1. Gods and earthlings

Comment #166269 by coolwainy on April 23, 2008 at 4:25 am

I don't see how Dawkins' argument adds up: 'Entities capable of designing anything, whether they be human engineers or interstellar aliens, must be complex - and therefore, statistically improbable.'

Surely in order for something to be created, its creator must be more probable than the thing it created otherwise it could not have created it in the first place? The more improbable and complex something is, the more probable it must be that it was created by something.

And even if we are improbable, WE'RE HERE, so surely there is far more of a probability of a God existing than Dawkins gives credit for - I don't see how he can assert that God 'almost certainly doesn't exist', yet at the same time claim that it is religious people who claim to know everything. In order to disprove God you would need to know everything, so there's no way Dawkins could be almost certain that God doesn't exist.

2. Catholic condom ban helping AIDS spread in Latam: U.N.

Comment #81120 by coolwainy on October 24, 2007 at 7:16 am

Yes but if people actually waited until they are married to have sex (as the Bible says), then they wouldn't contract AIDS in the first place!!

3. Poll: Which religion do you associate with?

Comment #65180 by coolwainy on August 23, 2007 at 5:13 am

Yes but this is a poll of people who watch the Larry King Show and is not in any way representative of the population so it has no meaning whatsoever. I'm not sure why this news item is even on here as it doesn't prove anything.

4. A force for good?

Comment #59080 by coolwainy on July 27, 2007 at 8:17 am

the_assayer, thanks for your message. In answer to your question yes I do find hungarianelephants' comment about Jesus and the way he's crossed out much of the Apostles Creed offensive. I'm also glad to see that you do not condone Goldy's comments - ironically they just prove my point entirely.

Yes I do believe in God because I have seen evidence throughout my life of his existence - in fact everyday I see that evidence. I have seen a great number of people changed for the better when they have accepted Him into their lives, and have not known anyone to regret doing so. That the Bible guides me morally is not a reason in itself to believe in God. However, I am of the opinion that the Bible offers a complete world view and moral code for how to live on this Earth, and I believe that it is the word of God.

I have read the God Delusion and whilst I take Dawkins' points (and there is no doubt he makes some good ones), it has not caused me to lose my faith in God (and I read it with an open mind). However, I feel he does not tackle the core issues and tends to get side-tracked on irrelevant, side issues.

When I have more time I will develop these comments.

5. A force for good?

Comment #59023 by coolwainy on July 27, 2007 at 2:18 am

What a good load of sense Paul Vallely talks - in fact this is the best article I've seen on this site. There seem to be a lot of responses on here which are phrased in an arrogant, condescending manner and really do not offer a satisfactory rebuttal of Vallely's points. In fact they don't do athiests any favours at all. For instance words beginning with 'f' and ending with 'k' do not constitute a good argument and neither does describing someone as a 'bald, fat man'. This just adds zero credibility to your argument I'm afraid.

And hungarianelephant, I don't understand why you have to be so derogatory and sarcastic - we know you're an atheist so why do you have to make your point in such a manner?!

6. Do We Really Need Bad Reasons To Be Good?

Comment #36091 by coolwainy on April 30, 2007 at 7:03 am

The mistake Harris makes is his assumption that Christians only do good deeds as a result of fearing God, or as a ticket to heaven. Most Christians are alert enough to understand that a God who knows people's every thoughts would be intelligent enough to detect that someone is doing good primarily in order to earn His respect. In fact the Bible states 'do not test God' and instructs us to be as selfless as possible with our giving, and only He knows whether we are doing so out of a love for Him or simply to make ourselves look good or feel better. If you truly love a person, you would do anything for them because you love them unconditionally, not for fear that they will walk out on you. The same is true of loving God. The Bible says 'Love others as you love yourself'.

In a worst case scenario (ie assuming God doesn't exist), let's say that a Christian does give his or her time or money to the poor simply out of a fear of 'God' - surely this is better than not giving anything at all? Harris hasn't mentioned all the athiests who give nothing because there's no reason to give other than out of their own goodwill. I have no doubt that there are a good many athiests who do good or give generously to the poor, but I'm pretty sure that that percentage is far lower than the amount of Christians who give, regardless of whether they are doing so for the right reasons (it does say in the Bible that we should give 10% of our income as a tithe). Forgive me for the crudeness of the example, but surely a society based on Christian values where people give 10% of their incomes (and more) is better than a secular one where people only give if they feel the urge to.

7. Was Muhammad Epileptic?

Comment #36032 by coolwainy on April 30, 2007 at 2:38 am

Yet more proof (as if we needed it) of the fallibility of Islam. Islam was brought into being through Muhammad's desire to unite the Arabic people - and to create a rival religion to Christianty. It was created over 600 years after Jesus lived, and the reports on Jesus which Muhammad received were distorted at best - therefore their misunderstanding of Christianity. Since then, Islam has grown through its use of violence, the fear of punishment and pressure placed on Muslims by their families. So much for the peace and love which Islam preaches.

8. Reply to a Christian

Comment #35401 by coolwainy on April 27, 2007 at 4:20 am

BaronOchs, I agree in a way that some of the miracles that Jesus is said to have performed may be considered to be trivial by the fact that they only affected a handful of people, but surely his reasons for doing so were to provide an example of how to treat others? By feeding the 5000 he was demonstrating that we should look out for our fellow human beings when they are in times of need and give to those less fortunate. A selfless being would not perform a miracle to show off or prove his divinity after all.

I would argue that Jesus proving Fermat's last theorem is far more trivial than feeding the 5000 or indeed any of the other miracles he performed - how would that in any way benefit humanity? This touches on the excellent points that Nick makes in comment 16. on here.

9. Reply to a Christian

Comment #35391 by coolwainy on April 27, 2007 at 3:51 am

Mark, there is an excellent book entitled 'The Case for Christ' in which an atheist sets out to disprove that Christ existed and was who he said he was and ends up coming up with the opposite conclusion through careful study of the evidence.

10. Reply to a Christian

Comment #35383 by coolwainy on April 27, 2007 at 3:28 am

'Why doesn't the Bible say anything about electricity, about DNA, or about the actual age and size of the universe?' The purpose of the Bible is not to explain these things. It provides a guide for how best to live our lives, and provides us with a perfect example in human form of how to do so, which no other religion does. (I understand what Mr Harris is saying about how Christians would perceive other religions, but we have very good reasons for discrediting other religions, reasons which other religions cannot in turn use to discredit Christianity. There is not nearly enough room to go into these here, but there are enough books which explain these reasons).

'...imagine how good a book could be if it were written by the Creator of the universe. Such a book could contain a chapter on mathematics that, after two thousand years of continuous use, would still be the richest source of mathematical insight the earth has ever seen.' This again is completely missing the point - Mr Harris obviously does not understand what the Bible is if he thinks it should contain a section on maths. How does maths explain how to treat our brother or sister as we would treat ourselves, or how to forgive or how to love or lead a selfless life or how to give what we have to the poor?

11. Street Evangelist Saves 300 Souls From Enjoying Park

Comment #35073 by coolwainy on April 26, 2007 at 6:14 am

You don't have to be an athiest to realise this guy's a complete idiot - but don't judge religious people on minority preachers like this. He obviously has a screw loose, but then so do many athiests.

12. Study: Religion is Good for Kids

Comment #35056 by coolwainy on April 26, 2007 at 5:17 am

Some highly predictable responses from posters here. Yet more evidence that religion has a positive impact on society and Rtambree's only response is 'bollocks'. That I'm afraid does not win the argument. And then we have people accusing the study of being biased - another predictable response. Dutch-labrat - the article is not saying religion is true, that is not the argument here. And what kind of statement is that anyway? Only one religion at most can be true, so don't place all religion under the same umbrella.

13. Imagine No Religion

Comment #34800 by coolwainy on April 25, 2007 at 9:26 am

Imagine a world without religion - welcome to a world of total anarchy, no morals and a society in pieces. Dawkins is living in fantasyland if he thinks a world without religion (or should I say Christianity), would be a better place. How can a society work where as long as the majority agree with something it becomes acceptable? And don't cite religion as the reason for violence - it would still exist to an even greater degree. Hitler and Stalin did not need religion as an excuse to start a war. Also don't make the mistake of tarring all religions with the same brush - you cannot blame law-abiding Christians for the acts of Muslim terrorists, that is just naive.

14. Genie shows barred by Islam, clerics say

Comment #34775 by coolwainy on April 25, 2007 at 7:37 am

Completely agree with you RascoHeldall, but why is this article even on here? There's no point in tarring all 'religion' with the same brush. We all know Islam is a nonsense and is destructive to civilisation - I have read about it in great detail to be able to conclude this, but please don't put Islam under the same umbrella as Christianity - it's a completely different kettle of fish.

15. Where Is Atheism When Bad Things Happen?

Comment #34771 by coolwainy on April 25, 2007 at 7:23 am

'It is hardly surprising that Dinesh D'Souza is once again not only profoundly mistaken but also deeply offensive', Mr Dawkins comments in his customary innocent tone. What hypocrisy! The vast majority of the God Delusion is deeply offensive to its critics (not to mention misinformed, biased, irrelevant to the argument and bitter). It's a breath of fresh air to see someone actually talking sense on this site in the form of Mr D'Souza - please let's have more articles like it. The majority of posts on this site have completely missed the point or are in fact offensive themselves when that's exactly what they are accusing Mr D'Souza of.