Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Dawkins: The world may need Christianity...

brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 3:48:33 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?

We don't trust him. He simply made the point that Christians have been making for years. If not Chridtianity, then what? Marxism, Naziism, Islam?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 3:58:43 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?

What would be better than Jesus' teaching as the predominant belief?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:28:33 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:58:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?

What would be better than Jesus' teaching as the predominant belief?

Jesus brought out the worst in Jews and Romans. They agreed he had to be crucified for his blasphemous lies and lunacy. His delusional claims are what made Dawkins write his bestseller. "The God delusion" A delusion people following a delusional God.
The prophet Mohammad ( pbuh) was sent to save the descendants of Ishmael and preserve the covenant which God stripped away from the Jews.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:32:13 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:48:33 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?

We don't trust him. He simply made the point that Christians have been making for years. If not Chridtianity, then what? Marxism, Naziism, Islam?

Dawkins suggested an alternative. Evolution to monkey believers based on Darwins: The Descent of Man.
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:36:59 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:39:55 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:28:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:58:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:42:21 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Getty
by THOMAS D. WILLIAMS, PH.D.
12 Jan 2016
11,535
In a text that is coursing about on social media, professional God-slayer Richard Dawkins begrudgingly admitted that Christianity may actually be our best defense against aberrant forms of religion that threaten the world.

"There are no Christians, as far as I know, blowing up buildings," Dawkins said. "I am not aware of any Christian suicide bombers. I am not aware of any major Christian denomination that believes the penalty for apostasy is death."

In a rare moment of candor, Dawkins reluctantly accepted that the teachings of Jesus Christ do not lead to a world of terror, whereas followers of radical Islam perpetrate the very atrocities that he laments.

Because of this realization, Dawkins wondered aloud whether Christianity might indeed offer an antidote to protect western civilization against jihad.

"I have mixed feelings about the decline of Christianity, in so far as Christianity might be a bulwark against something worse," he said.

www.breitbart.com/national-security/2016/01/12/professional-atheist-dawkins-says-christianity-bulwark-against-something-worse

Dawkins accused Christisns for being delusional about God. Now he encourages them to remain delusional. I can understand why Christians will be elated to hear Dawkins an atheist is now supporting them. They always saw atheists as objective and evidence based critics. And the evidence suggests delusional Christisns are less dangerous than normal Islamists. What if the jihadists are threatened by delusional Christians and resort to defending themselves from crazy infidels just as their scriptures teach. Are Christians then being too naive to trust a sworn atheist like Dawkins?

What would be better than Jesus' teaching as the predominant belief?

Jesus brought out the worst in Jews and Romans. They agreed he had to be crucified for his blasphemous lies and lunacy. His delusional claims are what made Dawkins write his bestseller. "The God delusion" A delusion people following a delusional God.
The prophet Mohammad ( pbuh) was sent to save the descendants of Ishmael and preserve the covenant which God stripped away from the Jews.

Muhammed fidn't save anyone. He enslaved them. Slaves of Allah right Harry? Just like the Bible said about Ishmael's descendants in the curse.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:40:37 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:36:59 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.

That is why Islam is a religion like no other. It is beyond recognition.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 4:44:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:40:37 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:36:59 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.

That is why Islam is a religion like no other. It is beyond recognition.

It doesn't make a lick of sense. It's some old school desert crap holding Muslims back from freedom and keeping them in the year 600
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Bronto, did you find a primary source for this attribution?

That's a rhetorical question, because if you had, you'd surely have quoted it. Asking whether you looked would be a rhetorical question too, since if you had the diligence to check, you'd've surely had the integrity to admit that you hadn't found the quote -- and I haven't seen that sort of diligence or integrity in your posts before.

So the question I'm really asking is: does it concern you to blindly cite and argue from quotes you haven't checked?

The reports generally attribute this quote as having appeared in an October 2013 interview by Seth Andrews on his channel The Thinking Atheist. (E.g. Christian Post, January 15, 2016 [http://www.christianpost.com...].)

I've found a copy of an October-published interview on Youtube linked right, in which Dawkins is promoting an autobiography, and audited the talk simply because I couldn't find a single primary source in any article quoted. As far as I can tell, this is the only Seth Andrews interview with Dawkins on or around that date.

While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Bronto, did you find a primary source for this attribution?

That's a rhetorical question, because if you had, you'd surely have quoted it. Asking whether you looked would be a rhetorical question too, since if you had the diligence to check, you'd've surely had the integrity to admit that you hadn't found the quote -- and I haven't seen that sort of diligence or integrity in your posts before.

So the question I'm really asking is: does it concern you to blindly cite and argue from quotes you haven't checked?

The reports generally attribute this quote as having appeared in an October 2013 interview by Seth Andrews on his channel The Thinking Atheist. (E.g. Christian Post, January 15, 2016 [http://www.christianpost.com...].)

I've found a copy of an October-published interview on Youtube linked right, in which Dawkins is promoting an autobiography, and audited the talk simply because I couldn't find a single primary source in any article quoted. As far as I can tell, this is the only Seth Andrews interview with Dawkins on or around that date.

While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?



I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 5:56:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Christian on Dawkins' statement

http://youtu.be...

Richard Dawkins on Christendom and Islam

http://youtu.be...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:05:57 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Bronto, did you find a primary source for this attribution?

That's a rhetorical question, because if you had, you'd surely have quoted it. Asking whether you looked would be a rhetorical question too, since if you had the diligence to check, you'd've surely had the integrity to admit that you hadn't found the quote -- and I haven't seen that sort of diligence or integrity in your posts before.

So the question I'm really asking is: does it concern you to blindly cite and argue from quotes you haven't checked?

The reports generally attribute this quote as having appeared in an October 2013 interview by Seth Andrews on his channel The Thinking Atheist. (E.g. Christian Post, January 15, 2016 [http://www.christianpost.com...].)

I've found a copy of an October-published interview on Youtube linked right, in which Dawkins is promoting an autobiography, and audited the talk simply because I couldn't find a single primary source in any article quoted. As far as I can tell, this is the only Seth Andrews interview with Dawkins on or around that date.

While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?

I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.

You know it because...you have a primary-sourced quote? Or was it perhaps a revelation? If I wanted to know what was in the Bible, should I ask other people, or read a primary source myself? And do you owe your fellow humans anything less?

It's not a derail, Bronto. It's a matter of probity, diligence, truth and accountability, and entirely on-topic. And you could address it quickly and permanently by providing a primary-sourced quote, if you had one.

So, are these qualities unimportant to you when exploring and promoting matters religious? Or do you have double standards in this regard?
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:31:44 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 6:05:57 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Bronto, did you find a primary source for this attribution?

That's a rhetorical question, because if you had, you'd surely have quoted it. Asking whether you looked would be a rhetorical question too, since if you had the diligence to check, you'd've surely had the integrity to admit that you hadn't found the quote -- and I haven't seen that sort of diligence or integrity in your posts before.

So the question I'm really asking is: does it concern you to blindly cite and argue from quotes you haven't checked?

The reports generally attribute this quote as having appeared in an October 2013 interview by Seth Andrews on his channel The Thinking Atheist. (E.g. Christian Post, January 15, 2016 [http://www.christianpost.com...].)

I've found a copy of an October-published interview on Youtube linked right, in which Dawkins is promoting an autobiography, and audited the talk simply because I couldn't find a single primary source in any article quoted. As far as I can tell, this is the only Seth Andrews interview with Dawkins on or around that date.

While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?

I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.

You know it because...you have a primary-sourced quote? Or was it perhaps a revelation? If I wanted to know what was in the Bible, should I ask other people, or read a primary source myself? And do you owe your fellow humans anything less?

It's not a derail, Bronto. It's a matter of probity, diligence, truth and accountability, and entirely on-topic. And you could address it quickly and permanently by providing a primary-sourced quote, if you had one.

So, are these qualities unimportant to you when exploring and promoting matters religious? Or do you have double standards in this regard?

I don't owe anybody anything. I put up topics on a forum people can read them or participate in them. If they are not interested, they don't have to participate. We know Dawkins views on Christianity vs Islam word for word as I posted above, and they support the topic..
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:39:26 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Richard Dawkins and Bill Maher on Islam getting apass for fear of being called racist(which Islam is not a race)

http://youtu.be...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:47:24 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 6:05:57 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:17:43 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
Professional Atheist Dawkins Says Christianity "Bulwark Against Something Worse"
Bronto, did you find a primary source for this attribution?

That's a rhetorical question, because if you had, you'd surely have quoted it. Asking whether you looked would be a rhetorical question too, since if you had the diligence to check, you'd've surely had the integrity to admit that you hadn't found the quote -- and I haven't seen that sort of diligence or integrity in your posts before.

So the question I'm really asking is: does it concern you to blindly cite and argue from quotes you haven't checked?

The reports generally attribute this quote as having appeared in an October 2013 interview by Seth Andrews on his channel The Thinking Atheist. (E.g. Christian Post, January 15, 2016 [http://www.christianpost.com...].)

I've found a copy of an October-published interview on Youtube linked right, in which Dawkins is promoting an autobiography, and audited the talk simply because I couldn't find a single primary source in any article quoted. As far as I can tell, this is the only Seth Andrews interview with Dawkins on or around that date.

While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?

I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.

You know it because...you have a primary-sourced quote? Or was it perhaps a revelation? If I wanted to know what was in the Bible, should I ask other people, or read a primary source myself? And do you owe your fellow humans anything less?

It's not a derail, Bronto. It's a matter of probity, diligence, truth and accountability, and entirely on-topic. And you could address it quickly and permanently by providing a primary-sourced quote, if you had one.

So, are these qualities unimportant to you when exploring and promoting matters religious? Or do you have double standards in this regard?

Are you a leftists extremist?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 6:49:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Dawkins interviews Muslim

http://youtu.be...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 7:20:11 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 6:47:24 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 6:05:57 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?

I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.

You know it because...you have a primary-sourced quote? Or was it perhaps a revelation? If I wanted to know what was in the Bible, should I ask other people, or read a primary source myself? And do you owe your fellow humans anything less?

It's not a derail, Bronto. It's a matter of probity, diligence, truth and accountability, and entirely on-topic. And you could address it quickly and permanently by providing a primary-sourced quote, if you had one.

So, are these qualities unimportant to you when exploring and promoting matters religious? Or do you have double standards in this regard?

Are you a leftists extremist?

Speaking of derails...

Not only are you unable to supply the quote from a topic you're evidently happy to straw-man, you're unable to even admit the weakness of your own research, and cannot stay on-topic when challenged.

Are you proud of this behaviour, Bronto? Do you wish other members acted like this?
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 7:54:22 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:28:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Jesus brought out the worst in Jews and Romans. They agreed he had to be crucified for his blasphemous lies and lunacy. His delusional claims are what made Dawkins write his bestseller. "The God delusion" A delusion people following a delusional God.
The prophet Mohammad ( pbuh) was sent to save the descendants of Ishmael and preserve the covenant which God stripped away from the Jews.

You are a Muslim?

If so, you go against Muhammad by rejecting Jesus and referring to him as delusional and blasphemous. You slander a prophet of God.
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 8:55:47 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 7:20:11 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 6:47:24 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 6:05:57 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:56:21 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 5:34:30 PM, RuvDraba wrote:
While the talk is far-ranging, it doesn't mention Islam. So is there a credible primary source supporting this imputed quotation, and does it bother you that you haven't looked for it and posted it?

I already know what he says on Islam vs Cristianity. Nice derail tactic though.

You know it because...you have a primary-sourced quote? Or was it perhaps a revelation? If I wanted to know what was in the Bible, should I ask other people, or read a primary source myself? And do you owe your fellow humans anything less?

It's not a derail, Bronto. It's a matter of probity, diligence, truth and accountability, and entirely on-topic. And you could address it quickly and permanently by providing a primary-sourced quote, if you had one.

So, are these qualities unimportant to you when exploring and promoting matters religious? Or do you have double standards in this regard?

Are you a leftists extremist?

Speaking of derails...

Not only are you unable to supply the quote from a topic you're evidently happy to straw-man, you're unable to even admit the weakness of your own research, and cannot stay on-topic when challenged.

Are you proud of this behaviour, Bronto? Do you wish other members acted like this?

Yes. Are you proud of me?
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
EtrnlVw
Posts: 2,307
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 9:20:16 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 4:36:59 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.

LOL....Oh McMuhammad had a bomb, E I E I ohhhhhh...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 9:29:29 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 9:20:16 PM, EtrnlVw wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:36:59 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:34:38 PM, Harikrish wrote:
At 2/7/2016 3:53:50 PM, brontoraptor wrote:
The fundamental teaching of Christianity

http://youtu.be...

What would it be replaced with?

Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.

LOL....Oh McMuhammad had a bomb, E I E I ohhhhhh...

With our powers combined I present you with...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
brontoraptor
Posts: 11,685
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/7/2016 9:30:00 PM
Posted: 10 months ago
Islam, a religion of peace.

A religion of pieces you mean. Pieces of a body here. Pieces of a body there. Here a piece. There a piece. Everywhere a piece piece.
Oh McMuhammad had a bomb, E I E I ohhhhhh...

http://youtu.be...
"What Donald Trump is doing is representing the absolute heartbreak, and anger, and frustration at a government gone mad."

http://youtu.be...
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:10:05 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/7/2016 7:54:22 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 2/7/2016 4:28:33 PM, Harikrish wrote:

Jesus brought out the worst in Jews and Romans. They agreed he had to be crucified for his blasphemous lies and lunacy. His delusional claims are what made Dawkins write his bestseller. "The God delusion" A delusion people following a delusional God.
The prophet Mohammad ( pbuh) was sent to save the descendants of Ishmael and preserve the covenant which God stripped away from the Jews.

You are a Muslim?

If so, you go against Muhammad by rejecting Jesus and referring to him as delusional and blasphemous. You slander a prophet of God.

jesus was deemed delusional and blasphemous before the prophet Mohammad was sent by God by several centuries, and was crucified. Muslims are not responsible for Jesus. He was sent to save the Jews. The prophet was sent to unite the descendants of Ishmael.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:20:25 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 2:10:05 AM, Harikrish wrote:

jesus was deemed delusional and blasphemous before the prophet Mohammad was sent by God by several centuries, and was crucified. Muslims are not responsible for Jesus. He was sent to save the Jews. The prophet was sent to unite the descendants of Ishmael.

I refer to the fact that Muhammad accepted Jesus as a Messenger of God, a prophet, and the Messiah.

How could a person of such a station be delusional and blasphemous? Or do you believe Muhammad was wrong about this?
Harikrish
Posts: 11,011
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2016 2:38:27 AM
Posted: 10 months ago
At 2/8/2016 2:20:25 AM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 2/8/2016 2:10:05 AM, Harikrish wrote:

jesus was deemed delusional and blasphemous before the prophet Mohammad was sent by God by several centuries, and was crucified. Muslims are not responsible for Jesus. He was sent to save the Jews. The prophet was sent to unite the descendants of Ishmael.

I refer to the fact that Muhammad accepted Jesus as a Messenger of God, a prophet, and the Messiah.

How could a person of such a station be delusional and blasphemous? Or do you believe Muhammad was wrong about this?
The prophet Mohammad ( pbuh) did not hear Jesus. He was told by Gabriel all that he was reguired to know. After all, he was not sent to save the Jews but to save the covenant that was taken by God from Israel and given to Ishmael. Jesus was a prophet and that will never change. The prophet Mohammad was not sent to judge Jesus.