351. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #53364 by the great teapot on July 1, 2007 at 3:12 am

All I need now is for Yorker to tell me that this website is once again worthy of his visits and I will be in Nirvana.

352. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #53363 by the great teapot on July 1, 2007 at 3:09 am

Alovrin
Thank you for your permission.
I await your next command.

353. Christopher Hitchens and Al Sharpton

Comment #53358 by the great teapot on July 1, 2007 at 2:48 am

Does Sharpton not know that the s comes before the k in asked.

354. Inferior Design: Richard Dawkins reviews Behe's lastest book

Comment #53265 by the great teapot on June 30, 2007 at 12:43 pm

PaulEmmecz
Are you a deist who does not believe in a personal god. Before I go further can you please answer that for me.

355. God Hates the World

Comment #53210 by the great teapot on June 30, 2007 at 5:40 am

There is a Pratts Bottom near me, just off the A20/M25 junction.I also sit on one everyday, but I am not letting Billy photograph it.
(If only Wee Flea wasn't on holiday Billy. How pleased he would be to see the peurile banter)

356. In Defense of Witchcraft

Comment #53197 by the great teapot on June 30, 2007 at 3:45 am

PaulEmecz.
Just like your God, if I am bigger and more powerfull than the individual that comitted the crime against my sensibilities I am, just like your God, in a position to say "you shouldn't have done that- I don't like you doing that"
How does that differ.
I would assume, though I don't know for sure, almost every atheist thinks this. Might is right.
That after all is the God principle.
The lack of no absolute morality requires no coming to terms with,it is, to me at least,self evident. But then I don't look at the world through rose coloured glasses.

357. God Hates the World

Comment #53187 by the great teapot on June 30, 2007 at 2:56 am

Re Shuggys comment quoting

"For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16

Those of us who doubt gods love should think on this. Why it brings a tear to my eye.
His ONLY son.
He gave us his ONLY son. think on that. he had only one son and he sent him to die for us.
WTF? Why are they comparing the sacrifice of the son of an omnipotent god who can create the world to that of the human sacrifice of our children. The two things are completely incompatible, but that doesn't stop them doing it, because they lack the intelligence to see the asymmetry of the comparison.
Surely god sacrificing "his son" is the equivalent of me sacrificing my toenail clippings.

This is a pet hate of mine. Watching the likes of Mcgrath drool as he thinks fondly of what his loving god is prepared to do for him makes me wretch.

358. In Defense of Witchcraft

Comment #53181 by the great teapot on June 30, 2007 at 2:16 am

We use morals to provide stability in our lives.
What has a god got to do with that.
There are no absolute morals. Morals differ from time to time and place to place. I bet they are not even converging to an absolute, as people like to think they are. So what.
The existence of absolute morality is the lamest argument for god (that is taken seriously) I have heard, and it is up against fierce competition.

359. Sally on Sunday with Alister McGrath

Comment #52868 by the great teapot on June 28, 2007 at 9:55 am

A word of warning, if you choose to listen to this you will be exposed to the travelling willburys.

360. Lecture on Neo-Darwinism

Comment #52848 by the great teapot on June 28, 2007 at 8:08 am

I am currently siting in a consulting Engineers office pretending to design some piles and ground beams while watching Richards video. If I could conduct a straw poll, I can't do it now -that will give the game away, I suspect almost 100 % of my colleagues neither believe in strange ghosts in the sky nor reject out of hand the theory of evolution. {I know this from office chatter).
Although i do live in the UK not the USofA.

361. Lecture on Neo-Darwinism

Comment #52835 by the great teapot on June 28, 2007 at 7:08 am

Perhaps we should change our careers to escape the ridicule.:P ( on second thoughts with my spelling ability perhaps I'll stick with Engineering)
Where does the :P originate from Robert?

362. Lecture on Neo-Darwinism

Comment #52808 by the great teapot on June 28, 2007 at 5:57 am

The meaning doesn't change, only the people being ridiculed.
PS I would have typed LOL after my last comment.
But at my age it doesn't feel right.

363. Lecture on Neo-Darwinism

Comment #52786 by the great teapot on June 28, 2007 at 4:47 am

"Why is it always Engineers?"

Richard I am shocked.
Try substituting the word Engineer with Blacks,Gays,Atheists etc. Doesn't sound so funny now does it. I really expected better from you.

364. In Defense of Witchcraft

Comment #52282 by the great teapot on June 26, 2007 at 4:02 pm

Alternative sounds nicer than troll atleast.
It strikes me as a little unfair to consign mind rebel to the alternative thread dump. He always offers an honest opinion and never says anything just to irritate. (unless I have misjudged).
If he sympathises with witches more power to his elbow. Perhaps he should substitute the word witch with Thor etc. Sam wasn't attacking witches afterall.

365. In Defense of Witchcraft

Comment #52270 by the great teapot on June 26, 2007 at 3:45 pm

Pewkatchoo,
this is just another version of Richards Thor analogy. No more or less childish.
If extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence then childish propositions only require childish refuting. This fits the bill nicely.
But good point Bruno we are probably underestimating the stupidity of the average believer.

366. God Hates the World

Comment #51949 by the great teapot on June 25, 2007 at 3:50 pm

The only way to stop this selfpromoting childish nonsense is to ignore it completely. Without the attention it will have no reason to exist and hopefully disappear. It has nothing to do with "sensible" religion whatsoever.

Anyway, enough about the wee flea.

367. In the name of the Father

Comment #51585 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 2:26 pm

Northern Ireland was a political battle between Ulster Unionists and Irish Republicans. The Terms Catholics and Protestants were just convenient identity markers. No religious leaders, say with the title Reverend, would ever seek to gain from the situation, surely.

368. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51576 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:49 pm

If only they would hide it from the kids.

369. His word

Comment #51570 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:27 pm

Logicel

David Baddiel is a very tounge in cheek comedian.
The self effacement of him being behind the zeitgeist etc is his main line. Don't take him too seriously. He is very "laid back".
On the other thread of this post(0r may be the last post) someone mentioned Melvyn Bragg, Now there is a typical "I used to be an atheist but I am alright now" pseudointellectual arsehole who needs some serious criticism.
(by needs serious criticism I mean disabusing of his delusion- he doesn't actually preach religion, oh my god I am a fundamentalist. Help)

370. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51567 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:11 pm

Wee Flea ,the most notorious thing about Xians is their lack of sense of humour, a close second is the scientists (lack of) sense of humour. I don't expect to see you or Richard Dawkins in the humour section of my local waterstones for quite some time.
Wee flea ,when you look in a mirror do you have reflection?

371. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51556 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 11:40 am

@ the wee flea.

I will dispense with politeness, as you have. Which part of the Thor, Tooth-fairy, Teapot, analogy do you not understand you f***w**. Your trivial arguments cut no ice on this website, you represent the infancy of human thought. David Ike means as much to the average thinking Briton as your Jesus Christ. Wake up and smell the coffee.

He's got a pineapple on his head, a pineapple on his head ....
(Bring back fantasy football.- If you google and read this David I loved the show, and would love to see it back- And if you do read this, which is your Team? - I 've always assumed Spurs, I suppose that makes me a racist SOB)

372. His word

Comment #51479 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 5:01 am

All he is saying is religion is the fear of death.
Nothing more.
I think the article was worth while if only for the imagery of the fragile butterfly of religion being broken by the giant wheel of simple logic.

373. In the name of the Father

Comment #51478 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 4:49 am

"But it is in this capacity to recognise, appreciate and respond to what is of worth that religion has its origin."

Wow, that's quite an admission from a Bishop.
Does that mean religion is man made?
Surely God compelled us to be religious during his various revelations and appearances throughout our history.
I hope his boss doesn't read that.

374. The Future Forum Presents: Christopher Hitchens and Marvin Olasky

Comment #49965 by the great teapot on June 14, 2007 at 9:42 am

Holy shit.
The most accurate 2 words I have ever heard.

375. The Future Forum Presents: Christopher Hitchens and Marvin Olasky

Comment #49963 by the great teapot on June 14, 2007 at 9:40 am

Religion doesn't poison everything.
Ok
So it must be true.

376. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49592 by the great teapot on June 12, 2007 at 1:18 pm

Dianelos wrote

"Now, experiencing having a physical body is not strictly necessary for interacting with our physical environment (one can conceive of a disembodied condition of interacting with physical things) but the presence of a physical body gives coherence and closure to our experience of the physical world, and therefore represents a better experiential environment, a better solution"

Are there any disembodied entities out there that can confirm that. Speak now or forever...
Sorry I see what you are suggesting. We could be disembodied but that would be too easy, we need a challenge. Here son you have this one lets see how you get on with it.i'll judge you when youv'e worn it out, or wrapped it round a lamp post.

Thats too easy. You have used an awful lot of sophisticated argument just to bring us back to a simple an anthropomorphic view of the world.

(Dianelos - Thanks for correcting my misspelling on your quote of my question earlier)

377. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49583 by the great teapot on June 12, 2007 at 12:50 pm

Thinks are looking up. Once upon a time the Godfrees were the "evil ones" Now we are just a virus.

378. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49107 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:56 am

Dianelos

Might I just take time out for thanking you on behalf of all this site , if i may be so presumptious, for your continuing contribution under the face of such overwhelming opposition without once losing your self control or dignity- Respect where respect is due.

379. We of little faith

Comment #49101 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:26 am

this may seem a bit crude,
and i am not even a political animal, but Tony Blair-" what a wanker"
A phoney of the first order.

380. We of little faith

Comment #49098 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:13 am

Deja fu

thanks for understanding my question and thanks for the answer.

381. We of little faith

Comment #49035 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 3:54 am

No I am not implying Buddhism has a party line I am implying that "this site" has a general common consensus of opinion on most things.Opinion about buddhism seems more divided.

382. We of little faith

Comment #49026 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 3:22 am

Buddhism seems very popular among contributors here. In fact it seems to be the only subject people can be divided on on this site. I can't help but notice there is a"party line" on various questions such as abortion, the Iraq war and homosexuality amongst otherthings, all of which have nothing to do with Religion except for the fact religion also has party lines on some subjects.
I must admitt until reading this website I had no idea how much of the nonsense side of Buddhism was added on at a later date, no doubt to someones gain.
A question I would like to ask of Buddhist adherents is "How long would the teachings of Buddha have been preserved if they weren't wrapped up in all the trappings of the other religions? How much of a shelf life does your average self improvement manual have without dressing it up as something more and how long did his ideas last before they were corrupted into the mumbo jumbo we see today.
Not a criticism just a question.

383. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49012 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 2:01 am

Dianelos

I once believed that the physical sciences explained the real world, that kept me on an even keel and allowed me to do good things. Then I realised the theories of Newton etc were just mathematical models used to predict the way things would happen within a closed system. Imagine my rage. I now have no way of understanding the world around me in a "real" sense,I feel so miserable. I must have an explanation of life,no matter how preposterous, to get me through the day. I have just read your last (now but one) post, thank you, that could just well be the preposterous notion I am looking for.

384. We of little faith

Comment #48853 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 7:42 am

Sue Blackmore was on a radio 4 program earlier this week, I forget the name and date but it was at 11pm. I was only half listening to it as it was only intended to be a lightweight stocking filler type of program.
The programe was about people who believe in strange things joining the real world.
She described how she believed all the new age nonsense ,Tarot cards etc and was a champion of these beliefs.
Then one day she had a eureka moment and no longer believed. She then was a champion for the skeptics and became the celebrity rent a quote for skeptics. Since then she has not changed her views but claimed to have given up on the rent a quoting - obviously not completely.
She wrapped up with what I thought was the only telling point of the program (loosely quoted) "Skeptics don't send hate mail, believers do"
Funny how you never hear a name all your life, then bang twice in 1 week, spooky.

385. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #48838 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 7:05 am

Using his criteria for when atheist books hit the best sellers list when would atheist books ever be off the bestsellers list.

Once again priest, Rabbis etc can not confront the simple fact that the reason churches etc are empty is not because people are very naughty or because they are humming under a crystal pyramid but beacause we no longer buy the junk they pedal.

I also think atheists are better for not going on thought for the day. The contributors platitudes and cliches including the above Rabbi are toecurlingly embarrassing. Only the archers theme tune makes me head faster for the dial.

386. Teaching assistant quit in protest at Harry Potter

Comment #48831 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 6:40 am

I hope she wins her case. Before you know it there will be people flying around on broomsticks everywhere, car sales will plummet, CO2 emissions will drop and we will never see that mediterranean climate in the UK we have been promised. Good luck to her. Tax payers money well spent.

387. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48804 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 5:28 am

Dianelos
I am not really up on philosophical debate but if conciousness is supernatural why does it follow my body around like a stalker.

388. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48616 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 3:20 pm

"what the bible meant and what it means for us today" I could just Imagine those words falling from the plum filled mouth of Alister McGrath.
That is a very important question.

389. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48610 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 3:01 pm

Zwingli.

Do you ever ask people, or yourself, what is the point of life without God?

390. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48600 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Zwingli

That point appears daily on this website, but it is usually asked by the atheist. Please tell us what you think God, or as a priest would say Gooooddd, actually is and what your beliefs actually are.

391. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48590 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:23 pm

Devolved.
Why were you at a seminar?

392. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48579 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:01 pm

Mr Priapus

I knew that Mr Hitchens was in error, and you are quite correct to point out the error.

As I am also sure you were aware my defence of his position was born of my desire to preserve his dignity.

Regards Mr G Teapot.
(At last someone on this site affords me the respect I deserve)

393. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48574 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 12:30 pm

yes that is right devolved and that is why religion is shit.

394. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48566 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 12:04 pm

I think it is always worthwhile engaging when peoples arguments are elegant. Eventhough the argumnents may prove to be redherrings, if you are inclined to debate these topics in public (which I don't) forewarned is forearmed. If you can not answer the obscure point there and then it will look to the casual observer as though the opposition has completely won the debate. Coming up with the response in bed the following evening is too late.
Who knows it may even convert you.
If you don't want to listen turn off.

395. Wanted: Moral Education for Secular Children

Comment #48528 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 9:16 am

Shouldn't that be children of secular parents?

396. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48519 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 8:32 am

I believe there is no god. What am I?

397. Republican candidates range from ignorant to dishonest, part 2

Comment #48516 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 8:20 am

What is the Bewler reference he makes about. Not living in the USA that passed me by. Can any americans not hiding from shame enlighten us.

398. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48354 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:49 pm

"We didn't Know the sun went around the earth."

That is still as true today as it was 2 thousand years ago.

What's so funny about that Priapus.

399. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48353 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:44 pm

Yes , it is the same interview.
Who could forget Hitchens telling the "Pasta" that he was either a fool or a charlatan and outright "disgusting" for believing that the Lord answered his prayers for the life of his daughter while ignoring the prayers of others. (Although we have since discovered from Mcgrath that this can be explained by the fact that god makes one or two random interjections but wouldn't want to be seen to be showing off by curing everyone- after all who would want to live in a pefect world)

400. Atheism is pretentious and cowardly

Comment #48187 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:06 am

bitbutter

I think reading all that once was enough, no, too much for anyone.