Is Richard Dawkins an ostentatious acrimonious supercilious pusillanimous calumnious censorious vituperative querulous embittered obsessive and bombastic bully? (page 5)

jaguarbass

In January I read Dawkins latest book the Greatest show on earth.

I read it because I want to be informed and know what is out there,

There are always going to be two sides to the coin.

Personally I gravitate toward design.

In Feruary I read the book "I dont have enough faith to be an atheist" by Norman Geisler

both books are similar but they draw different conclussions from the facts.

I wont say those who are disciples of Dawkins and his memes better repent and get right with God,

because I think everything is predestined and preordained based on both my reading of the bible

and my understanding of science, astrology the big bang.

Personally I think God is putting on a big play and we are caught up in it.

It seems to me, if one is concious, not walking about as a zombie and one has truly read the bible

reflected on it, studied it made notes, and conversely done the same with Dawkins read

his books reflected on his hypothesis weighed them out and one chooses to deny a creator, designer

then one is willfully ascending into the depths of darkness and hell.

Atheisim and atheist have been as responsible for many great attrocities just as have Christians

and other religious groups, Often these atrocities are a result of being spiritually dead.

Either those who lead the masses are spiritually dead or demon possessed and the sheeple who

follow are spiritually dead.

While I believe in design and a creator and lean toward believing in a young earth, I realize its

impossible to state ones opinion on this issue without seeming arrogant no matter what side

you are on. People can not calmly discuss religion, or politics because those are not tranquill subjects

and Atheistic Darwinism is as much a religion as being a creationist, Its an organized system of thoughts.

Its groups of people responding to memes. On that issue I agree with Dawkins.

cofty

It seems to me, if one is concious, not walking about as a zombie and one has truly read the bible reflected on it, studied it made notes, and conversely done the same with Dawkins read his books reflected on his hypothesis weighed them out and one chooses to deny a creator, designer then one is willfully ascending into the depths of darkness and hell.

OMG! I don't know whether to laugh or scream.

I know the bible in great detail; I have read a great deal on evolution. One is full of the most fascinating information I have ever encountered and full of facts that can be verified. The other is full of mythology, superstition and banality and substitutes evidence with threats of hell for dissenters. You figure out which is which.

Cofty of the atheist "religion" whose hobby is not collecting stamps

jaguarbass

OMG! I don't know whether to laugh or scream.

I know the bible in great detail; I have read a great deal on evolution. One is full of the most fascinating information I have ever encountered and full of facts that can be verified. The other is full of mythology, superstition and banality and substitutes evidence with threats of hell for dissenters. You figure out which is which.

Cofty of the atheist "religion" whose hobby is not collecting stamps

The bible and evolution are both big topics.

I believe we evolve, 30 years ago it was called adaptation, today its called micro evolution.

I believe we evolved but, I believe we evolved from man, frogs evolve from frogs, birds evolve

from birds. I prefer to think of it as adaptation, the moths in darwins origens of species

were adapting to their enviroment.

The bible has stories that some call myths. One story some call a myth, I give a lot of credibility

to, the story of the flood, It appears in many civiliazations if not all of them.

It appears in the myths or stories of the first civiliazation known to man kind, Summeria.

Summeria is where civiliazation popped up 6000 or so years ago.

The writings of the Summerians their hyroglyphic text and the epic of Gilgamesh contain

a handfull of the biblical so called myths.

If you are inclined to learn about some of the Summerian myths I recommen "Slave Species of God"

by Michael Tillinger or the 12th Planet by Zechariah Sitchin.

I cant see how one could not read either book and not feel they had a mind expanding experience.

both books tie in the Summerian text with the bible.

Another thing, based on classifying yourself as an atheist, I am assuming that you believe in an

ancient earth. If you read about carbon dating and the various dating methods and you have to go

no further than Dawkins works, He himself, Dawkins tells you that dating the earth to be millions of

years old is based on assumptions, that is the only way they can calebrate their dattings.

They have to assume item x is 1million years old so they can assume that item y is 50 million years old.

That take more faith than I have at the moment.

I respect you atheist, keep plugging away, thats all part of life.

If there werent atheist and people taking the opposite side of the coin, I might have to

be an atheist.

But my feeble understanding of the big picture is that we really dont have a choice what we

believe, most think they do, but I dont think so.

Think about it right now you cant believe design, I cant believe atheism.

Because I cant believe athesim doesnt mean, I necessarily believe everything in the bible.

Or if I were to say I believe everything in the bible I am not sure I can defend everything.

I think there is a higher power, atheist Carl Sagan called it a mystery of the universe, cosmos.

I suspect that we reincarnate that we are on a journey, a ride like in an amusement park.

Those are spiritual thoughts, not really documentable. But they do provide me some peace.

I'll say this, I am just commenting here to be alive and throw my 2 cents in.

I understand that 40 to 50 persent of the people will not believe in God, a designer.

Its going to be that way as long as there are people. That can be explained by various means,

from stupidity, to demons, depending on ones perspective.

On this planet there is always going to be the ying and the yang, two sides of the coin.

But what I observe is there is only one coin, So both sides are a little bit right,

But the devils in the details and the devil isnt even necessarily always a bad person.

VoidEater

Dawkins is no worse than most televangelists. He fills a need.

agonus

"No worse"?

Is Dawkins "no worse" than "The Faithful And Discreet Slave"?

Dogmatism is dogmatism. Arrogance is arrogance. Cynicism is cynicism. I don't care what you believe.

slimboyfat

Does misogynist need to be added to this list?

slimboyfat

Dawkins' followers as militant as ever, out to convert you!

sd-7

I'm actually starting on 'The God Delusion' right now. He does get pretty visceral with his tone, but he also brings up some pretty darn impressive points about religion. I can accept the validity of his tone when it supports facts or pretty logical argumentation. Certainly religion is no less visceral when it comes to its own beliefs.

I'm actually enjoying the book so far, though I probably would prefer a little more data and a little less slamming, but I'll reserve my judgment beyond what I've already said for the time being.

--sd-7

Amelia Ashton

I woud highly recommend "The Magic Of Reality" Prof. Dawkins latest book. It's unputdownable.

slimboyfat

Isn't that the children's book?

Tries to be a sort of story book, but about "reality". Talk about sucking the fun out of stuff.

After the first few pages, unpickupable more like.

I read The Blind Watchmaker years ago. I quite liked it. It's what convinced me to believe in evolution.

Is Richard Dawkins an ostentatious acrimonious supercilious pusillanimous calumnious censorious vituperative querulous embittered obsessive and bombastic bully?

Share this