Richard Dawkins sums up religion

RDM said:
I vehemently disagree with it's conclusion. Much as I find the whole idea of "sins of the father" to be morally reprehensible when done by man, I find it equally so when done by a deity.

By any objective moral yardstick the actions the God of the Old Testament are wrong and could easily be considered evil. Genocide, infanticide, punishing children for their fathers mistakes. The fact that he is the creator of said people does not really excuse the acts themselves.
Click to expand...

OMG you just don't get it! It's OK 'cos they went to Heaven!
 
Woden said:
OMG you just don't get it! It's OK 'cos they went to Heaven!
Click to expand...

Not sure if you're joking or serious, so I'll assume serious? Appologies if you were not, and ignore accordingly.


So let's look at one example, the great flood - " “Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great on the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.”

So, of the millions of people drowned (murdered), they actually all went to Heaven? This doesn't seem to follow what the bible suggests? So where did all these million of (evil) folks souls go to? Heaven or Hell?

I can guarentee with your next answer, which ever is picked (Heaven or Hell), I'll show how farcical (& unfair) it is :)
 
Last edited:
Wasn't being serious :D

It's similer to some guy on the politics show here in the UK. Some guy said that all the aborted babies go to heaven, then freaked out when some woman asked "So we are doing them a favor?"

Forgive typos, speeling ... I have ale.
 
elmarko said:
You can remember them, you can even give a detailed response as to why you feel you made that choice.

But ultimately the thought which made the choice simply arose into consciousness, what else could it do? (that is the sense in which I mean account for). Thought brain scans scientists are already able to predict choices with a much higher degree of accuracy than random before a person is even aware they have made a choice (proven via experimentation) - in these cases the person also felt they could 'account for the choice' - in reality it had already been made subconsciously.

This explains it well if you are unfamiliar with the subject.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately I am unable to respond for the same reasons Castiel has stated and I have only limited and intermittent use of a pc at the moment. I also haven't viewed the above vid for the same reasons. There is post Lebetian evidence to the contrary. That is to say evidence that shows there is simply a build up to potential activity prior to conscious activity becoming involved, not that it doesn't:

Our brain gets a hint that we are contemplating making a movement, so it gets ready. And it’s only when a critical mass occurs that decision making actually takes place.
Click to expand...
Unable to dig up the link at the moment though I think it is Medicalxpress.com. I just wanted to add that our conscious minds are not just passive receivers of information of subconscious decisions that have already taken place; they are active makers of those decisions instead. This does not prove that free will is true however, but it proves that the way we feel we do things is pretty much the way we in fact do things and we can't necessarily do away with consciousness and conscious decision making processes yet.
 
Last edited:
ethan said:
Unfortunately I am unable to respond for the same reasons Castiel has stated and I have only limited and intermittent use of a pc at the moment. I also haven't viewed the above vid for the same reasons. There is post Lebetian evidence to the contrary. That is to say evidence that shows there is simply a build up to potential activity prior to conscious activity becoming involved, not that it doesn't:

Unable to dig up the link at the moment though I think it is Medicalxpress.com. I just wanted to add that our conscious minds are not just passive receivers of information of subconscious decisions that have already taken place; they are active makers of those decisions instead. This does not prove that free will is true however, but it proves that the way we feel we do things is pretty much the way we in fact do things and we can't necessarily do away with consciousness and conscious decision making processes yet yet.
Click to expand...

well we may not all be ceo's of large companys but getting from that, we're all a ceo of our own unconsceinceness, yeah sound about right how my mind thinks.
 
The problem with people isn't religion or faith. The problem with people is the fact that they hype up their own ideology so much they begin to believe own their own bull and think they can take matters in to their own hands - kinda like Dawkins.

Although I must admit I love watching him - like Bill O'reilly - that American twit. It's my Xfactor.
 
Woden said:
Wasn't being serious :D

It's similer to some guy on the politics show here in the UK. Some guy said that all the aborted babies go to heaven, then freaked out when some woman asked "So we are doing them a favor?"

Forgive typos, speeling ... I have ale.
Click to expand...

No problem :)

Indeed! We can follow your exact point through to the Biblical flood. God killed everyone (except Moses & Co) because they were evil. We can therefore only assume they went to Hell? But what about the children? Surely they can't be held accountable so went to Heaven?

So there must have been many children deemed too young to be held accountable so went to heaven, and a many children who were just old enough (days? weeks? months?) to be held accountable so went to heaven.

Now consider if the flood had happened a year earlier? Thousands of souls would then have gone to heaven instead of hell (they're now too young to be accountable) simply down to good luck.

Sound like a divine system made by an all-seeing supreme being? Or pot lock?
 
smelly_legend said:
The problem with people isn't religion or faith. The problem with people is the fact that they hype up their own ideology so much they begin to believe own their own bull and think they can take matters in to their own hands - kinda like Dawkins.

Although I must admit I love watching him - like Bill O'reilly - that American twit. It's my Xfactor.
Click to expand...

I'm curious, what is this Dawkings ideology you speak of?
 
Jaynos said:
Stalin didn't kill in the name of aethiesm therefore your point is absurd
Click to expand...

Unfortunately his point is not absurd as many of Stalins Pogroms were indeed in pursuit of a Atheist State. There were several anti-religious campaigns conducted in the USSR whose purpose was to replace Religion with Atheism. In one Stalin ordered the execution of the Clergy of The Orthodox Church for example.
 
Last edited:
Prof Richard Dawkins is a very intelligent man, there is absolutely no doubt in my mind about his intelligence, anyone that thinks otherwise is deluded. Prof Richard Dawkins has some excellent points with regards to certain religious teachings and customs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom