Richard Dawkins is a super coward

reply to post by windword

But I disagree the premise that atheists and agnostics know more about the Bible and Religion than evangelicals and Catholics, because they study in order to better argue against religion. I think that most atheists and agnostics were raised in religious environments and tried like hell to make sense of their religion by pouring over scriptures and books. Finally, coming up empty, they abandoned religion and they know why

I feel bad for you.

As a cynical person myself, I've exhausted every avenue of research into the legitimacy of my faith.

I've never come up empty. In fact, it's becoming more and more clear to me that atheists are coming up empty...........

They cling to evolutionary theory as if it disproves God. This is their silver bullet...........yet it's not even in contradiction to scripture. It's a bit unnerving from my end to see all the brainwashed atheists out there, but it's a function of the society that the Bible prophecied.

reply to post by windword

But I disagree the premise that atheists and agnostics know more about the Bible and Religion than evangelicals and Catholics, because they study in order to better argue against religion. I think that most atheists and agnostics were raised in religious environments and tried like hell to make sense of their religion by pouring over scriptures and books. Finally, coming up empty, they abandoned religion and they know why

I feel bad for you.

As a cynical person myself, I've exhausted every avenue of research into the legitimacy of my faith.

I've never come up empty. In fact, it's becoming more and more clear to me that atheists are coming up empty...........

They cling to evolutionary theory as if it disproves God. This is their silver bullet...........yet it's not even in contradiction to scripture. It's a bit unnerving from my end to see all the brainwashed atheists out there, but it's a function of the society that the Bible prophecied.

reply to post by LightOrange

The real funny thing I find about people who support William Lane Craig is how they could possibly see a link between his arguments and an organised religion. WLC's arguments support agnosticism at best. How you get from his arguments to a single god who wants to micromanage your morals, sex life, life views, views on creation, and how you feel about your enemies and deligates such requests through other human beings is a stretch I have yet to see any reasoning behind.

It's clear to me that you don't understand scripture from your comments. You've missed the point of the Gospel entirely.

Also, your points are completely off target and redundant.

This isn't about organized religion. Everybody knows organized religion is stupid. In fact, most organized religions don't promote critical thinking.

The point of this thread is why RDawk is afraid to debate William Lane Craig. He's supposed to be very intelligent.

reply to post by sdb93awd

I've made my case excruciatingly clear. I've yet to hear one thing showing me that his excuses are valid.

That's because you cover your ears and eyes and sing softly to yourself, "La La lala La La"

He knows that his weak arguments against "young earthers" won't hold water against a stout opponent like WLC and I'm sure he'd like to continue selling books to idiots.........They may not sell as well after he gets humiliated.

You're delusional and maybe you should seek help.

reply to post by windword

I'm happy to admit that a god exists, providing that god is defined as the consciousness of the collective of everything that exists. But, no, his / their god doesn't exist within existence, but outside of existence, and through its will, and it's will only, created the universe in one word and the wave of its magic hand!

Good to see that you have it all figured out with your .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of knowledge about the universe. I wish I could make quantup leaps in logic like that...........

reply to post by windword

That's because you cover your ears and eyes and sing softly to yourself, "La La lala La La"

Show me one excuse of yours(for Dawkins) that I haven't completely refuted and invalidated.

You're delusional and maybe you should seek help.

But somehow I've destroyed everything that you've said. Must feel horrible....

reply to post by sdb93awd

“I would say that God has the right to give and take life as he sees fit. Children die all the time! If you believe in the salvation, as I do, of children, who die, what that meant is that the death of these children meant their salvation. People look at this [genocide] and think life ends at the grave but in fact this was the salvation of these children, who were far better dead…than being raised in this Canaanite culture."
-William Lane Craig

Craig is a moronic thug who worships a child murdering rapist.

As a man with a Ph.D. he is an embarrassment to philosophy and a poster child for the psychopathy and abuse that runs rampant through religious institutions.

Your god is such a piece of **** that he rapes a woman and then kills her son.

reply to post by Wertdagf

Craig is a moronic thug who worships a child murdering rapist.

Thats weird. I'm a Christian as well. I know a lot of Jewish people too.

None of us think rape is ok.......maybe your ignorant of what the Bible is about??

As a man with a Ph.D. he is an embarrassment to philosophy and a poster child for the psychopathy and abuse that runs rampant through religious institutions.

That's odd. It seems to me that Craigs ideas are completely independent from organized religion. Another case of your ignorance???

sdb93awd
reply to post by windword

 

I'm happy to admit that a god exists, providing that god is defined as the consciousness of the collective of everything that exists. But, no, his / their god doesn't exist within existence, but outside of existence, and through its will, and it's will only, created the universe in one word and the wave of its magic hand!

Good to see that you have it all figured out with your .0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of knowledge about the universe. I wish I could make quantup leaps in logic like that...........

LOL

Is this you refuting my charge that WLC's logic isn't logic. That he postulates a hole in a theory and fills it with god, and then says "If god, then my god"? LOL

Yeah, No!

reply to post by sdb93awd


Did god ask Mary before he impregnated her? I must have missed that part.

You do know what rape is right? The biblical story is an angel saying "hey don't be scared. You've just been raped, and this child going to be murdered by the people who worship your rapist."

sdb93awd
reply to post by Wertdagf

 

Craig is a moronic thug who worships a child murdering rapist.

Thats weird. I'm a Christian as well. I know a lot of Jewish people too.

None of us think rape is ok.......maybe your ignorant of what the Bible is about??

As a man with a Ph.D. he is an embarrassment to philosophy and a poster child for the psychopathy and abuse that runs rampant through religious institutions.

That's odd. It seems to me that Craigs ideas are completely independent from organized religion. Another case of your ignorance???

edit on 17-9-2013 by sdb93awd because: (no reason given)

Your god is such a piece of **** that he rapes a woman and then kills her son.

You don't have a God for me to attack in an ignorant fashion. Crap. What am I to do now? I'll pray that God finds you and saves you. Is this really the only life that you want? This earth?

reply to post by windword

Is this you refuting my charge that WLC's logic isn't logic. That he postulates a hole in a theory and fills with god, and then says "If god, then my god"? LOL

No. It's just me reiterating to you how little you know.....and that maybe you shouldn't jump the gun with your broad statements of assumed knowledge.

You probly fell for Dawkins telling you that Evolution had something to do with the Bible huh?


With all these fantastic points y'all are making, it should be a walk in the park for Dawkins. Heck, YOU guys could destroy him.

You guys need to write Dawkins and tell him how easy this will be! At the very least he'd have some credibility again.....Oh wait he only speaks with Catholic clergymen and young earth creationists. How boring and redundant.....

reply to post by sdb93awd


So your sheepishly admitting your god is a rapist thug who murders childen? I wonder how long it took before mary could walk right again? It probably hurt a lot luckily he did it in her sleep so she couldn't resist or be afraid, that was mighty kind of him.

So intellectually honest of you. I must have stepped into and alternate reality.

It's becoming more and more clear to me that the atheists don't want to hear new ideas. They've already figured out that God definitely doesn't exist.

How smart of them.

It's almost as smart as blindly supporting one political party or another. Same concept.

reply to post by sdb93awd


Dawkins has spoken. He has put it out there for all to see, why he refuses to debate William Lane Craig. He doesn't give a fig what you think.



More importantly, in all your efforts, you have failed to convince us of Dawkins' cowardliness.

reply to post by sdb93awd


I don't want to hear new ideas I want to see evidence.

Anyone can come up with a new idea or god theory but they are imagination fodder without evidence.

reply to post by windword

More importantly, in all your efforts, you have failed to convince us of Dawkins' cowardliness.

He doesn't seem like much of a champion to me.

Publishing an excuse online towards someone not worth his time(hmm). His publishing of an excuse says that he IS worth his time.

His excuses are all invalid considering his actions as well(debating young earth creationists and clergy). These are easy targets. Also, he writes books correlating evolution and Christianity. This IS HIS WHEELHOUSE.

No true champion would run from a challenge. Unless this "champion" is content to sell ignorant books to close minded people who have already clung to evolution as their bullet against Christianity.

Your champion looks like a content bafoon. He likes his niche market consisting of: idiots

reply to post by sdb93awd


Why does William Lane Craig openly support the same logic that Andrea Yates used when she drowned her 5 children?

Would you care to explain this

“I would say that God has the right to give and take life as he sees fit. Children die all the time! If you believe in the salvation, as I do, of children, who die, what that meant is that the death of these children meant their salvation. People look at this [genocide] and think life ends at the grave but in fact this was the salvation of these children, who were far better dead…than being raised in this Canaanite culture."
-William Lane Craig

"It was the seventh deadly sin. My children weren't righteous. They stumbled because I was evil. The way I was raising them, they could never be saved. They were doomed to perish in the fires of hell." Andrea Yates

This is the reason Dawkins wont debate WLC.

I'm not sure what people think debates on these topics actually resolve, and I think they miss the point sometimes.

Why do persons like Sam Harris, Hitchens, Hamza Tzortis, Dinesh D'Souza, and others ran around the country debating each other endlessly? It's to sell books. It advances the human race not on iota. People like Harris and Dawkins and others even state openly their criticisms of the debate format, but they've done it in the past because it makes money.

William Lane Craig deserves credit for his rhetorical ability, and I respect that certainly, but this is all William Lane Craig does. You can read about some of Craig's strategies here.

There is nothing productive about running rings around a scientist after training like Rocky for years upon years in timed debating techniques. I'd be more genuinely impressed if two individuals decided to spend years researching, discussing, and working together towards some genuinely useful insights rather than orchestrating macho verbal wrestling matches.

Side note: I've attended and watched debates with the same two characters a few times, and frankly it plays out almost the exact same way every time. Sometimes I think they rehearse.

reply to post by Grimpachi

I don't want to hear new ideas I want to see evidence.

We don't know whether or not God exists

You have to think about this on a higher level.......

There will never be 100% proof of God in the physical realm.

There are also a lot of questions about darwinism and the origin of life and existence as we know it as well(abiogenesis, the power of darwinistic mechanisms, etc). Science isn't even close to figuring it out.


Why is a collaborative mindset so toxic to some of y'all?

We have almost no knowledge of the universe or even genetics.


Is it really that bad of an idea to at least keep the possibility of a designer on the table when considering new evidence(the genetic coding and recent junk dna discoveries for exmaple)??