701. The Out Campaign

Comment #60184 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 9:07 am

Well said Elli. He is more to be pitied than scolded - but scolding can be fun.

here is another thread where david gets a "fisting" over homosexuality http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1197,Debate-between-Richard-Dawkins-and-Robert-Winston,Today-BBC,page1#comments

You will see he is very one dimentional. We tend not to ban him because he is like a ferral pet that we hope one day sees the light. He is also good for silent doubters who read these threads

702. The Out Campaign

Comment #60182 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 8:57 am

Hi David,
You remind us that this thread is abaout the out campaign, then you go off at tangents. Who's being an inconsistent and silly boy then?

You still didn't answer my question about forcing islam on your children. I think that I know the answer, but I want to hear you say it - after all, I could be wrong and you may actually think that forcing the bible on children is equally wrong.

That brings me to the next point - you say you could be wrong. Come on, you dont really believe that do you? The reason I say that is because elsewhere you talk of the certainty of god's existence? So have you developed doubts, learned to reason or just internally inconsistant?

As for your comment on sin, I hope quetz doesn't mind me asking - I'm sure you will ignore my challenge and make some predictable insult. You acknowledge then that we are born sinful (I dont, we are born human). It sureley would then be evil of a hypothetical god to send sinners to hell then.

"I agree with your psychological assessment of D. Robertson. However, as is the case with wonked-out individuals, they think they are JUST FINE. "

Hilarious. I love it! The definition of someone who is mad is someone who denies it when you accuse them of being mad. Superb. You could not make this stuff up….

Cant he see the irony of this comment :-)

Of course Ellie, Corylus can not trust you to read it for himself (maybe its because he is an inherent sexist?).

Yes, Elli, you be a good little girl and dont you worry your pretty little head about that nasty Corylus.
Tell me David according to many in your church (perhaps even you), what is a woman's place again?
Lets consult St Paul shall we? God has it in for women, and lays all the blame for the original sin on Eve (1Tim. 2:12-14), and women are the property of men and were created for men, because we are superior. They must be silent in church and never hold authority over men, or even teach a man (1Cor. 11:8-9, 14:34-35, Ephesians 5:22-24, Colossians 3:18, 1Tim.2:11-14). All however is not lost, as a woman can be saved through childbirth (1Tim. 2:15). The only problem is that God would rather men didn't get married (1Cor. 7:8), and for those lucky enough to get a man, child birth will be incredibly painful because women are evil simnners that corrupted gods perfect creation (Gen.3:16). Your god is a misogynist. You believe in moral absolutes, perhaps you could justify making a woman marry her rapist - and to add insult to injury, it is her father that must be compensated (Deut 22:28-29). And tell me why driving up chocholate alley way is wrong? All you can say is its in the bible - seems a poor justification to me

finally Love your enemy and do good to those who hate is not about power. Since when have you treated people who disagree with you that way. Even Quetz, J and Philip get the occasional Ad hominem thrown at them. You case most of your own problems on this site. I predict that if you practice that, things will improve and folk could have a discussion without the gratuitous sweeping insults hurled by you.

OK one more DO YOU ACCEPT THAT LABELLING THE POPE AS THE ANTICHRIST FUELS HATE - AND BY SAYING SO YOU ARE CONTRIBUTING TO SECTARIAN HATRED?

And dont pretend it is off thread because most of your comments are not about the thread.

703. The Out Campaign

Comment #60171 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 8:17 am

Katherine, if your housemates are good friends they will respect your views. If not, I think it is always important to do what you feel is right and not bow to peer pressure. If they expect you to say grace at meal times etc, then you could start by pointing out that you dont believe in it. I found a lot of my christian "friends" stoped hanging out when I started to lose my faith, but you always have to be true to yourself. You never know, your housemates may harbour secret doubts - that was something else I found about some of my other christian friends. You could find a local brights group to meet like minded individuals.
Good Luck

704. The Out Campaign

Comment #60152 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 6:41 am

Forgive them quetz (especially Huxley and Steve) for they know not what they drink.

By the way Steve, mine's a large tea with milk and two sugar that I brew in Russells Tea pot

705. The Out Campaign

Comment #60141 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 5:56 am

Yes, I too long for the day when all blends are considered equal. They are all from quetz and he give to those in accordance with their tastes. I look forward to the English breakfast drinker laying down with the darljeeling brewer. It will be so wonderful. Earl Grey will no longer be looked upon as posh by the happy shopper brand drinker, and there will be sticky scones a pleny. My pot runneth over.
So, what do you say J go on - go on go on go on

(we really are starting to sound like christians now)

706. The Out Campaign

Comment #60133 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 5:09 am

Ah High priest Philip, your talk of holy tea made me think about how I haven't seen lapsang souchong on sale for a while. Anyway, Quetz delivered. I was getting my lunch in a shop that I dont associate with tea, but something made me look up the back - and there it was. Even when we dont ask, he is good to his followers. What more proof do David and J require?

707. The Out Campaign

Comment #60121 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 4:17 am

Philip,

I didn't want to destroy your street cred :-) Us followers of quetz must stick together. Young J is a quetz agnostic, but I pray that one day he will see the light.
Quetz, what will you have us do? Shall we sacrifice a shrubbery unto thee?

708. The Out Campaign

Comment #60118 by BillySands on August 1, 2007 at 4:09 am

Welcome to the club irateatheist. I have been told that I have a diseased mind and an intolerant hatred of religion - despite having religious friends. Apparently when I hit him with reason I am being laughable. It's all quite amusing really and just rolls off me. I would take it as a compliment, because he cant deal with your comments.

Nice evaluation Corylus. I'm reminded of the Fawlty towers episode where the psychiatrist visits. Just as he leaves, he looks at Basil curled up with his hands over his head and hopping, and says "there is enough material there for a whole conference"

I wonder if Richard's comment made his day. However it was more like a boot in the nuts before being told to get out of the way than an acknowledgement of a worthy advesary.

Concerning his martyr complex. There are apparently 12 000 members here. Let's assume about 200 have ever bothered to respond to him, and that 10 were gratuitously abusive. That means a staggering 1.67% members gave him any attention and an even more mind bogglingly small 0.083% were down right rude to him with no reason (I can however only recall one such poster- who incidentally I told was out of line - David never acknowledged that) So, to my knowledge only 0.0083% of posters have been gratuitously rude without provocation (Actually, cant remember if this guy was provoced or not - he's called Mika and on Davids letter thread if anyone is interested - David can quote the post number off the top of his head). So, the overall data suggests that the people here are not like David makes them out to be. That sounds like a mental illness and he really should seek proper help - none of this praying to jesus rubbish, but real psychiatric help

J

I'm 'a credit to this site'.

Looks like you're teachers pet :-)

709. The Out Campaign

Comment #59971 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 9:14 am

Yorker

You mean this one? "It certainly beats wearing a dead jewish blasphemer on a stick."

Enjoy it David.

Corylus wise words - Daivd, if your eye causes you to sin, pluck it out.... Although I will miss the comedy value.

SG Talking of indoctrination, I saw these THESE bible toys today

The makers clearly realise the value of brainwashing children at an early age. However, to help them create a range of toys to teach biblical values, I have some ideas of my own they may want to try. How about Genocidal Joshua, Murdering Moses and Homophobic Hosea? The latter comes with real throwing motion and can hurl pieces of gravel at your television screen every time Graham Norton appears (admittedly, this will appeal to non homophobes too).

Bicyclerepairman I've only just started reading the Ancestor's tail, so I couldn't comment. It's a sad reflection on dishonest Dave, but my initial thaought was "bet you're lying matey and you have'nt read it"

Guys I think David is just insulting us because his church no longer have the right to burn dissenters. SAD REALLY.

Oh David, the bible does actually tell us that we are concieved sinful (PS 51) I also doubt you have read this book either

710. The Out Campaign

Comment #59967 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 8:59 am

Ah there's the voice of alzheimers we have missed.

Comment #59882 by BillySands - Richard, obviously I cannot blame you for every one of your followers and so it would be and fear of me to attribute Billy to you.

First error, I'm not a follower of Richard. I just happen to agree with him on many things. I know that being religious an all, you need. someone to tell you what to think - or in your case not- but that's not how we work. Perhaps you could point out your issues here, but then that would require maturity on your part.

Next, the comment to which you refer. I was pointing out reasons why people would want to meet together. That seems to have somehow become warped in your mind. At times like this I wonder "have you sat down too fast and dammaged your brain ay your arse hits the seat?" So, what is so wrong with that post?

He's good fun though! I'm not quite sure how someone gets from discussing the formation of an atheist 'out' campaign to discussing the nature of the antichrist in one easy jump!

Let me explain it for the impaired - and it is not one jump. I'll type it slowly so you can keep up - good job it doesn't do joined up writing.
1 You seem to think Atheist meeting up is a religious thing - I refer you to the post you have difficulty understanding.

2 You sarcastically call RD the truth

3 Baeoz makes a valid point about you.

4 I add to that by pointing out that even amongst christian you think you are on the right path

5 I point out the pope hypocricy because - well, hell, why not. It shows you up - an ad hominem that is not a fallacy.

See, its as easy as A B C. Repeat after me David A B... what comes next?

I have never thought, taught or said that the Pope is the antichrist. And I regard the whole idea as ludicrous and pathetic.

For the upteenth time, you did make that oath. Now, what was the point of that oath? And, If you disagreed with it, why did you not speak out? Are you a coward as well as a hypocrite and deciever? Tell me, what do you think oaths like that do for building bridges between catholics and protestants? It's worse than Donald Finlay singing the sash. You are basically fuelling hate - and you know it. That both disgusting and perverse.

THe bible takes oats seriously
Matthew 23:20 He, then, who takes an oath by the altar, takes it by the altar and by all things on it,And he who takes an oath by the Temple, takes it by the Temple and by him whose house it is.And he who takes an oath by heaven, takes it by the seat of God, and by him who is seated on it.

So, this oath you took, who were you making it to? God?

I would like to know how you get from having never seen god to getting to you are as sure of his existence as you are of your wifes?

So, you are teaching science? But you know nothing about it. Remember SG asking you about volcanoes and me asking you about evolution and the implications for the fall?

Not suprisingly, you have dealt with noting with any substance.

What about your childern being forced to pray to Allah?

711. The Out Campaign

Comment #59943 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 7:47 am

Arent the pope and satan one and the same.

If enough folk sign up to go to that restaurant, I would. I could stay with some (christian) friends over there :-)

712. The Out Campaign

Comment #59932 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 6:53 am

I was also wondering, What would wee fleas' position be if his children were forced in to muslim worship at school. I've a slight feeling that he may want it stopped.

713. The Out Campaign

Comment #59931 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 6:48 am

By this logic, YOU ARE BORN WRONG.

It is even worse than that. You are CONCIEVED wrong psalm 51:5 Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me."

Psalm 51 is a great self esteem crusher. there is also verse 14 "Save me from bloodguilt" - which refers to inherited sin. In fact, the christian god likes punishing people for the sins of their ancestors. For example, let's take Deut 5:9 "You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me".

How is following this stupidity good for anyone?

714. The Out Campaign

Comment #59923 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 6:04 am

There a a number of good points comining up on a few threads at the moment about how faith is bad for your esteem and solving problems in your life - or indeed how you go about your life.

The whole central message about judeo-christian belief is that there is something wrong with you and that you deserve gods judgement. You have to believe this to be a christian . What an terrible way to think of yourself. People talk of freedom through jesus. I say what rubbish, there is however true freedom in ditching this bullshit and accepting that you have failings, but you are not defined by them.

715. The Out Campaign

Comment #59902 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 3:56 am

Ah, but he had his finger crossed behind his back while he said, it so it didn't count.

What? A minister Lie - I've never heard such outrageous papism and devil worshippry :-)

But it would be nice for David to explain this little problem to any new members

716. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59900 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 3:52 am

Cheers V

I have found him and engaged :-)
You really are lucky that you have never expericed this stuff. Philip tells a sad story on the other thread that is worth reading to see what this nonsense can do to folk http://richarddawkins.net/articleComments,1471,The-Out-Campaign,Richard-Dawkins,page2#59869 . It reminded me of some stuff too that I have now posted on it.

717. The Out Campaign

Comment #59896 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 3:41 am

I want to help.

That was a really good post Philip. I have met people like your friend too who have been emotionally abused by the belief that god must be punishing them. I have met people who have been raped or abused as children who thought that god was punishing them for various reasons - how is that belief ever going to bring healing to these people?
I know people (one in David's church) who constanlty live in fear of going to hell if they enjoy or express themselves too much. I've also known drug addicts sexually abuse other christians because the church has said to them that their faith has renewed their heart and jesus has changed them. The church through faith allowed these people to pursue relationships despite their problems. This person should have been getting some proper relational therapy. As for his victim - she became depressive, had pannic attacks (although the church called them "demonic" attacks), contemplated suicide, turned to drink, cut herself repeatedly and cycled between anorexia and bulimia. The extra nasty twist comes from the fact that they both thought that god was bringing them together.

Killing this god nonsense (by non violent means such as this campaign before wee flea pipes up) is the best way to help.

718. The Out Campaign

Comment #59891 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 3:10 am

Well said Baeoz. Robertson like the rest think his way is the only valid way. Did you know that he made an oath stating the Pope to be the antichrist?

Nice new avatar SG

719. The Out Campaign

Comment #59889 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 3:04 am

How dare anyone accuse the author of The Ancestor's Tale of giving up on science? I invite the Reverend Robertson to read it from cover to cover (he might learn something about evolution and other aspects of real life) and then try to estimate how many scientific papers that five year labour of love is equivalent to.

Yes, you should set him an essay on genomic evolution and see how long it takes him to do background reading etc. It's not like religion where you just write how you feel and what the voices in your head are telling you that day.

May I also suggest that the reads TGD properly

720. The Out Campaign

Comment #59882 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 2:47 am

Welcome Back Wee Flea - I've missed you. Did you get any on holiday then? How did you cope being separated from your hero Richard for so long?

Why do you have a problem with Atheists getting organised? Is it fear? There are plenty of good reasons for this. Some are opressed and need encouragement (that's not religious) Others like the fellowship of like thinkers to echange ideas with (definately not religious) Some are concerned with the truth and want to defend science and free thought against fundie opressors (again not religious).

721. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59881 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 2:38 am

Billy- you might be interested to know that Wee Flea has returned.

Where? Is he Fides in disguise?

722. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59878 by BillySands on July 31, 2007 at 2:15 am

You pasted a quote of mine where I was clearly talking about me and then used it to say I was talking about you. I wasn't by the way. Let me make it clearer, read back through the quote, when it says 'I', that means me, not you.

Yes, but in the context it is far from unreasonable to assume that you were also refering to me. Particularly when preceded by your worzel comment.

Do enlighten me, what are these straw men to whom you refer?

723. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59730 by BillySands on July 30, 2007 at 12:59 pm

J
Theists just dont get humble. Moses, the supposed author of the pentateuch had this to say about himself: "Now the man Moses was very humble, more than all men who were on the face of the earth." (num 12:3)

724. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59729 by BillySands on July 30, 2007 at 12:51 pm

When I can't work something out and I need to, I ask someone to help me (for example a plumber with a plumbing difficulty, I don't start building an Ark). However, if I don't need to know (for example, how to build an aeroplane), I just accept that someone else does (and then I buy my ticket). It's called humility to accept that one doesn't know everything (and also that one cannot know everything).

Fides, are you for real? You make my point perfectly by assuming that there was something wrong with me – that I did not seek help. Amazing Sherlock, how did you manage to presume what I did and get it so spectacularly wrong? How stupid are you to assume that? a perfect example of the theists deluded way of thinking concerning doubt. For your information, I saw ministers, Christian friends, various members of my church, and other churches and none of them could answer my doubts. After much discussion and an inability of the others to come up with a reasonable answer, I was told to just trust god. Hell, I was even told by a few that I must have some unconfessed sins on several occasions. Even asking god to show what they were got no answer. What higher help could I have sought? I hope one day you learn to think for yourself too.

Looks like your straw man is a smouldering heap of napamled bullshit.

But thanks for giving others an insight into deluded thinking

725. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59670 by BillySands on July 30, 2007 at 5:15 am

Tell me, someone, why is it that people seem unable to distance themselves from inculcated belief systems in order to embrace reason (or another point of view)?

I agree with what Quetz said (he is my new god after all)

Faith is one of those things you just know is true, and you feel it too. You dont look at problems with your faith logically. You know it is true, so the problem lies with you. You know that god is perfect and always knows best. This is your starting point in viewing and interpreting the world/bible/human nature/ relationships/ suffering etc. When you cant work out something you go "I dont know, but god does and I'm sure he has a good reason for not explaining it to me" This is mental slavery and it is not good for you. I believe this holds a lot of people back and stops them taking charge of their lives. So, if you know god knows best (and you buy the lie that you dont if you arew struggling with faith) when you approach every challenge, it is hard to see the godless simplicity responsible for the challenge - be it natural disasters, unfairness, biblical contradictions, god not doing what he says he will etc.
I guess I got out because I reached challenge overload and I started realising that my problems with faith were not my fault and that I did do everything that I could to stay faithful. Looking back now, I realise just how toxic that position of faith was. I now know that shit happens because it just does and that I am the only one in control of my life and destiny. If I succeed or fail at something, be it relationships, career or sport, then it is me alone who fails or wins, and that is the most empowering thing that I have found in atheism.

I contend that I am able to listen to and evaluate a point of view or a discussion without adopting its premise(s). Is this merely an intellectual trick that I have taught myself? smiles>/i>,

If you go back and change the last part of this from >... to <... it should remove the italics from the rest of your post

726. OUT Campaign Launched, 'Scarlet Letter' Shirts Now Available!

Comment #59461 by BillySands on July 29, 2007 at 6:25 am

It certainly beats wearing a dead jewish blasphemer on a stick.

Bizzaro, How's those pesky toothed chickens going down with your creationist delusion? You seem to have run away without addressing the issue

727. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59419 by BillySands on July 29, 2007 at 2:35 am

I feel like that about maladaptive ways of thinking and coping that I have abandoned because I finally realized they were wrong and hurting me. I find it irritating that I had to go through so much of my life feeling distress over these. But I've tried to look at it from a more positive light- that at least I finally got it and that part of the learning was in the journey.

Yes, it is only once you get rid of the negative crap of faith that you can start seeing things in a positive light. I have often thought that this aspect of faith is like a mental ilness.

728. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59108 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 11:06 am

The failing must lie with the individual

That is sooooo true. It is also bad for yoiur esteem, you are constantly doing something wrong and god is rejecting you until you sort it out. No matter how often you ask, he never tells you what it is, and you keep fretting over it. Of course, I now know why he never answered - just wish it hadn't taken so bloody long to find out. It reminds me of a comment I made here on learning the will of my TV set through praying to it http://richarddawkins.net/article,1399,Praying-to-a-milk-jug,Why-Wont-God-Heal-Amputeescom#55420

729. Don't eat at the Outback Steakhouse on Route 3...

Comment #59101 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 10:17 am

Strange no fuss is made when christians want to burn TGD - as I saw on David Robertsons' site once. At least it's better than burning people like they used to to. I wonder when god will issue the command to burn atheists and use TGD as kindling?

730. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59086 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 8:27 am

Northern Bright
That was one of the best posts I've read for a long time.

Veronique
That's a great idea about the quotes. Haven't heard from the flea. J has been posting on his site, but hasn't heard from him for a while. Maybe he's gone to Twatt for good. One of my friends went to see him at his book signing in Edinburgh recently. I never knew he was doing onein glasgow or I would have went along. How could I have missed such high impact news? I'm aware that Posh spice apparently has cellulite, but not that wee flea was signing toilet paper so that kind of puts it into perspective really

731. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59056 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 5:14 am

Well done! to get your whole brain back:-)

Thanks. I feel a lot better for it.

I love quotes, don't you?

Yes, and here's a whole load more http://www.chrisbeach.co.uk/core/scripts/viewQuotes.php

Billy, help! Who said something to the effect:

When I was a child I spake as a child. When I became a man, I put away childish things.

It was the author/collective alledged to be Paul in 1 Corinthians 13:11

732. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59053 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 4:28 am

I thought I could ether introduce some genes from thermophilic bacteria or cheat and ask you to sort it out. Good idea you gave me about heat resistant hydra. They can regenerate and you can sew an army from it's teeth

733. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59049 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 4:08 am

Yes my LORD. The other guy in the video has had some modifications and combines all the above characteristics. He is busy cloning himself as we speak. The only problem is finding him enough mushy fruit to eat and stopping him cooking his progeny with his freakin' laser and eating them at the mo

734. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59044 by BillySands on July 27, 2007 at 3:45 am

Yeah verily brother Lee. Anyone who is at all co-ordinated is an infidel. Slippy floors and not being able to see a bloody thing help the spirit of Quetz enter me. If I'm really lucky, I bang my head and he gives me a vision

735. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #58907 by BillySands on July 26, 2007 at 4:09 pm

Hi Veronique, the faith thing got me at an early age. I was a believer up until about 5 years ago, but I guess I compartmentalised things to carry on believing. To quote Mark Twain: "Faith is believing what you know ain't so"

736. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58905 by BillySands on July 26, 2007 at 3:47 pm

Not only does quetz move in mysterious ways, but he posesses his followers with his spirit and makes them move in very mysterious ways http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3XV6hNCgLAU

737. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #58762 by BillySands on July 26, 2007 at 4:02 am

I can imagine that one or more people on this thread who left behind a childhood-inculcated belief system, years and years ago, may have some vestige of 'understanding' what that belief felt like to live in.

I dont think the understanding diminishes. If anything, I think I have a greater understanding of what faith is. I also have a greater understanding of why this faith is an illogical position.

738. How could God allow 26 pilgrims to die in a crash?

Comment #58755 by BillySands on July 26, 2007 at 3:40 am

An Omnipotent God, and THIS WORLD is the best he can do?

Yeah he could have created a world without earthquakes or volcanoes - he could have made elements that dont decay and release radiation - oh yes, and he could have omitted to make maggots that feast on living brains etc

739. How could God allow 26 pilgrims to die in a crash?

Comment #58752 by BillySands on July 26, 2007 at 3:37 am

why then, why pilgrims, why?

Erm, stab in the dark here, because god doesn't exist?
Surely the faithfull should be celebrating the fact they have gone to heaven.

740. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58512 by BillySands on July 25, 2007 at 4:34 am

Quetz,
Or even BREWce Tea

I just thought, a short DNA sequence inscribed on skulls would do too

741. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58509 by BillySands on July 25, 2007 at 4:28 am

Cheers Quetz,
It appears that Jason has no evidence. I really dont get how you get from things taking billions of years to that's what a designer does. Occasionally designists bring up something that is challenging, like the bacterial flagellum or antiboby generation. These are not arguements for a designer, but arguements from ignorance. However, these things do make folk look more closely at the relationships between components of these systems, and we actually get a better understanding of how these things actually evolved. The biggest problem I see for thoe who want to claim design is that their arguements come from current ignorance in the area (which is later explained), or even worse (and a crime Behe is very guilty of) personal ignorance. Like lee says, skulls wih names inside would be hard to refute.

Philip (this would have sounded witty and spontaneous yesterday) Are you then a practicioner of Tai Fu?

742. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58277 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 8:17 am

Hi Quetz http://skepticrat.blogspot.com/

743. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58271 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 8:01 am

Quetz, Not sure why we are so crap at regenerating. It seems some level of de-differentiation is involved. I guess this may be the problem. We may silence these genes through morestable means. I'll look into it somethime for you.
JC I thought I had seen your avatar before. My first guess was that there may have been another more) famous JC Samuelson, so I googled it and found your blog. One thing that always comes through in your posts is your genuine desire to understand the truth. It looks like your deconvertion phase was not too dissimilar to mine, although it is suprising how similar it is to other peoples too.

Philip Do you serve your tea with one or two lumps of rational vengence?

744. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58231 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 4:38 am

Quetz, I think I've found my army their unarmed combat instuctor - Do you want the job? Mind you, the unarmed bit goes against the idea of regeneration.

I used to do Shotokan and tried kick boxing later, but the way I was trained before was too ingrained in me (apparently it is a common problem when you try to transfer to a different stystem). What do you do?

745. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58229 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 4:23 am

Ah good point about the crabs, I did mean homo as in our genus, but we dont want them having any unnecessary distractions now.

I think it seems more the case that the "simpler" the animal, the easier regeneration is. The only "higher animals i am aware of that can do this are salamanders, most fish can regenerate much of their fins (Some members of the genus Apteronotus can regenerate parts of its spinal chord) and some lizards can regenerate their tails. We contain the same genes that salamanders use to regenerate (eg Wnt BetaCatenin, FGF, Rb etc) but we cant regenerate.

Lee Excellent, I look forward to watching that later :-)

746. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58221 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 3:56 am

Hi Quetz,
We really are crap at regeneration. You can slice worm up (think you only need the first 9 segments to regenerate) and chop up starfish all you wand and they regenerate (think you only need a very small piece of the body). You can also liquidise a sponge and you will get mini sponges reforming from the bits.
A half human half crab could be a useful biological weapon - MWWWWHHAHAHAH. I've even seen a crab lose its leg then eat it. How's that for hard? This means my homo-crab soldiers will never go hungry in battle - and they can repair themselves.

747. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58214 by BillySands on July 24, 2007 at 3:31 am

Also trying not to participate here. As of tomorrow, going to try not to even visit here.

Tomorrow is always a good day to give something up :-)
One day you will be Sensei J and own your own Dojo of reason. I'm sure that come your next grading, Sensei Dawkins will award you the black leather bound God Delusion (1st chapter).

748. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58126 by BillySands on July 23, 2007 at 3:11 pm

Hi J,
Your kung fu is good, but is no match for my fu kyu tue jimmy :-)
Your post reminds me a bit of a discussion I had at lunch time and a post I made on my old ministers blog the otherday I'll post it below for anyone bothered. I would be interested on peoples thoughts on the verses concerning proof. Is Dave Robertson still about then? I need to resist following your debate with him or I'll get sucked in.

Hi guys, I was just settling down with my cup of horlicks and there are so many responses. I will try and deal with them generally, so I hope I don't miss anything out. I don't buy the argument that god doesn't reveal himself because we would chose not to follow. I think you will find that many people would follow him if given enough evidence. The bible tells us that god knows your heart any way (eg 1 sam 16:7), so that argument is refuted by the bible. I think it would be far more moral to provide evidence, and since he can read our hearts, let us decide what to do with that knowledge. I have anther problem with that argument. I presume you mean follow as in love him. However, read Deuteronomy 28, or god's command to kill your family if they tempt you to worship other gods (deut 13:6:11) God clearly wants obedience through fear (deut 13:11: " Then all Israel will hear about it and be afraid, such wickedness will never again be done amongst you")

I also don't buy the people need to worship god, or need him in their lives. I don't feel that need, and the atheists who hold on to their lack of belief in fox holes (and there are many) certainly don't. Many Atheists lead fulfilled lives – we don't need to believe in god – that does not mean we would not follow him if he revealed himself (although, I might have a problem worshiping his nasty side)

It seems folk are saying that you can't rule out the super natural – but we have no evidence for it, and there is an attempt to equate this with naturalism. However, I have experience of the physical world. I can make reliable predictions. I have not sat on every chair on the world, but through experience and observing the behaviour of other chair – people interactions, I can be 99.9999% sure that every thime I sit on one, it will take my weight – and if it doesn't, I can make predictions about why it didn't – the chair was old, I've put on weight etc. This all rely on REASONABLE assumptions that are testable. Belief in the supernatural without any evidence is not reasonable. It also suffers from the same logical flaws as Pascal's wager (if god is not real and you believe, you have not lost anything, but if he is real…….) This line of reasoning then holds true for the existence of Zeus, fairies and Allah – what if they are real? – well we can all laugh about it together in hell (incidentally, the wager is unbiblical – ignoring the verses above – we are told elsewhere that god only wants those who love him). If the supernatural is false, then I have wasted my only shot at existence following a lie.
The argument of not being able to disprove a negative is not a reason to believe, because we then have to consider flying spaghetti monsters as being real too – Incidentally Paul we could point the Hubble telescope at the lunar landing sites and look for flags and foot prints (I've actually met someone who claims to have walked on the moon (Jim Irwin) but more on witness testimony later) We could exhume who ever is buried in Elvis's grave and perform some micro satellite DNA analysis, and compare it with his wife daughter and parents, we could all take a trip to Transylvania – all these provide a good rational case one way or the other, and Bruce may want to think what evidence he needs to prove I'm not Billy. There are no such cases for the supernatural.
What then does the bible say about it then? Well, it is full of super natural miracles, so we can expect to see these today (John 14:12 says anyone who comes after Jesus will be able to do the same thing) John (20:31) tells us that his gospel was written to provide evidence of the supernatural nature of Jesus. We are also told that the supernatural phenomenon of prophecy is open to scrutiny (1 Thess 5:20-21)
Does the bible say that we can expect evidence? Yes, it does. Remember Thomas (Jn 20:24-28) required proof (an example of eyewitness account not being good enough for him) Despite the usual Christian response of don't test god, we are told that Jesus provides the required proof. Asking for evidence in the form of a miracle is not prohibited either. There is the story of the father asking that his possessed son be healed. He says "I do believe, help my unbelief" (Mk 9:24), and Jesus obliges. So, the bible effectively tells us that the Christian view of the supernatural can be tested. Biz, you remind me of the contest on Mt Carmel (1 kings 18 ) where god provides proof too – however, I think that when we don't convert the excuse will be that we didn't want to follow god, and as I said, that is a false assumption.
It's late, but lets briefly deal with the evidence for Jesus: I am not convinced that there is sufficient reliable historical evidence for the existence of Jesus – but that doesn't mean I necessarily reject the possibility that a Jesus may have lived. All extra biblical sources are not contemporary and usually only mention the existence of Christians. One notable exception is the testamonium flavium (the Josephus one - he lived decades after Jesus). This is partially – if not wholly fabricated (even according to Christians). Evidence includes the fact that Josephus – a devout Jew blasphemes by calling Jesus "the Christ" and the fact that it seems to break up the narrative of the surrounding paragraphs.
If Jesus did exist, then I still have serious doubts about the claims made about him. Not least because there is a strong feeling of recycled OT stories about him, and when one looks at the prophecies he is alleged to have fulfilled, they appear contrived and/or mistranslated.
Take the virgin birth prophecy for example: there are some serious obstacles of context that prohibit this verse from prophesying that a virgin will give birth to Jesus. The first problem is that God is telling King Ahaz to choose a sign that will prove to him that God will defeat an enemy (Is. 7:10). Ahaz refuses to choose one, so God chooses this one for him and says: "All right then, the Lord himself will choose the sign. Look! The virgin will conceive a child! She will give birth to a son and will call him Immanuel--`God is with us.'" The child is so called, because it is a sign that God is with Ahaz. Ahaz ruled from 743-727 BC (Galil's the chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah p1010). The birth of Jesus some 730 years later could hardly have been a sign to Ahaz. Verses 15-16 state that the child will have to learn right form wrong. This is incompatible with the idea of Jesus being "the spirit of God on Legs" as some evangelists put it.
It is a similar story with all messianic prophecies

There is also reasonable doubt about the identity of the authors and important differences between various gospel accounts – which become more fantastic the later they were written. Even the earliest dates attributed to the gospels puts the earliest at 45-50 CE some scholars even place them at as late as 100-200 CE. Then there is all the pagan gods who sound remarkably like Jesus. As Justin Martyr said: "When we say that the Word, who is the first born of God, was produced without sexual union, and that he, Jesus Christ, our teacher, was crucified and died, and rose again, and ascended into heaven; we propound nothing different from what you believe regarding those whom you esteem sons of Jupiter (Zeus)." (First Apology, ch. Xxiv)
We also have other problems, Matt (1) and Luke (3) cant agree on the genealogy of Jesus, then there is the incompatibilities between matt and Luke of the date of the birth of Jesus http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/richard_carrier/quirinius.html (and I haven,t even touched on the resurrection. That should at least explain some of the reasons why I reject Christianity.
Bruce. Have you ever seen a true miraculous answer to prayer? It seems you are saying that you pray for things and if it happens it is god's will, if it doesn't, it's not. Imagine we both have exams – you study and pray and pass. I study, don't pray and pass. Where is the hand of god? We both pass because we study. You would not pass an exam on quantum mechanics without studying. No matter how hard you pray (no doubt you will now tell me you are a physics prof). Have you ever seen an amputee grow a new limb? I'm always amazed with those who claim we are designed – crabs can grow new limbs and we cant.
I hope I've covered everything.

Think the discussion has ended, but folk can resurrect it if they want );-) http://gadgetvicar.typepad.com/gadgetvicar/2007/07/a-question-of-p.html They are not as unpleasant as David Robertson

749. Can the rest of us have our planet back?

Comment #58099 by BillySands on July 23, 2007 at 1:00 pm

Ah, Just the Mutt's nuts

750. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58072 by BillySands on July 23, 2007 at 9:22 am

Hi bouwe. It's a pretty diverse thread at the start. I guess the prophecy stuff changes a bit. There is some early stuff on whether it was prophesied that jesus would be born to a virgin in Bethlehem. Then Mark proposed that Deuteronomy 28 was a prophecy about Rome, and there is some stuff about the book of Daniel. Then there is some evolution stuff and some stuff about prophecies concerning the destruction of Tyre. I try to keep a way from the strangeness that is DG. The good thing about the prophecy stuff is that it is largely testable, and I think this is the best evidence that a theist could present. I hope Mark wont mind too much if I say it doesn't live up to its potential :-)

If I change my mind about my favourite color in mid-sentence am I going to get thrown off into the Valley of What-ya-m-call-it?

No, we use the bridge of Death on this thread. Those valley of What-ya-m-call-it folk are bastard splitters! We will not have them mentioned here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4b4bGAoVR7g