And once again prove that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.
Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: December 1, 2024, 10:58 am
Thread Rating:
|
Michael "Intelligent Design" Behe's son is an Atheist
|
  Quote:Then you are doubly foolish for laboring harder down the wrong path. This is the problem mate, we dont know what is the 'right' path, to live on a slippery slope, between theism and agnostic deism is rather hard. I cant deny my relationship with some sought of higher being, Dawkins didnt either, he just called it a 'dellusion'...
Its ok to have doubt, just dont let that doubt become the answers.
You dont hate God, you hate the church game. "God is not what you imagine or what you think you understand. If you understand you have failed." Saint Augustine Your mind works very simply: you are either trying to find out what are God's laws in order to follow them; or you are trying to outsmart Him. -Martin H. Fischer  RE: Michael "Intelligent Design" Behe's son is an Atheist
October 8, 2010 at 5:43 am
(This post was last modified: October 8, 2010 at 5:44 am by Loki_999.)
(October 8, 2010 at 5:18 am)solja247 Wrote:Quote:Then you are doubly foolish for laboring harder down the wrong path.  Sorry, so you are saying that Dawkins calling God a dellusion (delusion) constitutes a relationship? EDIT: On topic - good on the lad for questioning his beliefs, especially in such a indoctrinated environment. That's all it takes, a little questioning to see the complete idiocy that comprise the Christian (and many other religious) beliefs. And agnosticism may constitute a relationship as there is a level of uncertainty there, but atheism is pretty hardline in the belief that there is no god... nothing to have a relationship with. We are pretty certain we are on the "right path" when it comes to the topic of a certain supernatural entity.
A finite number of monkeys with a finite number of typewriters and a finite amount of time could eventually reproduce 4chan.
Is there any proof he gives on that page that he is actually Michael Behe's son? Please excuse the skepticism, but on other IAmA reddit discussions, I usually see some sort of photographic evidence (especially when dealing with famous people).
Quote:Sorry, so you are saying that Dawkins calling God a dellusion (delusion) constitutes a relationship? Not at all. Wouldnt that be silly? Dawkins says. 'When you consider the beauty of the world and you wonder how it came to be what it is, you are naturally overwhelmed, with a feeling of, awe, a felling of admiration and you almost feel a desire to worship something, I feel this and I recognise that other scientists such as; Carl Sagan feel this, Einstien felt it. We all of us share a kind of religous reverence for the beauties of the universe, for the complexity of life, for the sheer magnitude of the cosmos, the sheer magnitude of the geological time. And its tempting translate that feeling of awe and worship into a desire to worship a particular thing, a person, an agent, you want to attribute it to a maker, to a creator.' http://fixed-point.org/index.php/video/3...nox-debate
Its ok to have doubt, just dont let that doubt become the answers.
You dont hate God, you hate the church game. "God is not what you imagine or what you think you understand. If you understand you have failed." Saint Augustine Your mind works very simply: you are either trying to find out what are God's laws in order to follow them; or you are trying to outsmart Him. -Martin H. Fischer (October 8, 2010 at 6:29 am)solja247 Wrote:Quote:Sorry, so you are saying that Dawkins calling God a dellusion (delusion) constitutes a relationship? Ah right. Well, that's nothing to do with a relationship just feelings. Feelings != truth. And besides, speaking for myself, I don't find i want to attribute it all to a maker. I tend to think "what an amazing place the universe is" and happy to leave it at that. If there is a maker, then its certainly not the god of the bible. Any such maker would be much more interested in the universe as a whole than this piddling little ball of rock in an unfashionable backwater of an insignificant galaxy. 
A finite number of monkeys with a finite number of typewriters and a finite amount of time could eventually reproduce 4chan.
 RE: Michael "Intelligent Design" Behe's son is an Atheist
October 8, 2010 at 5:59 pm
(This post was last modified: October 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm by The Omnissiunt One.)
(October 8, 2010 at 6:29 am)solja247 Wrote: Dawkins says. 'When you consider the beauty of the world and you wonder how it came to be what it is, you are naturally overwhelmed, with a feeling of, awe, a felling of admiration and you almost feel a desire to worship something, I feel this and I recognise that other scientists such as; Carl Sagan feel this, Einstien felt it. We all of us share a kind of religous reverence for the beauties of the universe, for the complexity of life, for the sheer magnitude of the cosmos, the sheer magnitude of the geological time. And its tempting translate that feeling of awe and worship into a desire to worship a particular thing, a person, an agent, you want to attribute it to a maker, to a creator.' Argument #1567 for God's existence: the Argument from Out-of-context Dawkins Quote. 1) Dawkins says that he feels awe at the universe. 2) Even an atheist as prominent as Dawkins feels awe. 3) Therefore, God exists.
'We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.' H.L. Mencken
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology. 'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain 'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln RE: Michael "Intelligent Design" Behe's son is an Atheist
October 8, 2010 at 6:29 pm
(This post was last modified: October 8, 2010 at 6:31 pm by solja247.)
Quote:Ah right. Well, that's nothing to do with a relationship just feelings. Feelings != truth. And besides, speaking for myself, I don't find i want to attribute it all to a maker. I tend to think "what an amazing place the universe is" and happy to leave it at that. If there is a maker, then its certainly not the god of the bible. Any such maker would be much more interested in the universe as a whole than this piddling little ball of rock in an unfashionable backwater of an insignificant galaxy. I agree. I know how most atheists see the God of the Bible and I dont see Him like that, so I worship a different God, than what you see in the Bible. I think we can have a relationship with God, but when I read the Bible, God is anthropomorphised in the Bible, we dont know if God has a back or a finger or so forth. Ancient religions would humanise their gods and the israelites did the same. Quote:Argument #1567 for God's existence: the Argument from Out-of-context Dawkins Quote. Your premises are wrong, I never said God existed, no one can prove that. However it is either, God exists or He doesnt, there cant be an inbetween. Dawkins doesnt deny that he wants to worship a higher being, he just calls it a dellusion. Maybe it is, maybe it isnt. Of course I say that it isnt a dellusion... So how have I taken Dawkins out of context?
Its ok to have doubt, just dont let that doubt become the answers.
You dont hate God, you hate the church game. "God is not what you imagine or what you think you understand. If you understand you have failed." Saint Augustine Your mind works very simply: you are either trying to find out what are God's laws in order to follow them; or you are trying to outsmart Him. -Martin H. Fischer  RE: Michael "Intelligent Design" Behe's son is an Atheist
October 8, 2010 at 7:10 pm
(This post was last modified: October 8, 2010 at 7:11 pm by TheDarkestOfAngels.)
(October 8, 2010 at 6:29 pm)solja247 Wrote: Your premises are wrong, I never said God existed, no one can prove that. However it is either, God exists or He doesnt, there cant be an inbetween. Dawkins doesnt deny that he wants to worship a higher being, he just calls it a dellusion. Maybe it is, maybe it isnt. Of course I say that it isnt a dellusion... Because Dawkins absolutely does not believe in god. He even explicitly states this to be the case. Case and point: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlZtEjtli...re=related He expressly states god is a fictional character almost right off the bat and later mentions that he does not believe in any god (of the myriad of gods Stein threw at him). At best, he states that there is a very low chance that such a being could actually exist when pressed to put a number on this but again, he doesn't believe this to be the case. As such, you are unequivically wrong.
If today you can take a thing like evolution and make it a crime to teach in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools and next year you can make it a crime to teach it to the hustings or in the church. At the next session you may ban books and the newspapers...
Ignorance and fanaticism are ever busy and need feeding. Always feeding and gloating for more. Today it is the public school teachers; tomorrow the private. The next day the preachers and the lecturers, the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, Your Honor, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until with flying banners and beating drums we are marching backward to the glorious ages of the sixteenth centry when bigots lighted fagots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and culture to the human mind. ~Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925 Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan |
|
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
