1. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #200266 by djspideyspinster on June 27, 2008 at 8:02 am

Galactor,

Thank you for reading a few paragraphs of Mr. Plantinga's review. I appreciate your time.

Respectfully

2. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #188287 by djspideyspinster on June 3, 2008 at 6:36 pm

epeeist,

1) Dr. William Lane Craig's "credentials" are free to see here: reasonablefaith.org, as are his articles, debates, etc. His credentials speak for themselves.

2) If by "advocate" you mean that I think Dawkins should debate Dinesh, you are correct! Why not? Isn't religion the evil that needs to be extinguished from the world? Why not take every opportunity to expose the falsehoods spoken by D'Souza, etc?

2) Everyone has a bais; "What is the right bais?" is the the question

3)I hope you don't get your "empirical evidence" for atheism at wikipedia (just kidding!)

Galactor, (cool name)

1) I will read the above references and thank you.

2) When did I inform this site that I hadn't read The God Delusion? Wasn't that some months ago? Perhaps I'm not the only one who has some catching up to do. Perhaps I could have read the book since then? Or perhaps I could be in the process of reading it right now? Or perhaps I have listened to Mr. Dawkins and his numerous debates? (McGrath, Lennox, etc.)

For example, in his debate with John Lennox, did he not discuss and explain each of his main arguments put forth in The God Delusion? Could I not have picked-up on his confidence there and in his various articles on this website?

3) Your criticism of Mr. Plantinga's argument that "Dawkins doesn't understand theology" reminds me of your argument that goes something like this: "djspideyspinster doesn't agree with Mr. Dawkins and months ago hadn't read The GD, therefore, ignore him.

4) I believe that the readers of these threads to be intelligent enough to discern who they want to read and respond to and who they don't. Do they require you to give them advice about how to handle those who post? I doubt it.

5)I don't respond to name-calling. That's called ad homenin argumentation, but I'm quite sure you already knew that.

6) I posted the link to provide an alternative point of view on The GD by a respected philosopher. Doesn't studying alternate viewpoints help further understanding? I believe that to be a good thing.

Thanks again for the comments and both of you take care

3. Richard Dawkins Responds to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #187417 by djspideyspinster on June 2, 2008 at 5:57 am

I believe many on this particular thread (atheist and theist) agree that Dawkins exercised poor judgment in comparing Shmuley to Hitler. Dawkins should have just acknowledged the fact, apologized, and moved on. And to be honest, I really don't care if a speaker is delivering his message by shouting, singing, writing, etc., I just want to know if the message is true. Granted, I would rather listen to a skilled speaker than a screamer, however, I will still listen; maybe with earplugs, but I'll listen! :-)

I believe it to be poor judgment on the part of Dawkins to not debate the likes of D'Souza or Dr. William Lane Craig (whom he also turned down). It communicates a lack of confidence, in my opinion, which is contrary to the good Professor's book, The God Delusion. If theists truly do believe "myths," and "fairy tales," why not take EVERY opportunity to expose this? Surely it would be an easy task for someone as "brilliant" as Dawkins, yes? I believe that Mr. Dawkins is beginning to understand why philosopher, Dr. Alvin Plantinga, when reviewing Dawkins' book wrote: "You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best sophomoric, but that would be unfair to sophomores; the fact is (grade inflation aside), many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a sophomore philosophy class (http://www.christianitytoday.com/bc/2007/002/1.21.html). Indeed.

4. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #180101 by djspideyspinster on May 14, 2008 at 8:14 am

I have to agree with many on this forum that Dawkins has made an error here. I have watched Boteach's "speech" and I agree with many on here that it's poorly presented. However, that doesn't make any of his statements false. I believe that should be the goal: to point out falsehood with reason and evidence. Granted, many will not be willing to hear, however, some will and those are the people you want to educate. Professor Dawkins would have done better to point out what he believed to be false in Boteach's statements and also answered Boteach's challenge to debate, whether accepting or rejecting, it looks poor to not even address it, in my opinion. It will be interesting to see how this transpires, if at all.

5. My Response to Rabbi Shmuley Boteach

Comment #177533 by djspideyspinster on May 9, 2008 at 8:52 am

Dear Mr. Dawkins,

I believe that Boteach challenged you to a debate via his website, no? Are you going to take up the challenge? Just curious! Interested in your thoughts if you have the time.

Respectfully
Dj Spidey Spinster

6. Dawkins: I'm a cultural Christian

Comment #113687 by djspideyspinster on January 20, 2008 at 10:36 am

allanw,

I have been thinking about your comments on our blog and feel that I owe you a sincere apology. We merely desire to weigh the truth of ideas and the validity of worldviews at Truth Bomb Apologetics and I am guilty of taking a "swipe" at atheists and am truly sorry. It certainly does not represent the Christ I desire to honor with my life. Thank you for your respectful critique and in the future I will be more sensitive.

Take care,
DJ Spidey Spinster
Truth Bomb Apologetics

7. Dawkins: I'm a cultural Christian

Comment #112967 by djspideyspinster on January 18, 2008 at 10:47 am

allanw,

Thank you very much for the inquiry. We appreciate your checking out the blog and respectful response to our article, "Merry Christmas...Richard Dawkins?"

First off, I want to assure you that I did not mean to be insulting or "childish" and was merely having some fun. I'm sure that you can appreicate this, especially if you are a fan of Mr. Hitchens, Mr. Harris, and/or Mr. Dawkins. They tend to take some shots and make some jokes, but it's all in good fun...at least from my end it is.

Second, I do not think it uncommon to use quotes to build upon a point that one wants to make, especially in a blog like format. Please don't misunderstand my main point; it was simply:

1) Dawkins obviously detests the God of the OT, which he has the right to do.
2) Then he says he is a cultural Christian.
3) These two ideas clearly seem to conflict.

Mr. D'Souza's article (yes, I am award of his award; I do not agree with D'Souza on every point, nor do I believe him to be the best Christianity has to offer in it's defense; that would be William Lane Craig, see reasonablefaith.org), I felt, made a valid point and I wanted to hightlight that and have some fun with it while making a point. Mainly, ideas have consequences.

I will say that I admire the zeal, passion, and determination of the atheist camp and wish that more believers would seek after reasonable answers for what they believe.

Finally, answers are out there and I encourage you to consider all arguments, as I try to do. Perhaps you could check out some of the links we offer.

Again, thank you so very much for your time.

Sincerely,
DJ Spidey Spinster
Truthbomb Apologetics

8. Dawkins: I'm a cultural Christian

Comment #112805 by djspideyspinster on January 18, 2008 at 5:42 am

A little belated Merry Christmas "love" for Richard Dawkins...sort of!

See http://www.truthbomb.blogspot.com/

9. Jail for creationist row killer

Comment #98748 by djspideyspinster on December 14, 2007 at 7:34 am

US Limey,

I have to agree with you here. For me to try and form an opinion and force it on all creationists or all evolutionists from this drunken argument would be obsurd.

Undoubtedly there are both creationists and evolutionists who have done and will do stupid things, but that has little to do with which one is true.

10. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95138 by djspideyspinster on December 7, 2007 at 12:26 pm

ADH,
I have always enjoyed Habermas' work. It will be interesting to see the response. I hope it's not, "Oh, he's a Christian therefore can't be taken seriously."

One more for everyone:
http://www.christian-thinktank.com/jesusref.html

Here's a little preview for you:

"We have a good deal of information about the polemical and often bitter arguments Christians, Jews, and pagans had with one another in the early centuries. But the early Christians' opponents all accepted that Jesus existed, taught, had disciples, worked miracles, and was put to death on a Roman cross. As in our own day, debate and disagreement centred largely not on the story but on the significance of Jesus.

"Today nearly all historians, whether Christians or not, accept that Jesus existed and that the gospels contain plenty of valuable evidence which has to be weighed and assessed critically. There is general agreement that with the possible exception of Paul, we know far more about Jesus of Nazareth than about any first- or second-century Jewish or pagan religious teacher."

Later

11. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95127 by djspideyspinster on December 7, 2007 at 12:04 pm

Found a great resource here that reviews the non-biblical references to Jesus from antiquity. Gary Habermas (has debated Anthony Flew on the resurrection of Christ) has studied this topic like no other.

See Chapter 9 "Ancient Non-Christian Sources"

http://www.garyhabermas.com/books/historicaljesus/historicaljesus.htm#ch9

Also, check out Habermas' results after reading over 1400 sources by scholars on the resurrection since 1975 to the 2005! Interesting stuff! Enjoying the dialogue.
Check it out:

http://www.garyhabermas.com/articles/J_Study_Historical_Jesus_3-2_2005/J_Study_Historical_Jesus_3-2_2005.htm

Habermas honestly approaches the topic of the reliability of Josephus (and the other sources) and I believe brings clarity to the topic. Enjoy and have a great one.

12. The Pagan Christ

Comment #95014 by djspideyspinster on December 7, 2007 at 7:09 am

I love truth. It is my desire to learn the truth, which is why I read articles and comment boards such as these and others written by atheists, agnostics, and Christians. I enjoy credible scholarship and exploring both sides of a debate. I don't care what the person believes that is writing an article, I want to know, as Mr. Dawkins often says, "Is it true?"

Tom Harpur may be many things, but a scholar he is not. The following links will expose that to any willing to read and consider the points made:

1) http://www.tektonics.org/jesusexist/jesusexisthub.html
2)http://www.tektonics.org/harpur01.html

I realize those that are fimiliar with the author, J.P. Holding, may not like his approach, however, it's apparent that most of you have NO problem with name calling and I encourage you to actually consider the points he makes and not how he makes them.