It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Atheists Dumbfounded to Discover Richard Dawkins is a Closet Christian!

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 11:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

Could you perhaps point out an example of where someone has done this with a verse from the Bible?




posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Great points OP.

But this isn't just about religion. People take quotes out of context and try to use them against each other all day long all the time.

It's one of the most common tactics that noob debaters use, however seasoned veterans can easily defeat them.

Just stay vigilant because you can bet on it that the tactic will be used tomorrow and the next day and so on.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by racasan
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


Sorry what knowledge in the bible?

Have you seen star trek II the wrath of khan?



here khan is quoting moby dick (sort of) – does this mean khan is using “knowledge” from moby dick?


Crap, I love that movie, but I'll have to watch the whole thing in order to find out if he is being sarcastic or not.

The point here is that the very God which Dawkins speaks against also comes from the same book which he now claims is apart of History. It's the ol classic case of, I believe this part, but not that part. My question is why is Dawkins now putting some stock into the Scriptures? You can't just take the literature, especially one which claims to be Holy and say that part is good, but reject the rest. Either the whole Book is a great work of literature, or it's a great work of fiction.

I think Dawkins is still confused on the matter.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


The confusion is all yours.....once again

A piece of literature does not have to contain truths for it to be literature.

Literature can be fiction or non-fiction.

The bible has for better or worse, been a part of the history of humanity for the last few thousand years, along with all the other holy scriptures from numerous other religions for a lot lot longer than that.

A lot of history has been recovered from religious texts such as the bible, however nothing regarding the supernatural claims in these texts have ever been found to contain any substance.




edit on 3-8-2011 by Prezbo369 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


He’s not being sarcastic

Side question the few christians I know here are all massive star trek fans, what’s that all about?



You can quote yoda from star wars but not believe in the force

And you can quote bits from the bible but not believe in bible god



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Wooooooosh went right over your head didn't it? Thanks for making my point for me...


Woooosh, another pseudo-christian completely ignoring the content of my post to tell me that I missed your point even though I addressed it quite clearly. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose, kiddo.

Your OP is terrible for one simple reason: pseudo-Christians are just as guilty, if not more guilty, of taking scriptures out of context and pushing it as if it holds any value. A good example would be quoting levitican law for anti-homosexuality, when the verses that surround it outline kosher laws, pro-slave standards, murdering prostitutes, etc..

But wooooooosh, the truth will be ignored by "you of faith" (blasphemers) as if ignorance is your area of employment.

What does the Bible say about hypocrites that warp His word to push personal agendas, again?
edit on 3-8-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prezbo369
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


The confusion is all yours.....once again

A piece of literature does not have to contain truths for it to be literature.

Literature can be fiction or non-fiction.

The bible has for better or worse, been a part of the history of humanity for the last few thousand years, along with all the other holy scriptures from numerous other religions for a lot lot longer than that.

A lot of history has been recovered from religious texts such as the bible, however nothing regarding the supernatural claims in these texts have ever been found to have any substance.


Ok, but how many people do you know that would be willing to die at the stake for a piece of literature that is fiction? I don't know of any other piece of literature that has had such a great impact on people.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by iterationzero
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

Could you perhaps point out an example of where someone has done this with a verse from the Bible?


Sure: www.abovetopsecret.com...




War or Peace?
EXO 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

ROM 15:33 Now the God of peace be with you all. Amen.


This is alleged to be a Bible contradiction, but God can be both a God of war and peace as the circumstance demands. The skeptic has simply cherry picked from two books which are literally separated by 1000 years and triumphantly declared a contradiction. It has the same level of merit as my Dawkins argument.




Who is the father of Joseph?
MAT 1:16 And Jacob begat Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus, who is called Christ.

LUK 3:23 And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, which was the son of Heli.


Again cherry picking from 2 different books. One genealogy is through the mother's side and another through the fathers. As a married person I have a father and and father in law thus 2 fathers , there's no contradiction.

Skeptics make no attempt to understand the text when they go looking for these sorts of things. I could go on but there are literally 100s of threads like this at ATS.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


I know a few, but I do consider them to be delusional. But how people feel about a text says nothing about its credibility.

There are many many books throughout history that people have been willing to die for, not just the one you subscribe to



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheOrangeBrood

Originally posted by Bigwhammy
Wooooooosh went right over your head didn't it? Thanks for making my point for me...


Woooosh, another pseudo-christian completely ignoring the content of my post to tell me that I missed your point even though I addressed it quite clearly. Ignorance is bliss, I suppose, kiddo.

Your OP is terrible for one simple reason: pseudo-Christians are just as guilty, if not more guilty, of taking scriptures out of context and pushing it as if it holds any value. A good example would be quoting levitican law for anti-homosexuality, when the verses that surround it outline kosher laws, pro-slave standards, murdering prostitutes, etc..

But wooooooosh, the truth will be ignored by "you of faith" (blasphemers) as if ignorance is your area of employment.

What does the Bible say about hypocrites that warp His word to push personal agendas, again?
edit on 3-8-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)


You are proving my OP thanks! The kosher/levitical laws were only for the ancient Hebrews but you seem to think we are under them. Jesus declared all food clean. We are under a new covenant. Leviticus is not necessary to establish homosexuality as a sin. The New Testament is crystal clear on homosexuality. See 1 Corinthians 6:9.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 

Why is there always an on-going debate about atheists and Christians? Its get's nobody anywhere.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 


I liked your post. Amen
. "God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. yet there ar enot 3 Gods, but only one".

Most unbelievers don't know that as God created Man in his image, He with 3 parts to his Whole, the Holy Trinity, is God's Body, Spirit and Soul. The same as man has a Body Spirit and Soul. It doesnt MEAN that God looks like mankind, but that with his "image" he gave us the same 3 parts he has for himself.

Moses on Mt. Sinai after God had shown him His just back, wouldn't have freaked to the point where his hair went white with the Fear of God, if all he saw was just a man's back. Whatever God looks like is frightening enough to kill a man if we looked upon him from the front.

I digress, i like how you turn their own tactics against them, well played.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Warpthal
 


I disagree, the debate has motivated me to pursue quite a bit of higher education and has deepened my faith. Also, I have seen a few atheists convert to Christianity and thus gain eternal life which is one the greatest thing that possibly happen to them. I realize the tone of this thread is a bit snarky but the sophomoric level of much the Bible skepticism here demands a somewhat sarcastic response. People are only relativists with things they don't care about. When you relativize something important to them (Dawkins' book in this case) they want it to be interpreted objectively.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 


Well in the Bible, God even says he creates life and brings destruction. He was the one who gave Canaan to the Israelites, and with the Ark of the Covenant borne before them they could never be defeated. This is also the same God that caused meteors to fall on the Hebrew, and the earth to swallow them up evreytime they tried to backslide into worshipping false gods. He is a jealous God, he hates lairs and cannot abide by sin. This is also the same God who in the end will destroy those of mankind who refused to repent from their wicked ways and do not accept Yeshua Christ as savior (the english name for yeshua is Jesus, but Yeshua is his real name).



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Bigwhammy
 


Wrong, blasphemer.

Jesus spoke not against homosexuality, Corinthians is a continuation of the corruption known as the Apostles trying to use their friendship with Jesus to make themselves some money.

They were the first people to take the message "out of context" and warp it to suit their personal agendas.

Are you Catholic?


You are proving my OP thanks! The kosher/levitical laws were only for the ancient Hebrews but you seem to think we are under them.


Wrong, I think that anyone who quotes anything from Levitican law does not understand what Christianity is at all, yet the ones who do quote it label themselves "Christian", but those are ancient jewish laws.

I'm not even going to have this argument with you if you are actually going to respond with this retarded nonsense and completele incapacity to read a post and know what it's saying.I AM NOT THE ONE SAYING LEVITICAN LAW SHOULD BE FOLLOWED, YOU "CHRISTIANS" ARE. This is not complicated

edit on 3-8-2011 by TheOrangeBrood because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by lonewolf19792000
 


Thanks!, Like I said above people will relativize things they do not affect them but they act entirely different with things that are important to them. The best way to deal with a moral relativist is to steal their stereo and ask them if they think stealing is really objectively wrong... I just extended this example to the interpretation of texts. Skeptics have no problem saying "That's just your interpretation!" until you do the same with something they care about - then they want it to be objectively handled in its proper context. All interpretations are not equal, with the Bible the original authors intention is what we are after.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:15 PM
link   
reply to post by TheOrangeBrood
 


It's obvious that you have no idea what you are talking about and are not interested in the truth. Jesus commissioned the apostles and Paul. In fact, we would not even have the words of Jesus at all if it were not for the apostles. Jesus did not write the Gospels, they came from his followers... the same ones you are accusing hence your logic and facts are incoherent.



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Prezbo369
reply to post by RealTruthSeeker
 


I know a few, but I do consider them to be delusional. But how people feel about a text says nothing about its credibility.

There are many many books throughout history that people have been willing to die for, not just the one you subscribe to


Of course you do, that's because you don't see it from their point of view. I'm sure they accuse you of the same thing, but of course that would be irrelevant.

I'm sure there are others, however, the Bible seems to stand above them all and is well documented in history.


edit on 3-8-2011 by RealTruthSeeker because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by chr0naut
 





Perhaps it would be easier for him if he practised a real science (like Physics) instead of one of the "Life Sciences".


You. Have Got. To. Be. Kidding. Me?

Physics is the 'water boy' to the Life Sciences. And I'm thirsty. Fetch me a drink, water boy.




posted on Aug, 3 2011 @ 01:27 PM
link   
Who is Richard Dawkins?




top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join