1. Who Was More Important: Lincoln or Darwin?

Comment #201739 by Stevie B on June 30, 2008 at 7:53 am

Unfortunately, as with the case of a lot of American articles, the gist seems to be - American hero = world wide importance, everyone else = not so important

2. Faith schools undermined by 'Government witch hunt'

Comment #201736 by Stevie B on June 30, 2008 at 7:50 am

faith schools suffering from a witch hunt

The irony is almost unbearable. What next, Neo Nazis complaining that they're being treated as sub-humans, or the Klu Klux Klan complaining that they're the victims of a lynch mob mentality??

3. Aliens need Christ's redemption, too

Comment #201718 by Stevie B on June 30, 2008 at 6:50 am

FAO Apeseed

You're thinking of one of my favourite short stories, The Streets of Ashkelon by Harry Harrison.

From Wiki-

An atheist merchant, John Garth, is the only human on an alien planet where the primitive natives have no concept whatsoever of religion or sin. He is teaching them the scientific method.

One day, the merchant is surprised by the arrival of a missionary, who is intent on proselytizing to the natives, despite the merchant's best efforts to dissuade him.

Several days later, the missionary triumphantly tells the merchant that catechism lessons are going very well, and that he has just finished teaching the natives about the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ. The merchant immediately begins making preparations to flee the planet, and orders the missionary to come with him. The missionary refuses, not understanding what's wrong; before the merchant can explain, several natives arrive with a crudely-built cross. They seize the missionary and force him to drag the cross through their town: in accordance with what the merchant taught them about the scientific method, they are experimentally testing the hypothesis that if they crucify the missionary in accordance with what he taught them about the Gospels, he will miraculously rise from the dead three days later and thereby redeem them.

Three days later, after the hypothesis has been disproved, the natives ask the merchant what went wrong, and if it was because of their sin.

4. Atheists don't believe in anything

Comment #82317 by Stevie B on October 26, 2007 at 3:35 am

I think its been posted on this site before, but for me this is the perfect summation of what I, as an atheist, 'believe' -

"YOUR PETITIONERS ARE ATHEISTS and they define their life-style as follows. An Atheist loves himself and his fellowman instead of a god. An Atheist knows that heaven is something for which we should work now — here on earth — for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist thinks that he can get no help through prayer but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue, and enjoy it. An Atheist thinks that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellowman can he find the understanding that will help to a life of fulfilment. Therefore, he seeks to know himself and his fellowman rather than to know a god. An Atheist knows that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist knows that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man. He wants an ethical way of life. He knows that we cannot rely on a god, nor channel action into prayer, nor hope for an end to troubles in the hereafter. He knows that we are our brother's keeper and keepers of our lives; that we are responsible persons, that the job is here and the time is now."


~ Madalyn Murray (later O'Hair), preamble to Murray v. Curlett, U.S. Supreme Court, April 27, 1961

5. Do you have to read up on leprechology before disbelieving in them?

Comment #70835 by Stevie B on September 17, 2007 at 3:55 am

These 'reviews' are really getting tiresome. In the vein of the postmodern essay generator, couldn't someone knock up a God Delusion review generator, to save all these hacks the trouble? Press a button, and hey presto an instant review including all or some of the usual comments in new and random arrangements:

'shrill'
'arrogant'
'atheist fundamentalist'
'sophisticated belief system'
'you cant prove God doesnt exist'
'look at all the good religion does'
'why does Dawkins hate god?'
'why does Dawkins hate christmas?'
'why does Dawkins hate leprechauns?'
'atheism is a belief system'
'spirituality'
'how can you have morals without religion'
'Hitler was an atheist'
'Stalin was an atheist'
'Pol Pot was an atheist'
'jesus was an atheist'

Any other suggestions?

6. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #31377 by Stevie B on April 12, 2007 at 7:40 am

Mark

" apart from the lack of naming of the other nations"

But thats the point! Consider the following two prophecies.
1) Manchester United will win the FA cup next season
2) A team in read from the north west will win the FA cup next season

Prophecy one is pretty watertight. For no 2, if Man Utd win, i still get confirmation of divine inspiration. If Liverpool won, again no problem. If Arsenal win, well they play in red, and when i said north west, i obviously meant north west of where i was when i made the prophecy. Without much effort, i have already trebled my chances of being right by avoiding specifics, and I'm sure i could find a way of matching up whoever won to my prophecy, some more tenous than others. Its called playing the percentages.

I must bow to your superior knowledge of Ezekial 29, but I'm guessing that, even if it was written prior to the events mentioned, predicting that Bablyon would attack Tyre might have been like predicting Man Utd would win a trophy ie a pretty safe bet. If it was divine inspiration, why arent the other nations mentioned?

7. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #31343 by Stevie B on April 12, 2007 at 4:50 am

Put me down for a copy!

Pity about all those mesoamericans though, generation after generation condemned to hell for the crime of not recognising Christ as their saviour - becuase of a poor excuse that they didnt even know he existed...thank God the Christians turned up to save them.

8. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #31340 by Stevie B on April 12, 2007 at 4:34 am

"Every one knew he could foretell wars and famines, though that was not so hard, for there was always a war and generally a famine somewhere."
- Mark Twain, The Mysterious Stranger

Although most of the obvious (and not so obvious) arguements have already been made far more eloquently that I could, I felt I had to contribute as I am really enjoying this thread. Its far more interesting than the ones where everyone is in total agreement.

My position, like most here, is one of extreme scepticism when it comes to accepting the Biblical 'prophecies' (if thats what they actually were) as having come true. My two'penneth worth is as follows.

Firstly, Mark, I would ask you to follow the link where the quotation comes from, 'prophecy for dummies.' http://www.skepticreport.com/lighterside/prophecydummies.htm
I think it sums up my position better than ever i could. I think the most relevant section is the first, 'Retroactive Shoehorning: a prophets best friend.' The title says it all.

Secondly, if having prophecies that come true is a mark (sorry no pun intended) of divine inspiration, what are we to make of the Aztec prophecy that in the year 1519, their god would return from the east in the shape of a white man. This proved to be spectacularly precise, even down to the year, far more precise than anything in the bible. By your logic, you should accept that this proves the correctness of the Aztecs faith, and should start worshipping Queztlcoatl immediately. If not, why not?

The other problem I have with these prophecies is the 'Oolon Coluphid' problem - if you are right, then we have cast iron, rock solid proof of Gods existence. What then is the need for faith? And if God is demonstrating himself so clearly and unambigously, what about free will? A common response as to why God fails to intervene today is that this would remove the need for faith and render free will meaningless. You cant have it both ways - either God is happy to prove his existence clearly and unambigously or he is not.

Lastly, and slightly off topic, I presume that you believe God made the world for mans benefit. My minor addition to the mass of evidence against this is this - the best way man has to tell time is marking the passage of the sun. Vital for farmers (as most of Gods early creations would have been presumably.) So does he make a system that is perfect for mans needs? Does he make the earth go around the sun in a nice, easy whole number of days? 365? 366? Errr, no. 365 days, 5 hours, 48 minutes and 46 seconds. Making any attempt to create a meaningful calender fraught with problems. Adding a day every four years help, but becuase the year isnt even a decent fraction, being slightly short of 365 and 1/4 days, even this means any calender will degenerate. So much for the anthropic principle. Surely a nice, human brain friendly number would have been better evidence of Gods existence than a few vague prophecies?

And I cant believe nobodys pointed out yet that atheism is a non-prophet organisation?