Hmmm. Probably no one has done more to turn out confirmed atheists than William Lane Craig. Still he doesn't speak for me.

(December 20, 2015 at 7:37 pm)athrock Wrote:

(December 19, 2015 at 9:05 pm)Stimbo Wrote: Richard Dawkins is a cult leader?

Yeah... your credibility went thataway.

As you probably know, the word "cult" has the following meaning:

a misplaced or excessive admiration for a particular person or thing.

So, does that apply to the relationship between Dawkins and some of his followers?

I'll let you be the judge.

That part of the definition "misplaced or excessive" is important. Do you really want to play that game when we examine your behavior with Jesus, or whoever it is you worship? If you don't like being called the very proper name "cult" (and it's truly "death cult" which applies to your religion), then you'd better stop masturbating on this forum now. No atheists ever worship anyone other than maybe their lovers while in bed, if it can be called that.

It's interesting that you added and then emphasised the "some" qualifier, because the weasel word in the construction is actually "followers".

(December 20, 2015 at 7:37 pm)athrock Wrote: I'll let you be the judge.

Why would you do that now after going to such extravagant lengths to do the judging for us? It couldn't be more plain to see that you view yourself as infallible compared to any of us who doubt your own ideas. What else would you be here for when you've already decided your opinion is above questioning? You come here expecting us to agree with you, and when we don't you grow increasingly insulting, and then you attempt to bring us down to your own level by putting your logical fallacies on us. That didn't work for you either - now what are you going to do, try and threaten us with what we don't believe anyway?

Wouldn't it be much easier for angry theists like you in your attempts at ridding the world of those who challenge your nasty bullshit if we had more assembly houses like your churches. You've got the guns, and we do believe they exist.

Yeah, let's not try to address the man's points when we can post a shopped jpeg attacking the man himself.

Which point of his do you think is worth taking seriously?

I used the plural actually, but maybe it's a language thing. How about you pick something and go from there?

Well, I can't think of a single point he makes that is substantive with regards to religion.

But you can pick the best. Or most easily defended. Or most plausible. Or whichever you want.

What about the point he makes about taking responsibility for your own actions, and not relying on a belief in a sacrifice to get you into heaven?
A fair point and a better way to live your life.