted people to realise the same thing can happen to them. And yes he would make snarky remarks about religion because he wants people to see the flaws in religion. Its funny that is actually comming from a christian. Christians also wants to "let people see the light", and christianity is constantly attacking science.
There is no need to create another thread. Because all of christy is "Because the bible said so". and thats that.
I like how he doesn't actually answer her question. "What if I'm wrong? Well what if you're wrong" I thought this guy was a doctor..this is the best he can come up with? Dawkins is an arrogant fool. What more can I say about a man who refuses to believe in God but gives credence to a theory that proposes that all life origionated from self replicating clay crystals?
Who cares if he's arrogant? That doesn't make him right or wrong. Actually, it doesn't change his credentials one bit. I would imagine that most people with a Phd do become somewhat disgruntled at the masses to an extent. I read somewhere a while back that once you gain and IQ that is 30 points or more over a person it becomes very hard to communicate with them. Imagine the frustration of someone who is that big of a thinker trying to explain himself to the masses.
I go back and read the writings of the founding fathers at times and feel that sense of frustration from being the "little guy". They were known to be a bit pompous with their attitudes as well. But that doesn't take away from their ingenuity, wisdom, knowledge, or desire to make something better for all of us.
And I think that is what Dawkin's is doing as well. Trying to make something better for all of us. I have watched some of his other interviews and he seems like a genuinely nice fellow to me. Like I said, he may get a bit frustrated at times, but even he has said that he considers himself a moral guy. He admits he finds morality a bit of a perplexing behavior but that he doesn't see how someone who follows a religion holds the key to morality. Anyone can be a moral person, with or without religion. He accounts it to the desire to see society and culture flourish and for our loved ones and ourselves to survive with out pain. But he feels that religion and it's false promises are doing nothing but holding us back from our true potential. It's a thing that was needed maybe at one time, but that we have outgrown and our requirements are for something new and more complex.
As for his answer to the question, sometimes you can answer a question for a person by giving them back a question. It's actually what a lot of great professors do. When you lead a person to discover the answers for them self that feeling of self-discovery means more than just throwing out an answer and not letting the person find it on their own. Again, he's a smart guy, and for all you know had the person asking the questions best interest in mind. You may just not want to see that because he disagrees with your ideas about religion. You are portraying him as a monster in your mind when he could actually be a compassionate educator.
Ronald Reagan had a saying on his desk that went something like this, (and I'm paraphrasing), "You can get more done if you do not worry about who gets the credit for it."
I find it VERY amusing that you call Richard Dawkins a fool while at the same time not even slightly understanding why he gave that answer. Richard Dawkins gave that answer to make people THINK for themself, so they can answer the question themself. That is what Atheism is about. To think.
I mean, the answer is quite clear isn't it? If you're wrong, you're screwed.
Dawkins is no more arrogant then any other christian, he is simply just as passionatly about his belief. He is no more arrogant then any priest or follower.
There is nothing foolish about not believing in God. especialy considering the serious lack of evidence that support the existance of a God, let alone the Bible. In fact, the Bible contains just as many miracles and wonders as the average fairy tale.
Of course I understand why he have gave the answer...what I find VERY amusing is that you simply assume that I have no idea why he gave the answer. In truth, there are many reasons why Dawkins gave the answer that he did. For you to sit there and give only one, completely misrepresents Dawkins as a person, and why he answered the way he did. If it was simply a matter of wanting people to think, he wouldn't make constant snarky remarks about religion.
I'm not going to get into whether or not atheism is foolish. If you want to start a thread about the senselessness of atheism, Christianity, or any other belief, go right ahead.
Draenor, why do you seem so angry lately? I've been reading your posts and I picture this person sitting behind a keyboard with the veins bulging out beneath their temples. Is there some bad stuff going on with you lately? Relax dude.
I can understand that point, thankyou for taking the time to explain it.
I thought the debate we were having was between athiesm and christianity, not just christianity.
But, my point is, it isnt really a christian answer, it is just your personal answer to life as a whole, as, im sure you know and are even more embarassed about this type of behaviour than athiest, Even some christians can lead a very VERY bad life, and do alot more harm than good.
I do, however, know you to be a good person, and i am sure you do live a very good life, regardless of whatever religion you have chosen to follow.
You mean I'm embarassed when I see people who are Christians doing deplorable things? Not really. I know that the world already looks at Christians with a great deal more scrutiny than other religions. This undeniable fact is simply due to how Christians are SUPPOSED to live their lives, in addition to how many of us there are out there. It's the same reason everyone looks at the United States with such scrutiny. I don't feel embarassed because I do not hold myself to the same standards as those others. In fact, I don't hold them to any standard. When I was having trouble with my woman friend a month ago, I was not embarassed by her behavior because she is a Christian, I was deeply troubled and hurt by her behavior. The thought that someone may look at her and go "and she's a Christian? pshh" didn't even cross my mind. I think that to be embarassed by the sins of others, would lead me to a life of constant and utter embarassment. People are constantly screwing up, myself included. If I wasted time feeling embarassed for all of them, I would never get anything done. Now, when I hear creationists using arguments like "well evolution can't be true because they say humans evolved from apes and there are still apes" I do feel slightly embarassed for them because they just don't know what they believe well enough to be talking about it. But when I do hear something like that, I always take the time to explain to them why that is not a valid argument against evolution. I would rather set someone straight than just sit and be embarassed or angry. Why would you be embarrassed at all if a Christian is cutting up? The way I look at it they are learning. Didn't Jesus say something to the extent that you don't discover God until you fall and need his mercy? If a person were living without sin then how would they know what if feels like to not have that mercy upon them?
What does bother me though is when Christians don't recognize that sin they live in just as much as others and DO take a holier than thou approach to dealing with other people. That hypocrisy is something that Jesus spoke about extensively.
I watched Dawkins talking a couple weeks ago and then looked into more of his stuff and then tried finding all of his videos. Then I went to Barnes and Noble and looked through some of his books. The guy is fascinating. I understand where he is coming from and it's very interesting and convincing and really made me think very deeply about my beliefs.
Did I convert to atheism? No, but I did learn a lot and i'm grateful for it. I do enjoy learning about his theories and how he explains complicated subjects. I believe everything he says about how the universe started is quite plausible until he says there is no God, although his evolutionary theory about why we believe in God is very well thought out imo.
So i'm a fan.
As far as the video is concerned. I think he made great points which is one reason why I don't belong to any religious authority. I'm my own authority...I figure God would equip me with adequate brainpower to do that considering the great points by Dawkins.
______________________________ "When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!" -cheer leading, flag waving American
Why would you be embarrassed at all if a Christian is cutting up? The way I look at it they are learning. Didn't Jesus say something to the extent that you don't discover God until you fall and need his mercy? If a person were living without sin then how would they know what if feels like to not have that mercy upon them?
What does bother me though is when Christians don't recognize that sin they live in just as much as others and DO take a holier than thou approach to dealing with other people. That hypocrisy is something that Jesus spoke about extensively.
Because it's impossible for a person to live without sin.
Easiest question you've ever asked
And why I've seemed angry lately...I dunno, Dawkins pisses me off...dietary changes might be altering my mood (I've lost 20 pounds in the last month...radically changing diet and exercise plans can do that to you) in addition to general stress from people in my life. I have been more apt to ripping people's throats out lately because I've discovered that sometimes being a douchebag is the only way that they are going to shut up with the stupidity that they put forth in their posts. That wasn't aimed at you Nasica.
For the people that I know are reasonable, and able to have a reasonable discussion, I talk to them as such...but for the people that I know to be just plain dense, I don't bother being completely altruistic and patient anymore. Now, some people might now take this opportunity to jump on the "omg he's a mean Christian" bandwagon. Understand - being nice and calm with some people just doesn't work to get your point across to them.
As far as my posts in this thread...I've always thought that Dawkins was an arrogant fool, so that's nothing new. And my discussion with Nasica was more indignant than angry. You will almost never see me truly pissed off either in real life or on these forums...it's extremely rare that I get angry enough to yell and scream at someone.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Comments
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.
Of course I understand why he have gave the answer...what I find VERY amusing is that you simply assume that I have no idea why he gave the answer. In truth, there are many reasons why Dawkins gave the answer that he did. For you to sit there and give only one, completely misrepresents Dawkins as a person, and why he answered the way he did. If it was simply a matter of wanting people to think, he wouldn't make constant snarky remarks about religion.
I'm not going to get into whether or not atheism is foolish. If you want to start a thread about the senselessness of atheism, Christianity, or any other belief, go right ahead.
Then why do you find it funny he didn't answer the question? Thats just plain silly, as I pointed out, the answer was obvious. he wanted people to realise the same thing can happen to them. And yes he would make snarky remarks about religion because he wants people to see the flaws in religion. Its funny that is actually comming from a christian. Christians also wants to "let people see the light", and christianity is constantly attacking science.There is no need to create another thread. Because all of christy is "Because the bible said so". and thats that.
I go back and read the writings of the founding fathers at times and feel that sense of frustration from being the "little guy". They were known to be a bit pompous with their attitudes as well. But that doesn't take away from their ingenuity, wisdom, knowledge, or desire to make something better for all of us.
And I think that is what Dawkin's is doing as well. Trying to make something better for all of us. I have watched some of his other interviews and he seems like a genuinely nice fellow to me. Like I said, he may get a bit frustrated at times, but even he has said that he considers himself a moral guy. He admits he finds morality a bit of a perplexing behavior but that he doesn't see how someone who follows a religion holds the key to morality. Anyone can be a moral person, with or without religion. He accounts it to the desire to see society and culture flourish and for our loved ones and ourselves to survive with out pain. But he feels that religion and it's false promises are doing nothing but holding us back from our true potential. It's a thing that was needed maybe at one time, but that we have outgrown and our requirements are for something new and more complex.
As for his answer to the question, sometimes you can answer a question for a person by giving them back a question. It's actually what a lot of great professors do. When you lead a person to discover the answers for them self that feeling of self-discovery means more than just throwing out an answer and not letting the person find it on their own. Again, he's a smart guy, and for all you know had the person asking the questions best interest in mind. You may just not want to see that because he disagrees with your ideas about religion. You are portraying him as a monster in your mind when he could actually be a compassionate educator.
Ronald Reagan had a saying on his desk that went something like this, (and I'm paraphrasing), "You can get more done if you do not worry about who gets the credit for it."
===============================
Of course I understand why he have gave the answer...what I find VERY amusing is that you simply assume that I have no idea why he gave the answer. In truth, there are many reasons why Dawkins gave the answer that he did. For you to sit there and give only one, completely misrepresents Dawkins as a person, and why he answered the way he did. If it was simply a matter of wanting people to think, he wouldn't make constant snarky remarks about religion.
I'm not going to get into whether or not atheism is foolish. If you want to start a thread about the senselessness of atheism, Christianity, or any other belief, go right ahead.
Draenor, why do you seem so angry lately? I've been reading your posts and I picture this person sitting behind a keyboard with the veins bulging out beneath their temples. Is there some bad stuff going on with you lately? Relax dude.===============================
What does bother me though is when Christians don't recognize that sin they live in just as much as others and DO take a holier than thou approach to dealing with other people. That hypocrisy is something that Jesus spoke about extensively.
===============================
Did I convert to atheism? No, but I did learn a lot and i'm grateful for it. I do enjoy learning about his theories and how he explains complicated subjects. I believe everything he says about how the universe started is quite plausible until he says there is no God, although his evolutionary theory about why we believe in God is very well thought out imo.
So i'm a fan.
As far as the video is concerned. I think he made great points which is one reason why I don't belong to any religious authority. I'm my own authority...I figure God would equip me with adequate brainpower to do that considering the great points by Dawkins.
______________________________
"When Saddam flew that plane into those buildings, I knew it was time to kick some Iranian ass!"
-cheer leading, flag waving American
Because it's impossible for a person to live without sin.
Easiest question you've ever asked
And why I've seemed angry lately...I dunno, Dawkins pisses me off...dietary changes might be altering my mood (I've lost 20 pounds in the last month...radically changing diet and exercise plans can do that to you) in addition to general stress from people in my life. I have been more apt to ripping people's throats out lately because I've discovered that sometimes being a douchebag is the only way that they are going to shut up with the stupidity that they put forth in their posts. That wasn't aimed at you Nasica.
For the people that I know are reasonable, and able to have a reasonable discussion, I talk to them as such...but for the people that I know to be just plain dense, I don't bother being completely altruistic and patient anymore. Now, some people might now take this opportunity to jump on the "omg he's a mean Christian" bandwagon. Understand - being nice and calm with some people just doesn't work to get your point across to them.
As far as my posts in this thread...I've always thought that Dawkins was an arrogant fool, so that's nothing new. And my discussion with Nasica was more indignant than angry. You will almost never see me truly pissed off either in real life or on these forums...it's extremely rare that I get angry enough to yell and scream at someone.
Your argument is like a two legged dog with an eating disorder...weak and unbalanced.