Richard Dawkins: The God Delusion.

[Seyser Koze]

heh hehhh, I remember as kids at school singing (not a voluntary thing I hasten to add) a song that went:

"When god made the hamper of creation, he filled it full of his love."

What we found amusing at the time as to swap "hamper" with "hamster"

Happy clappy trite shite nonsense, but the image of god "filling a hamster with his love" made it all the more bizarre...

[Tone Deft]

the image of god "filling a hamster with his love" made it all the more bizarre...

Think of God and the Virgin Mary... I bet he came first, they were both virgins. Joseph could only feel inadequate after his wife made it with god. Even the greatest sex is only 'god-like' or so I've been told.

[Patch]

[djadonis206"]Religion has never killed anyone - people kill people[/quote]

Guns don't kill people - Rappers do.

[shtreimel]

Let's get this party started again:

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2 ... there.html

"Atheism seems to be a somewhat bizarre, surreal belief system".

And hey, I've said it before, my background ain't science. But this dude sounds good (And hey, Dawkins sounds good as well...but anything that isn't your background, and sounds esoteric, sounds mildly convincing). So instead of posting your arguements here...take him on

[NorthernMonkey]

I've just taken my pizza out of the oven and noticed a piece of burnt cheese that looks remarkably like jesus; aren't these sort of visions quite popular in the US?

[Tone Deft]

Let's get this party started again:

http://jewishphilosopher.blogspot.com/2 ... there.html

"Atheism seems to be a somewhat bizarre, surreal belief system".

And hey, I've said it before, my background ain't science. But this dude sounds good (And hey, Dawkins sounds good as well...but anything that isn't your background, and sounds esoteric, sounds mildly convincing). So instead of posting your arguements here...take him on

There is no soul, no gods, no free will, no afterlife, no ghosts, no fairies, no witches, no magic, no boogey man, no Santa Claus and no leprechauns. There is no supernatural; there is only nature.

No free will?? This guy's being an ass.
There is no answer for every question you have, non-secularists label that with god.

This is more than merely a negative philosophy, but rather atheism makes certain positive metaphysical assertions about the universe. It is a religion in itself.

Atheism as a religion, I don't buy that. This guy has a problem in seeing absolutes, "you're for the war or Iraq or your for terrorism", same mentality. I'm anti-religion, I don't hold atheism as a religion.

The distinction between nature and the supernatural is:

- Natural entities create nothing.

Yeah, god is the all knowing, all being, boogeyman in the sky who created everything...

- The behavior of natural entities is governed by their internal, inherent properties. Everything, from a quark to a galaxy, from a gnat to a whale, is a robot, working on automatic pilot, motivated by natural properties which have existed eternally. Supernatural beings, for example a god or a person with free will, behave unpredictably and spontaneously. Even the most comprehensive knowledge of nature could not predict their next choice. An uncaused effect is supernatural.

Again, this whole 'atheists have no free will' is bullshit. I think we can all agree that we've seen people give up their free will to blindly follow religion. The tick us all of because they don't think about it. I've stated time and again that I believe the world is completely chaotic.

From a historical point of view...

Blah blah blah... It's not a religion.

Atheists will argue that other, supernatural, religions are evil since they encourage violence over silly theological issues and they distract bright young people from the study of science, which has true practical value. Of course, it could be argued that atheists might also find plenty to fight about – witness the conflict between the USSR and Mao’s China which nearly blossomed into a nuclear war. Our short experience with atheistic states, from Lenin’s Russia to North Korea, has not shown them to be particularly pacifistic. And even the USSR was not a very great beacon of scientific discovery.

Yes, religion goes against scientific curiousity.

Shit, he came this close to Godwinning himself. Let's skip both sides blaming wars on the other side, that's governments, take people. Take picketing, religious people are far more likely to be public assholes to shout out anyone they don't like, Marilyn Manson to abortion doctors.

Clearly, religion flourishes not because of any evidence, but merely because it offers empty solace to insecure, gullible people.

Hallelujah Brother!! And he goes on to play the Devil's advocate...

Of course, members of other religions have questioned atheism’s proofs.

Many do not and they are often shamed for even mentioning atheism. Being vocal about atheism would be uncomfortable in many situations, it's very taboo.

The atheistic assertion that “there is no proof of the supernatural” merely means “there is no proof which will satisfy me”. However, we do have scientific evidence that the universe was created from nothing 15 billion years ago.

Wrong. 'no wording to satisfy me...' There's enough evidence for me to conclude that there is no god. The universe was NOT created from nothing, i'd like to see his source on that.

The eternal functioning of any dynamic physical system seems to violate the law of entropy. According to atheism, the universe is some sort of cosmic perpetual motion machine.

More bad science. He doesn't even sound like HE believes what he's saying here. At least he recognises that entropy is a LAW and not a theory, but he's too nieve to know the difference between a law and a theory and to understand that law's must ALWAYS be taken into account. LAWS are observations that are fully accepted by the scientific community, theories are not.

If there is a god, he'd violate natural law with his supernatural powers, reversing entropy by creating energy/mass.

Many cosmologists have noted that we know of no natural reason why the universe must possess all the qualities needed to produce stars, elements heavier than helium and planets. It seems highly unlikely that they all occurred by chance, and without these features life would be impossible. Therefore, theists conclude, the universe was apparently supernaturally fine tuned to allow life to exist.

Whatever, the weak mind believes that shit. I don't know how many TV shows I've seen showing the births of stars and galaxies. Yes, it was all by chance and to me that's beautiful, we are frail and nothing.

In addition to this there would seem to be no properties inherent in basic chemicals which could cause them to automatically form complex self replicating machines – in other words, to form life spontaneously. This would seem to indicate that a supernatural intelligent designer intervened to create life.

More weak minded blame god bullshit. Lighting strikes, unfiltered sunlight, volcanic forces, meteors into chemical goo, create amino acids that make proteins that organise into a cell, etc. Billions of years.

In regards to the development of complex life from simple life, Charles Darwin in 1859 proposed that simple life does indeed possess natural properties which will transform it into more complex life.

Oh god, more bullshit. The only part where evolution is unknown is 'The missing link'. Evolution doesn't have to become more complicated, it leads to SURVIVABILITY. Again, this guy doesn't take into account that this takes longer than a lab experiment. There are also aberations from cross breeding (the jackass is a 'new' species) and radiation. Birds wing/feathers have been traced back to lizard legs/scales.

As far as the fact that Jews consider the world to be 6,000 years old, many do, however I believe they are mistaken. Ancient Talmudic commentaries mention worlds before this one. There is actually no conflict between fossils and the Bible. On the contrary, each helps us to understand better the other.

Noah's ark, for example is not supported by science. (Funny, that's natural selection with Noah playing god, blasphemy!) The bible doesn't detail animals well enough to be a record for comparison.

From a Jewish point of view, even the most terrible suffering of clearly innocent people can be explained on the basis of reincarnation. Someone may be suffering in this life for sins committed in a previous life. Furthermore, a seemingly cruel act may be actually kind if one is acting with complete foreknowledge, which of course God has. If someone would have known what Adolf Hitler would eventually become, would it have been unjust to strangle him in his crib? Having said that, I think that most people’s suffering is actually of their own causing, even from a natural point of view. If someone drinks until he becomes homeless, if he abuses his wife until she leaves, if he drives without a seat belt and becomes a cripple, that’s hardly God’s fault.

Reincarnation... original guilt reincarnated. I do believe we help create our surroundings and we can be victims of our own circumstance.

FINALLY!! He Godwins himself, I felt it would be a matter of time.

In regards to the success of atheistic science, this proves nothing about the truth of their religion. Atheism virtually worships nature.

The term 'virtual' is a fucking red herring, a weak word that does not hold water in a debate. Point striken from the record. Again, he's all caught up with that atheism=science bullshit. Science is science. An atheist scientist does not study an african frog and consider his disbelief in god as a reflection of his findings.

Also, our feeling of self consciousness and of having free choice would seem to indicate that we do have a soul and free will. We intuitively know that we are not merely robots. In addition to that, millions of people have experienced brain death yet afterwards remember having been conscious throughout the entire episode. This seems to indicate that we do have a soul independent of the body.

Again, I have free will, fuck him. Near death experience? I'm skeptical of those just because the body is under so much trauma, corridors and such sound like blacking out to me, I can see room for dreams as the body loses consciousness.

In essence, the atheist stands in the middle of this universe which is literally teeming with evidence of supernatural activities past and present and insists “No, I don’t see anything. There is no proof here.” Claiming "nature is all there is" is little different than claiming "our solar systems is all there is" and then ignoring all evidence to the contrary.

WTF? This is drivel.

In summary, atheism seems be a somewhat bizarre, surreal belief system. The insistence on “nature only” twists their world outlook irrationally. The entire universe is a machine which somehow functions eternally and automatically, with no creator or designer. Everything is caused by the innate natural properties of the universe. In the unlikely event that we fully understood them, we could reconstruct everything which has ever happened and predict everything which will happen, out to infinity. We ourselves are also robots who have no choice; we just imagine that we do.

In summary, Judaism seems be a somewhat bizarre, surreal belief system. The insistence on “god only” twists their world outlook irrationally. The entire universe is a machine which somehow functions eternally due to a creator or designer. Everything is caused by the god.

or I could've used the Flying Spaghetti Monster, take your pick.

And again, with the free will bullshit and more insults.

There is no meaning and no purpose, no judge and no justice, no morality and no ethics, no good and no evil, no soul and no future beyond death, no choice. Everything just exists, for no reason. Taken to its logical conclusion, atheism seems to be nihilistic and even leans toward madness.

Fuck this asshole. He can talk like this but I am not so low as to tell Jewish jokes. Fuck this guy.


His final paragraph is more insulting bullshit. This star hugger is too narrow minded and nieve to understand the side he's debating against. This essay would be great for the non-thinking jewish lemming, but it's not for public consumption, this guy's a star hugging ass.

[shtreimel]

this guy's a star hugging ass.

Tone Deft...you're a big man amonst a sea of atheists on this here board. C'mon, stop stroking the scrotum of your atheist pals on Ableton and confront the man. He'll be stunned I'm sure

If you'd like, I could hold your hand and post your responses on his blog, and have him respond.

[Tone Deft]

this guy's a star hugging ass.

Tone Deft...you're a big man amonst a sea of atheists on this here board. C'mon, stop stroking the scrotum of your atheist pals on Ableton and confront the man. He'll be stunned I'm sure

If you'd like, I could hold your hand and post your responses on his blog, and have him respond.

Done. I won't follow it, feel free to keep me posted. Seriously, the guy's got a narrow mind and is insulting. I did tone it down for him but I didn't pull any punches. So that's a blog response, never done it before, I feel so hip I want a Mac.

[shtreimel]

this guy's a star hugging ass.

Tone Deft...you're a big man amonst a sea of atheists on this here board. C'mon, stop stroking the scrotum of your atheist pals on Ableton and confront the man. He'll be stunned I'm sure

If you'd like, I could hold your hand and post your responses on his blog, and have him respond.

Done. I won't follow it, feel free to keep me posted. Seriously, the guy's got a narrow mind and is insulting. I did tone it down for him but I didn't pull any punches. So that's a blog response, never done it before, I feel so hip I want a Mac.

Huh? So did you post on his site or not? Last I checked, you didn't.

[Tone Deft]

Fixed.

You're a bad influence Shtreimel.

[NorthernMonkey]

this guy's a star hugging ass.

Tone Deft...you're a big man amonst a sea of atheists on this here board. C'mon, stop stroking the scrotum of your atheist pals on Ableton and confront the man. He'll be stunned I'm sure

If you'd like, I could hold your hand and post your responses on his blog, and have him respond.

Done. I won't follow it, feel free to keep me posted. Seriously, the guy's got a narrow mind and is insulting. I did tone it down for him but I didn't pull any punches. So that's a blog response, never done it before, I feel so hip I want a Mac.

Let it all out brother, let it out !!

[shtreimel]

Fixed.

You're a bad influence Shtreimel.

Thank you. I look forward to his response as well.

[JACKAL & HYDE]

86 pages of conjecture with no one any closer to proving if a God exists or not. Doesnt really matter what anyone says, theres no proof for or against.

[JACKAL & HYDE]

Georges LeMaitres Big Bang aka "The standard model" and Hubble's Law come to mind. The Universe is expanding. That means that the Universe itself is expanding from nothing into unknown infinity. Not 15 Billion years ago there was this big black area of empty space and all of a sudden an explosion happened within it and all this matter started flying around creating everything. The known Universe we see today is still the expanding explosion itself. Cosmic background radiation prooves this.

So I guess the question is, what was before the bang?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The atheistic assertion that “there is no proof of the supernatural” merely means “there is no proof which will satisfy me”. However, we do have scientific evidence that the universe was created from nothing 15 billion years ago.

Wrong. 'no wording to satisfy me...' There's enough evidence for me to conclude that there is no god. The universe was NOT created from nothing, i'd like to see his source on that.

[Tone Deft]

Georges LeMaitres Big Bang aka "The standard model" and Hubble's Law come to mind. The Universe is expanding. That means that the Universe itself is expanding from nothing into unknown infinity. Not 15 Billion years ago there was this big black area of empty space and all of a sudden an explosion happened within it and all this matter started flying around creating everything. The known Universe we see today is still the expanding explosion itself. Cosmic background radiation prooves this.

So I guess the question is, what was before the bang?

No. The universe is expanding at different speeds which indicates that it's a series of expansions and shrinkings. Take a rubber band, put some dots on it, pull on it and watch how some dots move faster than others. That's what's been observed of different celestial bodies in the universe, they are moving away/toward us at different speeds. So, it's thought that the universe has and always will expand, contract, expand, contract...


Shtreimel - I can't believe you got me to flame an old man, we'll see what his temperment is like.