Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 42 of 42

Thread: Richard Dawkins: 'Somebody As Intelligent As Jesus Would Have Been an Atheist'

  1. #41
    Account Inactive

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Last Online
    Thursday, May 3rd, 2012 @ 09:29 PM
    Ethnicity
    English
    Ancestry
    Mainly Yorkshire
    Country
    England England
    State
    Yorkshire Yorkshire
    Location
    Yorkshire
    Gender
    Age
    34
    Politics
    Libertarian
    Posts
    2,109
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    12
    Thanked in
    12 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by CruxClaire
    I think a lot of atheist debates prefer to avoid philosophical topics because believers tend to dismiss them as "great mysteries" of God that they simply cannot understand because they lack God's greatness. For example, if you ask a Christian if an all-powerful God would be capable of making a rock too heavy for him to lift, he/she will either give you some nonsensical, convoluted answer he/she genuinely believes is true, or will insist that it's just something for God to understand and humans not to understand. That seems to be the case with most any philosophical idea that undermines theists' beliefs. If you point out that an omniscient deity would know the future and therefore know his own actions/decisions, in a sense taking away his own free will, theists will simply believe that you're the one with flawed logic.
    They always eventually smoke grenade the room in response to better arguments, regardless of their intelligence level. Getting them to admit their beliefs don't make sense is the challenge. The stupid ones you can get to quit with even the worst brand of 'atheist' argument, such as "Why does evil exist?" Those types won't even be able to think of the correct response to such questions, which is "Well, that only disproves the existence of a God who is good and also omnipotent. It doesn't disprove a God who is good but not omnipotent, nor a God who is omnipotent but not good." Those types aren't really worth bothering with, since if you refuted every stupid idea currently in their heads, they'd simply fill their stupidity tank up with different, probably worse, stupidities.

    But the smarter ones, such as the types you find here on Skadi, generally like to take refuge in arcane verbosity and jargon ripped from millennia of unsuccessful philosophical floundering. Most people shy away from debating these types, what with their roar so confident and bearing so proud. The 'advanced religious' are usually more prepared for the fight than their adversaries, and while their weaponry's made of plasticine with a few sharp pieces of polystyrene duct-taped on, from a distance they look fearsome. So it's dishearteningly common to see people quit the field when they'd have won if only they'd been a little bolder. Picking on Biblical literalists after that seems a little like what's left of the Spanish armada kicking stray dolphins on the way home.

    It's just nice to get a certain type of religious mind, one that's accustomed to winning debates by default by citing unread texts and through crass equivocation and shameless obscurantism, finally admitting defeat in that familar religious way: God's ways are mysterious.

    My proudest moment (well, after getting Slavic death squads dispatched after me) was in getting the most obnoxious member in the history of Skadi to do this. Here's a collection of his gems, and I'll order it such as to show his smug pretentiousness give way to utter defeat

    Quote Originally Posted by Rev. Jupiter
    It's amusing to me that your sole arguments against Christianity are based upon heretical sectarian and reformist doctrines that are only a few centuries old, if that.
    If you can't tell me off the top of your head what the controversy is regarding the translation of this passage, you officially know nothing of Christianity and discredit yourself to all.
    He doesn't, and that doesn't matter. The Absolute by its very nature does not and cannot exist, since we cannot attach any of the qualities of manifest existence to it without it ceasing to be the Absolute. The key is not to bring God down to our level, but to raise us to His level.

    Short answer: The argument of God's existence is a red herring. Next question.
    I believe that matter is manifested by will. Meaning that I don't believe God created everything, because I don't believe in everything.
    You're not wrong, per se. Just, well, limited.
    Anyway, his primary argument was that there's no division whatsoever between the absolute and the empirical realm, meaning that the non-absolute is exactly the same as the absolute. He then supported this self-refuting assertion through pompous references to chapters of this or that ancient manuscript and smug dismissals of better arguments as 'beneath him'. I even remember (though I can't find it without reading all his posts again...ugh, the thought) his saying, in response to one of my arguments, this: "I used to think that, but I advanced beyond that view." And left it at that

  2. #42
    Senior Member
    Nebelwerfer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Online
    Thursday, May 10th, 2012 @ 07:20 PM
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Country
    European Union European Union
    Gender
    Posts
    122
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post
    I haven't watched the video but if you're not the son of God(Dawkins must assume jesus wasn't) it can hardly be considered a good idea to have yourself nailed to a cross and left to die - that is not an intelligent thing to do (unless you want to end it all and enjoy pain).

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345

Similar Threads

  1. Classify Richard Dawkins
    By Pro-Alpine in forum Anthropological Taxonomy
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Friday, April 15th, 2011, 11:36 PM
  2. Prof Richard Dawkins Drives Support for London's First Atheist Bus Advert
    By Hanna in forum Agnosticism, Atheism, & Irreligion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Monday, May 31st, 2010, 01:46 AM
  3. Professor Richard Dawkins Wants to Convert Islamic World to Evolution
    By Renwein in forum Agnosticism, Atheism, & Irreligion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: Saturday, August 29th, 2009, 12:50 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •