In praise of Darwin this Sunday … in hundreds of churches!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
lismore said:
British citizen. Since 1707 England doesnt exist.

Dawkins in that TV programme didnt say much about Islam. Lots of people from inside and outside Christianity like to put the boot into it.

:(

Sure. But why should that affect our reasoning processes? Again, people shoot their mouths off. What's new? Martin Luther concluded that he ought to hate Jews. You and I realize this was a faulty (and not a little harmful) conclusion. We may even despise this conclusion. We may even think less of him for it. But did he say things that were worth saying? Yes. Did he have insights in other areas? Yes. Malcolm X made certain statements about white people that were pretty divisive. Does that make everything he had to say irrelevant? No. Does that mean the basis from which he drew his anger was nonexistent? No.

This doesn't mean that everybody who speaks in anger has something valuable to say. But it does make me hesitate before condemning everything a person says, right off the bat.

Dawkins' disabilities in Philosophy and Character do not necessarily influence his abilities in Science.
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Willtor said:
Dawkins' disabilities in Philosophy and Character do not necessarily influence his abilities in Science.

I believe that the obvious hostility Dawkins has towards God, Jesus and the gospel will affect his objectivity in his work and means I would not read anything he wrote. Abilities mean nothing if a person is so twisted with loathing of something that he appears on national TV incandescant with rage at a man who believes in creation.

You expect me to take anything this guy says on origins seriously?

You'd get a more reasonable theory on race relations from Hitler and Himmler than from Dawkins talking on origins.

:)
 
Upvote 0

Dannager

Back in Town
May 5, 2005
9,025
475
38
✟11,819.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Democrat
lismore said:
I believe that the obvious hostility Dawkins has towards God, Jesus and the gospel will affect his objectivity in his work and means I would not read anything he wrote. Abilities mean nothing if a person is so twisted with loathing of something that he appears on national TV incandescant with rage at a man who believes in creation.

You expect me to take anything this guy says on origins seriously?

You'd get a more reasonable theory on race relations from Hitler and Himmler than from Dawkins talking on origins.

:)
Okay, fine. If you're unable to separate a man's professional accomplishments from his personal beliefs it's nobody's loss but yourself. In my opinion, though, it makes you appear rather prejudiced.
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Dannager said:
Okay, fine. If you're unable to separate a man's professional accomplishments from his personal beliefs it's nobody's loss but yourself. In my opinion, though, it makes you appear rather prejudiced.

Prejudice or obvious?

I think his professional accomplishments are obviously influenced by his beliefs, to the extent that he cannot control his anger. If you are looking for an extremely biased author then he's it.

:)
 
Upvote 0

Dannager

Back in Town
May 5, 2005
9,025
475
38
✟11,819.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Democrat
lismore said:
Prejudice or obvious?

I think his professional accomplishments are obviously influenced by his beliefs, to the extent that he cannot control his anger. If you are looking for an extremely biased author then he's it.

:)
Yeah, but you don't have any evidence that his personal beliefs have influenced his professional work. All you're saying is that you think he can't keep the two separate. Unfortunately, you'll never get the evidence you'd need because you've already resigned yourself to not reading his work (which is where the evidence would reside). Sounds kind of like a cop-out to me. You're willing to damn someone without bothering to go through the process of finding evidence to damn him with.
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Dannager said:
Yeah, but you don't have any evidence that his personal beliefs have influenced his professional work. All you're saying is that you think he can't keep the two separate. Unfortunately, you'll never get the evidence you'd need because you've already resigned yourself to not reading his work (which is where the evidence would reside). Sounds kind of like a cop-out to me. You're willing to damn someone without bothering to go through the process of finding evidence to damn him with.

You're missing my point friend. No matter how much information he would put in his book, I dont trust him. His actions point to a deep rooted problem.

I saw him on TV interviewing a pastor Ted Haggard in his church. Dawkin said evolution was a fact, without giving any reasons then said God was a myth. Ted haggard gave him reasons why he believed in God and creation. Dawkins then took a hissy fit like a child not getting his own way and turned white with rage like he was having a coronary, before storming off ranting and raving and then going back and shouting at some children. At which point church staff had to escort him off the premises.

I dont care what he writes in his books, the man is not right in the head. I'd rather read the autobiography of the son of sam. You dont have to be prejudiced to recognise when someone is one sandwich short of a picnic.

:)
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
36
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟18,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
I saw him on TV interviewing a pastor Ted Haggard in his church. Dawkin said evolution was a fact, without giving any reasons then said God was a myth. Ted haggard gave him reasons why he believed in God and creation. Dawkins then took a hissy fit like a child not getting his own way and turned white with rage like he was having a coronary, before storming off ranting and raving and then going back and shouting at some children. At which point church staff had to escort him off the premises.

So when "someone-call-the-security-he's-going-berserk" Dawkins tells you Christians can't be evolutionists, and us nice good churchgoing tithing baptised Bible-believing Christians tell you Christians can, whose word do you trust more?

Put that way it seems almost like a personal attack against us. You said it yourself (with slight emendation from me) : You expect me to take anything this guy says on origin theology seriously?
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
shernren said:
So when "someone-call-the-security-he's-going-berserk" Dawkins tells you Christians can't be evolutionists, and us nice good churchgoing tithing baptised Bible-believing Christians tell you Christians can, whose word do you trust more?

Put that way it seems almost like a personal attack against us. You said it yourself (with slight emendation from me) : You expect me to take anything this guy says on origin theology seriously?

Its not a personal attack against 'us' and please dont take it as such. As I have said before you can believe and say what you like.

My point was answering why I dont take Dawkin's view of evolution seriously and why I wouldnt read his literature. Its because I couldnt imagine of anyone more insanely biased than him. I can already imagine what he will be saying- I dont need to spend hours in reading to twig that.

I wouldnt think I have any more idea on origins than you. The only difference might be in the spring that waters the garden.

:)
 
Upvote 0

Numenor

Veteran
Dec 26, 2004
1,517
42
114
The United Kingdom
Visit site
✟1,894.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Private
Politics
UK-Conservative
shernren said:
So when "someone-call-the-security-he's-going-berserk" Dawkins tells you Christians can't be evolutionists, and us nice good churchgoing tithing baptised Bible-believing Christians tell you Christians can, whose word do you trust more?
Quite. We can't accept Dawkins' science but we can accept his theology. It's loopy.
 
Upvote 0

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
lismore said:
Its not a personal attack against 'us' and please dont take it as such. As I have said before you can believe and say what you like.

My point was answering why I dont take Dawkin's view of evolution seriously and why I wouldnt read his literature. Its because I couldnt imagine of anyone more insanely biased than him. I can already imagine what he will be saying- I dont need to spend hours in reading to twig that.

I wouldnt think I have any more idea on origins than you. The only difference might be in the spring that waters the garden.

:)

Again, read his Scientific work. He quiets down on his anti-religion rhetoric, pretty quickly, as soon as he's writing something peer reviewed. Seriously, read it. It's like another Richard Dawkins.

Speaking of Evolution, I don't remember whether you were the one who wanted to see my friend's thesis (that uses Evolution). He defended, today, and he told me he'd post it.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
36
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟18,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Its not a personal attack against 'us' and please dont take it as such. As I have said before you can believe and say what you like.

My point was answering why I dont take Dawkin's view of evolution seriously and why I wouldnt read his literature.

I said "seems almost like" a personal attack. :p And yeap, I hope you don't take Dawkin's view of evolution being incompatible with Christianity seriously.
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
shernren said:
I said "seems almost like" a personal attack. :p And yeap, I hope you don't take Dawkin's view of evolution being incompatible with Christianity seriously.

:wave:

No, dont want to attack anyone personnally.

The way Dawkins is wound up just puts me off his view on anything:eek: .
 
Upvote 0

lismore

Maranatha
Oct 28, 2004
20,671
4,354
Scotland
✟242,456.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Willtor said:
Again, read his Scientific work. He quiets down on his anti-religion rhetoric, pretty quickly, as soon as he's writing something peer reviewed. Seriously, read it. It's like another Richard Dawkins.

Speaking of Evolution, I don't remember whether you were the one who wanted to see my friend's thesis (that uses Evolution). He defended, today, and he told me he'd post it.

I see your point, but it would always be in the back of my mind how biased he is and his perhaps conscious or unconscious agenda to 'disprove' Christianity. Unfortunately all he is really doing is the opposite: a lot of people see him as irrational even raving.

TA, I would like to read that thesis:wave:
 
Upvote 0

Dannager

Back in Town
May 5, 2005
9,025
475
38
✟11,819.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Democrat
Well, to be honest, Lismore, it isn't all that important that you read Dawkins' works. They're easy to understand, which helps, but if you can't get past the fact that he's openly atheistic there are a lot of other fantastic sources of information on this topic. The important thing is that you learn something, and if you're willing to learn it I think we should be willing to accomodate you with your choice of reputable source.
 
Upvote 0
T

The Lady Kate

Guest
lismore said:
I see your point, but it would always be in the back of my mind how biased he is and his perhaps conscious or unconscious agenda to 'disprove' Christianity. Unfortunately all he is really doing is the opposite: a lot of people see him as irrational even raving.

Possible... which is why it's necessary to separate his facts from his beliefs. Facts can be checked.

Has Dawkins, to the best of anyone's knowledge, either unconsciously or deliberately misrepresented or distorted facts to promote any kind of anti-Christian agenda?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Dannager

Back in Town
May 5, 2005
9,025
475
38
✟11,819.00
Faith
Catholic
Politics
US-Democrat
The Lady Kate said:
Possible... which is why it's necessary to separate his facts from his beliefs. Facts can be checked.

Has Dawkins, to the best of anyone's knowledge, either unconsciously or deliberately misrepresented or distorted facts to promote any kind of anti-Christian agenda?
Not scientific facts, as far as I know. Although, I'm not overly familiar with Dawkins' works. I've read some of his stuff, but not enough to say that I'm well-versed.
 
Upvote 0

Willtor

Not just any Willtor... The Mighty Willtor
Apr 23, 2005
9,713
1,429
43
Cambridge
Visit site
✟32,287.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The Lady Kate said:
Possible... which is why it's necessary to separate his facts from his beliefs. Facts can be checked.

Has Dawkins, to the best of anyone's knowledge, either unconsciously or deliberately misrepresented or distorted facts to promote any kind of anti-Christian agenda?

Not to my knowledge. If you read his writing in Free Inquiry or the Skeptical Enquirer (I forget which), it's mostly touting his work and Christian-bashing. The two are certainly intermingled, but I can't find a way in which they are related.

The best I can find to a rational argument against Christianity is the evidence that indicates the human psychological tendency towards superstition. But, as you can imagine, even this is a bit of a stretch (not the evidence; the conclusion).
 
Upvote 0

Robert the Pilegrim

Senior Veteran
Nov 21, 2004
2,151
75
63
✟10,187.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
lismore said:
The people who penned the declaration of independence could be referring to their own view of 'creator', or 'christian god' .
The sky could be pink with purple polka dots, but somehow I don't think it is.
For example, Thomas Jefferson, kept over 5,000 black slaves, raped many black slave women and supported violence against the indians.
Citations please.

He never owned more than 225 slaves at a time, and only bought 20, some of them in order to keep husband and wife together.

Free Some Day: The African-American Families of Monticello (Paperback)
by Lucia Stanton
see also:
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/jefferson/jeffleg.html

The only sense of rape for which there is an argument is that any slave would have had no possibility of enforcing a refusal. The power relationship was highly unequal.

But please, provide evidence that he had sex much less forced sex with any other slave besides Hemmings...

Pardon me if I don't hold my breath.

When at war, one generally uses violence.

Jefferson's speech prefigured the manner in which he, and most white Americans, would view American Indians in the decades to come. They worried about Indians becoming enemies in times of war, and they sought to keep them at peace through treaties and through a project of "civilization" that would try to make Indian culture resemble that of the Anglo-Americans.​
http://www.monticello.org/jefferson/lewisandclark/virginiaindian.html
http://www.monticello.org/jefferson/lewisandclark/indians.html

That aside, I suspect this is the sole statement about Jefferson that comes even moderately close to the truth.

So why are you so eager to throw around such wild statements without checking them out?

It really doesn't take that much time or effort on Google.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.