1. Christian Shrine Needs Two Exits, Israel Says

Comment #17855 by saneatheist on January 17, 2007 at 3:57 am

One of my local churches was burned down, an act of god?
http://www.visitcumbria.com/wc/chw4.htm

2. Scientologists get £270,000 subsidy

Comment #12722 by saneatheist on December 13, 2006 at 11:46 am

It applies to all religions, they are all worth billions but are exempt from paying rates.
On top of that, the government recently gave £7.5 million to various religios groups, the muslims got the lions share £5 million I think.

3. Ken Miller on Intelligent Design

Comment #12670 by saneatheist on December 13, 2006 at 7:25 am

Yorker said.
It was hilarious that the foolish Pat Robertson — is 'Robertson' a generic buffoon's name.

Golly what a thought!
Robertsons jam for those who don't remember the good old days, when it wasn't politicaly uncorrect to put a gollywog on their labels.

4. Vicars in a Twist

Comment #12669 by saneatheist on December 13, 2006 at 7:14 am

I would be up for the handing out fliers thingy what fun, if his congregation is typical for the country we should only need a couple of dozen.
Got to go now, writing out christmas cards for the kingdom halls, (that really pisses them off).

5. Scientologists get £270,000 subsidy

Comment #12667 by saneatheist on December 13, 2006 at 6:57 am

The Humanist Society of Scotland IS a registered charity, but as far as I am aware they get nothing from the government.
It sickens me that these big business's that pass themselves off as religions get ANY special treatment, and by that, I don't just mean cash.

6. Religion for a Captive Audience, Paid For by Taxes

Comment #12665 by saneatheist on December 13, 2006 at 6:45 am

America, what can you say? I'm speechless!

7. Intelligent Design teaching materials sent to UK schools

Comment #11779 by saneatheist on December 7, 2006 at 9:07 am

I hope the schools use these information packs, I'm sure our kds are inteligent enough to conclude that the bible stories, are just that, stories! The more ridiculess the theists claims are, the better.

8. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10835 by saneatheist on November 29, 2006 at 11:23 am

PAUL
Check out this site.
http://jesusneverexisted.com/

9. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10790 by saneatheist on November 29, 2006 at 8:19 am

Paul Creber,
I found this and thought it might be of interest to you.

The Virgin Birth Fraud
The most colossal blunder of the Septuagint translators, the mistranslation of the original Hebrew text of Isaiah, 7.14, allowed deceitful early Christians to concoct their infamous prophecy that somehow the ancient Jewish text presaged the miraculous birth of their own godman.

The Hebrew original says:
'Hinneh ha-almah harah ve-yeldeth ben ve-karath shem-o immanuel.'
Honestly translated, the verse reads:
'Behold, the young woman has conceived — and bears a son and calls his name Immanuel.'
The Greek-speaking translators of Hebrew scripture (in 3rd century B.C. Alexandria) slipped up and translated 'almah' (young woman) into the Greek 'parthenos' (virgin). The Hebrew word for virgin would have been 'betulah.' The slip did not matter at the time, for in context, Isaiah's prophesy – set in the 8th century BC but probably written in the 5th – had been given as reassurance to King Ahaz of Judah that his royal line would survive, despite the ongoing siege of Jerusalem by the Syrians. And it did. In other words, the prophesy had nothing to do with events in Judaea eight hundred years into the future!
Justin 'Martyr', a pagan Greek from Palestine, fled to Ephesus at the time of Bar Kochbar's revolt (132 -135 AD). He joined the growing Christian community and found himself competing with the priests of Artemis, an eternally virgin goddess. Justin successfully overcame the sentiments of established Christians and had Mary, mother of Jesus, declared a virgin, citing his Greek copy of Isaiah as 'evidence' of scriptural prescience. The Greek priest who then forged the 'Gospel according to St. Matthew' went one stage further, taking the word 'harah' – in Hebrew a past or perfect tense – and switched it into a future tense to arrive at:

'Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel.'
(Matthew 1.23)
All this to arrive at the monstrous fiction that ancient scripture foretold of the arrival of an infant actually called Jesus!

10. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10784 by saneatheist on November 29, 2006 at 7:20 am

sorry, 566 was me.

11. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10730 by saneatheist on November 29, 2006 at 3:41 am

David, would you like to show me where I
"labelled everyone belonging to a particular church insane"
you're very good at misinterprating what people say, or simply making up things that they never said. Please stop it.

12. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10566 by saneatheist on November 28, 2006 at 11:47 am

From the website of David Robertsons church,
St Peters free church Dundee.

It is intended that we will have news updated on a regular basis here. Unfortunately, we have let things slip and we have not updated this for over a year! Hopefully soon, (yes, I know we have said this before) there will be some fresh information to keep this page alive...watch this space...(04/05/04)

Oh dear! nothing to say in two and a half years.
Replace "keep this page alive" with keep this religion alive.

13. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #10559 by saneatheist on November 28, 2006 at 11:23 am

Dear David Robertson, Thank you for doing so much to educate me regarding God's Law and what will happen to me for being an Atheist. I have learned a great deal from your posts in this debate and I will try to share that knowledge with as many people as I can. I do need some advice from you, however, regarding some of the other specific laws of the bible and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to English, but not Welsh. Can you clarify? Why can't I own the Welsh.

I have a neighbour who insists on working on Sunday(Sabbath). Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.

14. Atheists Agonistes

Comment #10477 by saneatheist on November 28, 2006 at 7:29 am

Hi, Billy Sands (post58)
I can't seem to find david robertson, can you post a link?
Re the "wee free" did you know they can't even make dinner on a sunday? they have to prepare it before midnight on saturday, did you know they aren't allowed to read a nespaper on sunday,or watch tv.
It seems the only ones that can do anything on sunday are the preachers.
The following is an article from the Times 24/10/06.

THEY have already banned drinking, public transport and housework on a Sunday, and now Hallowe'en has fallen foul of the Wee Frees.
Members of the Free Church of Scotland have been told they should not allow their children to go out guising this year because Hallowe'en falls on the Sabbath. If they insist on dressing up as goblins and ghouls to visit friends and neighbours, they should do so next Saturday — a day early.

It is the first time the Free Church has publicly expressed an opinion on Sunday guising, prompted by moves in America, where two cities in the "Bible belt" have officially moved Hallowe'en forward.
"Sunday is kept for the worship of God and being with your family," said the Rev Alex MacDonald, moderator designate of the 2005 general assembly.

"We have never expressed any kind of official view on Hallowe'en, but we would be very concerned about any kind of serious witchcraft, and certainly that seems to exist, although it has a low profile.

"Of course, there is no great harm in children guising, but we would rather not see it on a Sunday, and we would not be encouraging children to participate."

(Me) They conveniently forget that they stole both christmas and easter from the pagans.

15. Atheists Agonistes

Comment #10438 by saneatheist on November 28, 2006 at 5:52 am

I wish you people who keep responding to the retard that is David Mathews, would STOP IT, I had to leave a debate yesterday because of his insane ramblings, now here he is again fucking up this debate, I swear he is just copying and pasting the same shit he was spouting yesterday.
IGNORE HIM AND HE WILL GO AWAY. I'm off to find a decent debate now.

16. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #9614 by saneatheist on November 25, 2006 at 9:11 am

Reply to Richard 45.
As you are so well read on the bible, maybe you could help me out here.

Regarding some of the specific laws of the bible and how to follow them:

When I burn a bull on the altar as a sacrifice, I know it creates a pleasing odour for the Lord - Lev.1:9. The problem is my neighbours. They claim the odour is not pleasing to them. Should I smite them?

I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness - Lev.15:19- 24. The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can't I own Canadians?

I have a neighbour who insists on working on Sunday(Sabbath). Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination - Lev. 11:10, it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don't agree. Can you settle this?

Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev. 19:27. How should they die?

I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

My uncle has a farm. He violates Lev. 19:19 by planting two different crops in the same field, as does his wife by wearing garments made of two different kinds of thread (cotton/polyester blend). He also tends to curse and blaspheme a lot. Is it really necessary that we go to all the trouble of getting the whole town together to stone them? - Lev.24:10-16. Couldn't we just burn them to death at a private family affair like we do with people who sleep with their in-laws? (Lev. 20:14)

I know you have studied these things extensively, so I am confident you can help. Thank you again for reminding us that God's word is eternal and unchanging.
I look foreward to your advice.

Yours saneatheist.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I"ll see your jesus; And raise you 2 yeti"s and a loch ness monster.

17. E-Petition: Abolish Faith Schools

Comment #7346 by saneatheist on November 18, 2006 at 9:30 am

I have just come across this video which I think was made in the early 90s, my apoligies if most of you have already seen it.
It lasts 1hr 50min, and they do labour some points a bit, but I still watched it twice.
I think it should be compulsive viewing for every class of 11 year olds.
The idea of the bible being the word of god, is compltely blown out of the water.
For those who haven't seen it, enjoy.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6410112404402873027&q=naked+truth
_________________

18. Neanderthal DNA secrets unlocked

Comment #7000 by saneatheist on November 16, 2006 at 2:38 pm

Billy Sands, Re comment No 5, have a look at this.
Some very good responces after the article.

http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1694622006#new

19. Is Apple Computer Insulting Islam?

Comment #6922 by saneatheist on November 16, 2006 at 7:35 am

MECCA bingo anyone?

20. Neanderthal DNA secrets unlocked

Comment #6879 by saneatheist on November 16, 2006 at 2:56 am

That's not news, they are alive and well in the Scotish western isles as well.

21. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6804 by saneatheist on November 15, 2006 at 4:01 pm

Only so many hours in a day and I really could do with a minimum 48 hour day.

I've borrowed this from another forum, one which I'm sure some of you will be aware of.
http://www.evilbible.com/wforum/index.php?sid=e928a332db5baa1f961355b357d2300d

This elastic definition of a day the fundies use to excuse the creation myth - it's pathetic, isn't it?

Remember, when the bible myth was being concocted, the Israelites had no idea of why a day was as it was. The bible's creation is essentially no more reasonable than the other middle-eastern, graeco-roman, meso-american, egyptian, african and other creations and less convincing than the far-eastern cyclical mytho-histories.

The scientific justification for a (fairly) stable timescale of a day only comes about with the Copernican worldview. Astronomy and Physics now give consistent and irrefutable evidence that the earth has been spinning for billions of years and that the light taken from faraway stars has been travelling for billions more. None of this matters to the fundies, as they claim that god created the world "in medias res" - in the middle of the tale, with a fictional backstory all in place.

So the fundies can claim a "pre-Adam" day is whatever they want to - it doesn't have anything to do with the rational world.
_________________Posted by jd

22. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6668 by saneatheist on November 15, 2006 at 10:02 am

>>Nate, It really is too bad david won't ever read this post, or actually think about these questions. he'll dismiss it as anger,<<

I'll bet he can't resist a sneeky peek.

23. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6616 by saneatheist on November 15, 2006 at 5:47 am

Sorry, should have said plausible.

24. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6615 by saneatheist on November 15, 2006 at 5:44 am

Billy Sands asks,
BTW Did you see horizon last night? bit bizzare
Yes I watched it and thought it far more probable than the god story.

25. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6398 by saneatheist on November 14, 2006 at 4:11 am

Mr Robertson, you are STILL refering to Dawkins as a fundamentalist, please stop it.
Fundamentalism; A belief in the literal truth of the bible, koran, etc.

26. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6311 by saneatheist on November 13, 2006 at 3:20 pm

I have just recieved this from an aquaintance in Glasgow who obviousley knows of this guy, so I will take no further part in this debate.

"That David Robertson is as daft as a brush. I'm amazed he gets so many letters published in the papers."

27. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6228 by saneatheist on November 13, 2006 at 9:56 am

Quote To sumarise, japan (secular) lot less murder than god bothering USA Unquote.

The trouble with religious nuts, is they think they can do anything they like so long as they say sorry to the sky fairy, they will be forgiven.
If young men that strap bombs to their bodies realized they were only going to spread their bits all over the place,and not go to a paradise full of eager virgins, then they wouldn't doit WOULD THEY?

28. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6201 by saneatheist on November 13, 2006 at 5:14 am

I'm still waiting for a response from Mr Robertson; To this post from William.
Comment No 5795.
JESUS LIED ABOUT PRAYER:

>>John 14:13-14 "And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it." <<

>>John 16:23-24 "On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have not asked anything in my name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete."<<

>>Matthew 21:21-22 "And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive."

29. Dawkins Delusion (3rd article, Same Stupid Title)

Comment #6194 by saneatheist on November 13, 2006 at 4:20 am

I keep seeing references in this debate to "fundamentalist Atheists", if the people making this referernce would check their dictionary, you will see that this is an oxymoron,
As is "religious education".

David Robertson said in an earlier post that religion was on the rise, well not where I live i'm pleased to say.
There are more derelict Churches/Kirks here than anywhere else in Britain, obviously people here must have been religious at some time, but then saw the light; you can't drive more than three or four miles without seeing a delapidated god house.

I live in a comunity of 300 people, the Kirk is a few hundred yards down the road and I can tell you,when the shop opens at 3pm on sunday, there are far more cars there than there are at the Kirk for the morning service, and of the handfull of folk that do attend I would say their average age would be 70.
Does society need religion? definitely not.
Here in Shetland we have almost zero crime, granted there is a little bit of trouble in Lerwick on Saturday nights, but there is no mugging, no housbreaking, there has never been a single case of car theft, and as far as I know I don't think there has ever been a murder.
All this in a community that mostly rejects religion.
Also, there are no faith schools here, which is probably the best thing of all.