Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /home/johnband/sharpener.johnband.org/index.php:1) in /home/johnband/sharpener.johnband.org/wp-includes/feed-rss2-comments.php on line 8
Comments on: Faith, Dawkins and sillyness http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/ Trying to make a point Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:21:35 +0000 hourly 1 By: home equity line of credit http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-24564 Sun, 30 Jul 2006 00:27:13 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-24564 home equity line of credit http://homeequitylineofcredit.blogs-de-voyage.fr

]]>
By: Neil Harding http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5078 Mon, 23 Jan 2006 17:40:50 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5078 Well said GH, cheers. I’m glad someone sees sense.

]]>
By: GH http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5077 Mon, 23 Jan 2006 16:53:25 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5077 I think your wrong about faith and science being in conflict, of course they conflict with each other. At least the Christian form of religion. Whats odd about your entire argument is that it presupposes it’s the Christian religion only that should be discussed.

The Christian religion makes real world claims, claims that can then be subjected to the scietific method or dismissed.

‘, the bit wherein Jesus asserts that the old testament is now replaced and the old laws should no longer apply.’

Perhaps you should read the verses where he says not a jot of the OT law will pass away and that he came not to destroy the OT law but to uphold it. By the way one of the few passages of which there is little disagreement as to what he meant.

‘Just because religious extremists don’t understand their own faith, that’s no need to denigrate those that have read and understood the teachings of Jesus’

And who would that be? The Catholics? Baptists? Methodists? and on and on. The one true scotsman fallacy. I think the literalists ARE reading the religion correctly. Everyone else trims the edges.

The truth is, Neil Harding is reading the bible for what it says. You folks are attacking him for simply quoting from a book you deem to be infallible. It is an odd reversal. All he is doing is quoting passages as they where written.

]]>
By: Blimpish http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5074 Mon, 23 Jan 2006 00:03:20 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5074 No Neil, quite untrue. It’s only you who gets that treatment. One might inquire why? Might it be, lo, that you’re deserving? Possibly?

“For someone who has argued against democracy itself on his blog, it comes as a bit rich for you to criticise me for supporting the respect agenda.”

I don’t recall arguing against democracy as such, only as a universal principle – which is a view I’m happy to defend. But regardless, you’ll find you’re in error on the last bit – I never criticised you for supporting the respect agenda. I didn’t say a word. If I did, though, it would’ve been not so much rich as elegant, rigorous, and plain scathing.

As for your reply to MatGB, it’s the most confused crap I’ve seen so far this year. You seem to be under the view that all religions are one; therefore, Christianity might be fine, but as the Koran says stuff you don’t like, it’s wrong. Strangely, Neil, Christians don’t believe the Koran to be scripture.

Really – you are some kind of automated spamming device unleashed by Downing Street, aren’t you?

]]>
By: Neil Harding http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5063 Sat, 21 Jan 2006 11:49:13 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5063 Typical Blimpish, rather than answer the points just attack the man. Keep it up MR Blimpish. For someone who has argued against democracy itself on his blog, it comes as a bit rich for you to criticise me for supporting the respect agenda (admittedly with a clumsily written article that raised much ridicule).

So MatGB, we can safely disregard any religious writing before Jesus can we? I agree that the image of Jesus is pretty good, communist even. But what about all the terrible stuff in the Koran? If we are going to have Religion at all, and they are going to state that the the religious scriptures are the word of God, how can they justify picking and choosing like this?

]]>
By: MatGB http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5061 Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:26:52 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5061 Neil, as a fellow atheist, you, once again, miss the point entirely.

If you feel the need, reread Matthew (I think), New Testament, the bit wherein Jesus asserts that the old testament is now replaced and the old laws should no longer apply.

Just because religious extremists don’t understand their own faith, that’s no need to denigrate those that have read and understood the teachings of Jesus, who, from what I can see, was probably a nice bloke, he just had a few delusions about a mythical father.

]]>
By: Blimpish http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5052 Thu, 19 Jan 2006 10:08:52 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5052 Neil, why won’t God strike down stupid, ignorant embarassments like you, to save us all having to read your utter crap? Having seen MatGB’s excellent hatchet job on you, I think we can leave it there.

]]>
By: Neil Harding http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5051 Thu, 19 Jan 2006 06:30:38 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5051 Dawkins is right. The only problem is that there are not a majority that think like him.

If the 20% of the population who claim not to believe in God went out and preached as much as the Evangelicals, we could finish the religious nutters off in no time.

Lets all be like Dawkins and free ourselves of this religious oppression that victimises homosexuals, women who have abortions, discourages condoms and is trying to destroy our scientific advances with ignorant tripe.

It is all the liberal religious (who never go to church and never read the bible and probably don’t ‘really’ believe in God if truth be known) that allow the religious nutters to flourish. My advice to these liberal nutters is actually spend some time and effort reading the bible. The bible is the best way to encourage atheism because it is full of such crap.

This is God’s advice for what you should do to a friend or family member if they suggest believing in another deity.

Deuteronomy 13:7-11: “If your brother, the son of your father or of your mother, or your son or daughter, or the spouse whom you embrace, or your most intimate friend, tries to secretly seduce you, saying. “Let us go and serve other gods,” … you must show him no pity, you must not spare
him or conceal his guilt. No, you must kill him, your hand must strike the first blow in putting him to death and the hands of the rest of the people following. You must stone him to death, since he has tried to divert you from Yahweh your God.”

In the book of Numbers 31:18, Moses when ordering the massacre of all male prisoners and older women.

“But all the women and children, that have not known a man by lying with him. Keep alive for yourselves.”

In the book of Judges 19:24; A priest has some people come to his door demanding to rape his male guest, this is his response;

“Behold here is my daughter a maiden and his concubine, them I will bring out now, and humble ye them, and do with them what seemeth good unto you, but unto this man do not so vile a thing”

So go ahead rape my daughter, but don’t rape my guest, he is male after all.

Why won’t God heal amputees?

]]>
By: Blimpish http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5047 Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:44:46 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5047 I’d be honoured. And, heart-warmed that we had a discussion about God and not only avoided a futile comment death-duel but could show that the exchange was fruitful. Who’d have thunk that was possible..?!

]]>
By: Andrew Bartlett http://sharpener.johnband.org/2006/01/faith-dawkins-and-sillyness/#comment-5044 Wed, 18 Jan 2006 18:53:21 +0000 http://www.thesharpener.net/?p=228#comment-5044 “if we had that concrete evidence, we’d necessarily have concrete evidence of God Himself, and that means He’s entered the universe and that means it’s probably the Apocalypse so don’t make any long term plans…”

Blimpish, I like this point. Can I nick this idea?

]]>