Richard Dawkins is a super coward

reply to post by sdb93awd

I challenge you to find one thing that Jesus says that is of an evil nature.

Matthew 10:34-39 34
“Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword. 35 For I have come to ‘set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; 36 and ‘a man’s enemies will be those of his own household. 37 He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. 38 And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. 39 He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.

Seems to be working.

He who has no respect for family and human love is not worthy of my devotion.

reply to post by windword


You have failed.

Go ahead and read about how Jesus tells people to act towards one another and come back.

The whole concept of his teaching hinges on loving others more than yourself. Please read it again sir.

You are failing to realize that Jesus is God. It is saying that it is more important to follow the teachings of God(since they are perfect instructions for how to treat others), than even following ones own family. Makes sense if he is in fact God.

Jesus never commands any violence or hate out of anyone.

He who has no respect for family and human love is not worthy of my devotion.

We aren't even allowed to think bad thoughts about our enemies. You need to get a better understanding of Christianity before you attack it. It'd be like me saying bad things about Martin Luther King if I were born in West Virginia to a bunch of hillbillies because of one quote that I read out of context.

reply to post by sdb93awd


Jesus is NOT God. The god character of the Old Testament gets no respect from me either. But to think that Jesus is the same character? Well then yeah, Jesus is an evil M.F.

reply to post by windword


You don't have a very good comprehension of the Bible. That is clear to me. Please stop speaking out of ignorance about it lest you seem foolish to those of us who have read more than a few verses here and there.

I'm telling you personally that the book does not make people want to do bad things. Just trust me on that or read the gospels for yourself and tell me if it made you hateful.



If you want to debate whether or not Jesus is God I'd be happy to show you a million indicators from many different fields that I rely on in some other thread.

This thread is about how Dawkins is clearly afraid of William Lane Craig and I've simply seen nothing that states otherwise.

Lets talk about Dawkins for a bit again......... The man makes $ by humiliating Christians. Someone's faith is of utmost importance to them(moreso than almost any attribute), and as an avid reader of the Bible I have never read anything that even remotely made me want to do evil things. A lot of lost souls find God and turn their lives around forever because of the gospel of Christianity. Has anyone ever used their conversion to atheism as the crux to overcome a heroin addiction?

Dawkins is unreasonably and nonsensically attacking a group of people who are told to simply love everybody. And he is probably convincing a lot of people to lose their faith.......

It breaks my heart..........especially because I know what Jesus has done to my heart.

Originally posted by sdb93awd
reply to post by windword

 

You don't have a very good comprehension of the Bible. That is clear to me. Please stop speaking out of ignorance about it lest you seem foolish to those of us who have read more than a few verses here and there.

Get down of off your high horse. I have read and studied bible, as a Christian, many times over. I know what that book can do to destroy good people first hand.

I'm telling you personally that the book does not make people want to do bad things. Just trust me on that or read the gospels for yourself and tell me if it made you hateful.

That book is responsible for more atrocities than any book, person or country.

If you want to debate whether or not Jesus is God I'd be happy to show you a million indicators from many different fields that I rely on in some other thread.

Jesus isn't/wasn't God.

reply to post by windword


What atrocities does Jesus tell people to commit?

Oh wait, He doesn't. Man made religion was behind those sir!

And it does seem apparent to me that your knowledge of the book is highly suspect.

I know what that book can do to destroy good people first hand.

Explain. Make sure to tell me what the book says to make people bad rather than dogmatic teachings of man made religion. I'm dying to see what you come up with.

Jesus isn't/wasn't God.

Thank you for your subjective opinion

reply to post by sdb93awd

What atrocities does Jesus tell people to commit?

Jesus or the Bible? Wait, Jesus is God, the Bible is God's word................

Where to start?

reply to post by windword


Ok you obviously got lost somewhere in my line of questioning.

I am close to a vast number of Christians.

Guess what their main enemy is? Evil

They are the most sheepish people I come across in life because they simply aren't allowed to be hateful. That's the whole point of Jesus. I don't want to hear about Westborough baptist or Catholic crusades. Those are in direct contradiction with Jesus' teachings and anyone with any understanding of the teachings of Christ would know this.

If you don't understand who Jesus is in relation to the Old Testament than I'm going to find it very hard to talk with you in any sort of meaningful way because you simply lack understanding.

Tell me what you've seen first hand.......You said that youve seen the Bible turn people into horrible people.

Jesus or the Bible? Wait, Jesus is God, the Bible is God's word................

It appears to me that you don't understand that the Old Testament is a historical book about God's people before the appearance of the Messiah. It must be read considering historical context. Jesus fulfilled Messianic prophecy from the Old Testament and in turn offered grace to the whole world(gentiles).

These are fulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament. Upon the appearance of Jesus, the old law has been fulfilled and taken to a new level by one simple concept........Love.

Christians base their belief on the New Testament fulfillment of the God of Israel and that new law is centered around LOVE.

What in the world is wrong with believing in the love of the new testament? Have you read the New Testament?

How could the New Testament turn people into evildoers?


Oh by the way. Dawkins is still afraid of Dr. Craig by all accounts.

reply to post by sdb93awd


In the Old Testament, Yahweh, or Jehovah, I AM, or whatever his name was, said he was going to send a messiah. He never said that he was coming in person, to sacrifice himself to himself, to protect us from his wrath.

I'm not sure that the biblical Jesus even existed, but I sure don't buy the virgin birth, the resurrection or his supposed sacirfice for sin. I don't believe in a personal, creator god that intervenes in his own creation, but if there is one, it isn't that guy from the Old Testament of the Bible.

The 10 Commandments are Unnecessary, Irrelevant and Immoral

The Problem With God

Originally posted by sdb93awd

Shouldn't Dawkins be able to wipe the floor with him then? Dawkins has no issue with debating other apologists or others in the community.....

With that particular 'trap' he would wipe the floor with him yes.......

Why wouldn't he want to destroy such an easy target? Especially considering how WLC is considered to be perhaps the most powerful Christian apologist. This is supposed to be Dawkins wheelhouse. He writes books on the subject.

I did't say he was an easy target, WLC earns millions every year travelling the world as a professional debater, that's what he does. Dawkins is a professor of biology not a debater.

You all can discredit WLC all that you want but he is a respected apologist by all standards and Dawkins is clearly ducking him. Just read his excuse that he went out of his way to publish. It sounds like things that I heard in middle school.

Lol I doubt very much you read things like that in middle school, but nice try bub.

And as I showed, Craig is a long long way from being respected by all standards. He may be the Christian poster-boy but that's where any respect he has gained begins and ends.

At the very least Dawkins needs to hand in his man card.

Anyone that describes the deaths of children as a blessing (which I notice none of his advocates will go near) should at the very least hand in his human being card....

You guys have to be honest with me here.............

Does anyone actually think that Dawkins would win this debate?

Sure why not, its not like WLC hasn't ever had his ass handed to him, is it....

reply to post by Prezbo369




You use the Hitchens debate as evidence of Craig having his ass handed to him? Wow. Just goes to show the very subjective nature of the subject. The debate I watched, featured Hitchens being soundly defeated. Funny how that works... All the atheists say Hitchens won and all the Theists say Craig won. Just goes to show you are about as unbiased as a westboro baptist when all things are considered.

reply to post by DeadSeraph

The debate I watched, featured Hitchens being soundly defeated. Funny how that works... All the atheists say Hitchens won and all the Theists say Craig won. Just goes to show you are about as unbiased as a westboro baptist when all things are considered.

Doesn't that say the same thing about you being "about as unbiased as a Westboro Baptist when all things are considered"?

Originally posted by windword
reply to post by DeadSeraph

 

The debate I watched, featured Hitchens being soundly defeated. Funny how that works... All the atheists say Hitchens won and all the Theists say Craig won. Just goes to show you are about as unbiased as a westboro baptist when all things are considered.

Doesn't that say the same thing about you being "about as unbiased as a Westboro Baptist when all things are considered"?

It sure does.

reply to post by sdb93awd


sdb93awd, you do know that Jesus, or whoever he was, was "Just a man" and only a man. It wasn't until some time later after his death, as a man, was he "deified".

There are historical records and documents to that decision, made by mortal, human people, to make him into something he wasn't.

I'm not saying he didn't exist or that he wasn't a forward thinking, equality believing philanthropist with a genuine view of how people should behave and act to each other. I think that was probably all true.

But a God or deity or magical, he was not. Just a man.

And when certain types of people place this man on a pedestal and refute common sense, logic and reason, how can ANYONE debate them? There is no winner because, from YOUR religious point of view - you believe without seeing, without proof and without reason.

Science, on the other hand, believes only when the empirical, scientifically repeatable methodologies PROVE the theory.

AND - most important of all - science can ADMIT THAT IT IS WRONG. It is always updating itself with he latest FACTS, the latest insights and discoveries. Religion and religious people cannot. And because of that, there is no debate to be had. You know this, and you use that to your advantage.

reply to post by noonebutme

sdb93awd, you do know that Jesus, or whoever he was, was "Just a man" and only a man. It wasn't until some time later after his death, as a man, was he "deified".

You couldn't be more wrong. The beginning of Christianity started after the resurrection by people who personally saw him die and then saw him arisen. Christians were immediately under persecution for this belief yet the gospel flourished and is now preached peaceably throughout the world.

How many Christian terrorist attacks do you read about? Again I don't want to hear about religion or idiots like Westborough(they have like 15 members) or institutions like Catholicism.

Would these people all have gone to prison and been executed had they seen their messiah die on the cross?


It would take me a long time but I could systematically prove to you that Jesus is the Son of God. Well, I have it at about 99.999999999% personally.

Are you familiar with Biblical prophecy?

This is all beside the point.............

Richard Dawkins debates and ridicules Christians all the time. He just likes to pick on easy targets(bishops, young earthers, etc)

He is ducking Craig because he knows he is outmatched and he doesn't want to humiliate himself with his nonsensical arguments against human religion and his unguided application of this to the Christian faith.

He went out of his way to make an exccuse to not debate Craig but he will gladly debate those who are weak in their knowledge.

How is he not a coward? Seriously?

reply to post by windword


My girlfriend is a strong atheist. She freely admits that Craig simply anniahlates his opponents. We've watched almost all of his debates.

She was so embarassed for her boy Hitchens and she is extremely disappointed in her other go-to atheist in Richard Dawkins.

Y'all need to write him letters lest the creationist community know who has the real cojones in this matter.

Originally posted by sdb93awd
It would take me a long time but I could systematically prove to you that Jesus is the Son of God. Well, I have it at about 99.999999999% personally.

Nice copout. On the same note, I have the evidence that Earl the Pink Elephant is the true lord. It would take me too much time to present it thought.
So now we're even. Try again or give up?

reply to post by sdb93awd


You just lost ALL credibility with me, what little you had, upon reading this:

My girlfriend is a strong atheist. She freely admits that Craig simply anniahlates his opponents. We've watched almost all of his debates.

I don't believe you that your girlfriend is a "strong atheist" or that she's very smart at all, given that she succumbed to Craig's presuppositions and illogical arguments.

No intelligent, strong atheist follows Craig's intellectually dishonest arguments.

You really SHOULD watch this video before you comment of Craig's debate style. I posted it earlier, but I doubt that you watched it.

Originally posted by sdb93awd
You couldn't be more wrong. The beginning of Christianity started after the resurrection by people who personally saw him die and then saw him arisen. Christians were immediately under persecution for this belief yet the gospel flourished and is now preached peaceably throughout the world.

Uhm. No. No, not at all. There is zero evidence, none what so ever, that the human being, referred to as Jesus of Nazereth, "rose from the dead". Those stories were written long after his death.

In 325 AD the council of Nicaea tried to bring together all the "differenig" factions of Christianity. And during that council, he was effectively deified. Before then, he was not the son of god by various sects. Some believed it, some didnt. Yet all were his followers.

And there is documentation on that meeting - don't use Wikipedia - go to a library to look it up. It's very interesting and it shows where and how your religious beliefs came into being.

How many Christian terrorist attacks do you read about? Again I don't want to hear about religion or idiots like Westborough(they have like 15 members) or institutions like Catholicism.

So you can pick and choose which things you want to support your belief? Even if they cast doubt upon your beliefs?

You see, science allows for this. Is the scientific method finds evidence contrary to the hypothesis, then it re-evaluates that hypothesis and goes about analysing, observing and investigating the observable phenomenon to discover the truth.

Religion does no such thing. You blindly follow a belief and refuse anything that may call that into question.

And it's exactly that obstinate approach which people like Dawkins, I presume, tire of. Why bother trying to have a debate with a brick wall?

Richard Dawkins debates and ridicules Christians all the time. He just likes to pick on easy targets(bishops, young earthers, etc)

Well, i do too, because it seems so laughable, so childish and so counter-intuitive to the natural world that is directly observable and testable.

He is ducking Craig because he knows he is outmatched and he doesn't want to humiliate himself with his nonsensical arguments against human religion and his unguided application of this to the Christian faith.

He went out of his way to make an exccuse to not debate Craig but he will gladly debate those who are weak in their knowledge.

How is he not a coward? Seriously?

Yes, he's avoiding Craig. But not because he's outmatched. I believe it's because he simply gets tired of talking to a brick wall. A childish, petulant, self-absorbed mindset that sees only one belief and refuses to have anything question that belief.

At the end of the day - how *weak* is that belief if it cannot hold up to scrutiny?

Sound travels at a defined speed through Earth's atmosphere, light as well. Two Hydrogen atoms and one Oxygen atom create water. Light is a measurable wave of particles. All these "beliefs" are accountable, testable, observable and, above all, if new data and evidence comes along, adjustable. Well, 1 + 1 = 2 is pretty well common sense. But i wouldn't expect you to understand that.

reply to post by PsykoOps

Nice copout. On the same note, I have the evidence that Earl the Pink Elephant is the true lord. It would take me too much time to present it thought.

It's off topic and it's an incredible amount of information. That isn't what this thread is about.

I won't chase your diversion but I can break it down into segments and start a thread about it in a couple of weeks when I get back from vacation if you'd like.