1201. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59903 by Philip1978 on July 31, 2007 at 3:56 am

Lee,
Oh totally different, Quetz exists and speaks great wisdom to us all, that God and Golden Calf rubbish holds no interest for me!
Was only looking at it at Mark's point of view, here we all have been discussing how we think his God does not exist and then go worship Quetz in his absence!!
Praise be to Quetz and His Prophet Billy,
Philip

1202. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #59883 by Philip1978 on July 31, 2007 at 2:51 am

Billy,
He has just accused Professor Dawkins of giving up on science to become a politician for the anti religious discriminatory fundamentalist bunch that we are! Its in the COME OUT article

Poor David, must have had a rubbish holiday!

1203. The Out Campaign

Comment #59869 by Philip1978 on July 31, 2007 at 1:12 am

David, glad you are back, hope you had a nice holiday!

Guess what? I am going to disagree with you!!

1) Atheism, despite your insistence IS NOT A BELIEF. For goodness sake young man will you finally accept that I and all the others here do not revere Professor Richard Dawkins or others as any form of quasi deity.


2) Discrimination? have you not read SavageMickey's post? Or Yorker's? I could go on for ever! I am sorry David but how can you say that religion does not discriminate against people?

3) Yes I would love to have a cup of Tea with anybody on this site, beats sitting around in church asking the invisible for the highly improbable if he/she/it possibly feels like it. Oh sorry was I stereotyping there?

4) You have no idea what a fundamentalist is, how many times do I have to tell you?

David, I hope you have read enough of my posts now that you know that I simply disagree with your faith, not with you as a person. If you think I want to discriminate against you and that everyone on here and I simply follow in the herd with the Professor as the shepherd then you are greatly mistaken. I can be just as sarcastic as you if I want but it hasn't got us anywhere has it?

The reason why I support this and that I am going to get one of these T-Shirts is because I have seen, read and spoken about the psychological atrocities that religion has inflicted upon people. I'll give you an example, I know a woman whose husband beat her quite badly on a regular basis. She eventually divorced him but I will never forget the tears she cried as she told me she thought that god was punishing her for doing something wrong and that her beatings were justified in some strange way. Even after she had left him she thought god would inflict more suffering because she had left him and that she was frightened of what god wanted from her.
That's just one example and I am sure others could provide you with similar stories
I want people to be aware that believing in gods is a waste of time and effort, I don't want people being destroyed like this, being hurt and battered is one thing, adding to your misery by adding god's wrath to it all I think is so wrong. So if it means wearing a T-Shirt and getting people asking questions about religion, then that's fine by me. I want to stop this, as BillySands mentioned in another post, Mental Slavery. I don't want to hit people over this, I don't want to discriminate anyone, I want to help.

Philip

1204. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59697 by Philip1978 on July 30, 2007 at 9:22 am

Lee,
all I have is images of Moses returning from the mountain after a hard long chat with God only to find his mates worshiping a golden bull!

Hehehe, I would like to hope Mark has a sense of humour and he laughs as much as we have been, if not, well, he can blame me, I will do the explaining!

Philip

1205. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #59628 by Philip1978 on July 30, 2007 at 1:32 am

J,
Quezt did type this unto me

"My first commandment to you, Philip- go forth and drink much tea. It will be delicious. My Blessings be upon you"

Now, I travelled up to York over the weekend and did happen upon Betty's Tea room and in this tea room I drank a cup of Betty's Breakfast Tea. It was quite happily the best cup of Tea I have had since I found some Australian Billie Tea back in 1998 (Billy, have you been playing with Australian Tea in your lab perchance?)

How is that for a blessing upon the Tea that He did promise me?

Oh well, if you are going to be in the outgroup, at least take a good cuppa with you, it might get cold out there!

Good call for Dragons O Quetz, Fire goes well with frikkin' laser beams any day of the week! Cheers for the Tea, your humble Priest,

Philip Priestley ( I knew there was a good reason for my surname!)

1206. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58817 by Philip1978 on July 26, 2007 at 8:23 am

Thank you Oh Wise Quetz, I did find the kettle, I did boil the water, said the Sacred words "Cheers Quetz, your good health!" and the Tea was as you commanded, delicious!

1207. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58776 by Philip1978 on July 26, 2007 at 4:39 am

Ah, J had Quetz been a vengeful deity he would simply have used the lightning or changed Billy's ancestry to Spanish!
Billy was allowed to redeem himself in the best way possible and for the benefit of us all!

1208. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #58722 by Philip1978 on July 26, 2007 at 12:59 am

Ok Dianelos,

Here is a worse case scenario for you:

YOUR god, during one of your daily chats, tells you he is upset with the world and all their different religions so its time for you, the chosen one, to go do something about it. Conversion is improbable so lets blow them up says your god

What would you do? Since you claim you have this god inside your head and that he is real and pre-determining away quite happily, what would you do? Obviously you have spoken to Him in the past, had good chats, sorted things out, would that voice still be that of your god? If so you would have to do it for it would be His orders, wouldn't you?I mean this could be one of his "ethical challenges" couldn't it?

No, of course you wouldn't, I think you are a rational man incapable of such brutality. But my point is this is what some people hear in their heads, even the clever ones,look at the chaps who recently attacked Glasgow, one of them was a doctor and still justified his actions. From that normal platform of everyday, moderate religion to the horrible and frightening level Sam Harris describes. People charging around saying that morality comes from their god are then able to justify doing such terrible things because the god voice tells them. Their god is the truth, to them, he wouldn't order it unless He meant it, surely?

But no, I imagine you would say, "but my god wouldn't do that!" or something close to it, problem is some people's gods actually DO!

Please don't tell me that in this day and age that even President Bush would not flick the switch, he went on a religious war against Islam for crying out loud, Ok oil as well, but his primary motivations were religious. If you doubt me look back after 9/11 and tell me his god didn't "ethically challenge" him go war on Terror

So next time you have a chat with your god can you tell him to stop making ethical challenges that force people into doing stupid things like kill innocent people in His name and I will be more than proud of you and Him, I might even acknowledge his existence if he was feeling daring enough to prove he exists in the first place!

I advise you to think this one over and see if you can spot the difference between having a chat with Him and having Him ask you to go blow stuff up, cos I still see it as voices in your head no matter what.

Hope the book is getting better,
Philip

1209. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #58577 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 8:35 am

Dianelos,

I really think you should look at what Corylus posted, I think that is one of the best descriptions of Sam Harris I have heard in a while. (My Hat off to you Corylus!)

Ok, you mention all those bad things around the world, how about looking at how religion has some part in the making of those troubles. Then ask yourself why your god isn't doing a damn thing about it? Or are the people responsible for the poverty, starvation, war etc doing their god's will?

SharonMcT, brilliant summary of the issue Harris is arguing, there is an explanation, this is worse case scenario for you, the dewy eyed religite with his finger over the button. Where does he get it from, from the cherry picking moderates who provided him/her with a platform to get things wrong from.

Why is Harris so worried? Look at the enormous amount of religious people in his own country, look at the fact that Pakistan, India and North Korea have illegally obtained Nuclear Secrets, not looking good is it?

Last but not least DrBenway, the Bird has got it right, "Is it extreme to obey God?" These guys pick it up from the platform and turn into extremism, that is what Harris is worried about and so using his background in philosophy and neurology he tells you about it in his book.

sorry if I missed people to quote, but I want Dianelos to understand why Harris is writing what he does, tally ho, am off to see Harry Potter!

Philip

1210. Islamic Creationist and a Book Sent Round the World

Comment #58541 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 6:45 am

Erm what exactly is Mr Adnan Oktar.on if it isn't the cocaine he is "allegedly" to have found hurtling around his bloodstream?

And why does he like having his photo taken only showing his right side whilst his hand is pulling on something we cant see? Perhaps he is watching "Night at the Museum" on the tv and he is holding the remote to rewind bits!

1211. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58521 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 4:57 am

Last one, I have learned from many masters, esp the ones you mentioned, you did however miss out one the Grand Masters Twii Ning!

Cool we reached thread page 28!

I wholly recommend worshipping Quetz, he is a great deity, plus Billy the Prophet does much good with His one and only Lab coat! Its a good religion and well worth the time and effort, plus the benefit of your god actually communicating with you so that no confusion is made over what He requires of you! Quetz and Billy are actually real, their birth places can be confirmed and they have much wisdom and knowledge, beat that Yahweh and Jesus!

1212. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #58513 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 4:35 am

Quetz,

"Philip- you mention that you did not know your parents were atheists until later in life. But if you had known as a child that they were atheists (and obviously, understood what that meant), do you think that knowledge would have made it more likely that you would be an atheist, even if they didn't talk to you about it?"

Good point, I think the answer would be yes, if they had mentioned it to me that I would be an atheist in the sense that I looked up to those two for guidance as a kid. Only in the sense that I would not have known what the hell an atheist was or what the consequences of that was. I would have been a kid taught not to believe in gods with this weird word Atheist in my head, again I think that would be just as silly as calling me a Marxist or a Christian.

So what did my parents do?

I will explain it how I see it and see what you guys think

I have grown up with religion as my choice if I ever wanted it to be part of my life, I was first introduced to a god at the Church of England school I went to when I was 5 years old. I saw people praying and I copied them, I hadn't the faintest idea who this god was, all I knew was that the headmaster and the reverend spoke about him a lot in assembly. As far as I know my parents attended all the strange events like Harvest Festival etc where they stood in the pews like everyone else's parents. At the age of about 8 years old I stopped praying to see what would happen, being the inquisitive little chap I was I wanted to see what the fuss was about. Nothing happened. My world did not change in the slightest bit, but I still went along to all these school events with my folks just with the idea this was all a bit weird but went along with it cos my parents and all the other adults were there, I was brought up to be polite around adults so at this young age I simply acted like a normal 8 year old. Pushed the boundaries but learned how to behave when my parents asked me so I wouldn't be a pest...well as much as an 8 year old could!

I got to the age of about 11 or 12 and I asked my parents if they believed in god and they said no and spoke about it with them. All along my parents were more concerned about me learning how to act politely etc rather than think of religion as a good or a bad thing, I was given a choice in the matter and I see that as helpful. I was a child of Atheist parents but I was not labelled as one by them, I had my own choice in the matter.

Does that make any sense whatsoever?

1213. Richard Dawkins on Hardtalk

Comment #58469 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 1:54 am

Fides, the_assayer

How many times does it have to be explained to you?
Its so effortlessly simple:
Religion is a life changing decision, its something that I think should be made when a person, not a child, is aware of the consequences of that decision. Lets say you were Communists and then you started hurling Trotsky, Lenin, Marx - anything you could find and give it to that kid to digest, do you honestly think that is right influencing that kid with such a massive life changing decision that he/she should be a communist? No? I hope not at 4 years old.

Should little Fides now decide at 4 that the religion of the parents is the one he/she will take or perhaps wait a little bit before he/she is ready to accept that praying is a good or a bad thing?

I dont think Fides is a wicked chap, teaching your child about politeness and good manners is truly commendable ( My uncle would applaud the West Ham bit as well!!) But I do think it is 100% wrong to say that little Fides is now a Christian just because he/she is good at copying dad and mum. He might just as well be praying to the Flying Spaghetti Monster for all the good it is doing at the moment! (then again I think the same way for you guys but you are old enough to debate that with me!)

My parents never forced their atheism on me, I made my own decision about it and never knew they were atheists till much later on in life.

So please, let little Fides grow up without having religion thrown on to him/her and let it arrive like the Communism might!
Cheers, Philip

1214. Debate between Christopher Hitchens and Edd Doerr

Comment #58462 by Philip1978 on July 25, 2007 at 12:23 am

Professor Dawkins, AndyD.

I think you are absolutely right, I don't think the "moderator" ( I don't think the moderator ever remains neutral hence the " ") is necessary because, like AndyD said, every time we see you or Chrisopher, Sam et al in a debate, invariably you don't end up debating just the one person you turned up to have a discussion with. You are always seen to be debating with two people and that to me seems to be a little pointless. I would also say that if the "moderator" took your side, its not what the debate is all about.
I don't mind someone there to set the debate going, introducing people and explaining the topic of the debate,that's fine. (OK, you might possibly want someone there stopping the person you are debating with going for your neck after a well phrased denial of the existence of their god but that's beside the point hehehe!)

I too am getting tired of listening to "moderators", please can I hear the debaters?

kind regards,
Philip Priestley

1215. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58303 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 10:40 am

Logical, I think you might have the wrong impression about me, I don't want to come across in the way you described, thats not who I am

I am nearly 29 years old and I suppose my posts do come across as slightly naive, I don't think I have explained myself enough from what I understand of the situation in Pakistan or anywhere else in the world where religion has abused women.

I remember chatting to Manfred, an Iranian lady who had escaped persecution and moved to America for safety and I discussed the subject of women and Islam with her and learned a great deal. She described the experience of being a woman in Islam as something very close to Stockholm Syndrome in a prison camp.

If you look at my first post on here I mentioned how numb and ill I feel when I hear about this sort of thing. I totally agree it seems I have had it FAR too easy in my life in comparison to what these people have to endure. I don't want to come across as ungrateful or magnanimous because of where I am and where they are.

The only problem is I can only imagine what those poor women have to go through, I have never ever experienced it so I go on what I can only read and hear about. The fact that I am completely helpless to do anything about it is frustrating and it breaks my heart to see such pointless suffering. I feel great sorrow about how religion ruins and destroys people's lives, men and women have suffered far too much as a result of backward thinking and stupidity.

Please don't think that my joking around with Quetz or my sometimes over the top posts indicate that I think I am special or not caring about the plight of these women and all others for whom religion has segregated and abused for centuries. I am an optimistic man, I do have hope this will change and if I find a way I can contribute to it I will. But please don't think that I would dare assume to be in any way disingenuous to the plight of these women. I hope that clears things up,
kind regards,
Philip

1216. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #58301 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 10:05 am

Dianelos,

Harris= Anger? Which End of Faith book have you been reading from? Have you not been on the other posts where he is in video, he is as calm as a coma! He has always maintained, he is not out to offend anyone, he just wants to provide a reasonable argument against the necessity of faith without evidence

The first 30 pages have no angry statements in them at all as far as I can tell and I have the book in front of me! I don't know why you find it nauseating but I guess I find it tough to read the bible without getting a little weirded out!

He talks about faith and its effect on people, he talks about the abnormal respect people have for religion but have no reasonable basis for it.
He talks about the difference between extremists and moderates and the bad effect they have on religion, moderates being the platform for the extremists. He talks about how different religion has been throughout history and lastly about the need for faith, if the world woke up tomorrow and had no memory but had the all the books we have in front of them, would the bible or Qu'ran still be useful?

The angriest quote I can see so far is the bible quote from Deuteronomy 13:7-11

Where on earth did you find him angry? His tone is straight forward and to the core of the argument he wishes to discuss.

I think J has got it right, you have played your Virtue! No further questions allowed!" card. Its like when I have been typing to David Robertson and mentioned the plethora of other gods out there and he comes back at me saying but there is only one true god and you cant touch him, how dare you even think it! He thinks I am attacking him when I am merely pointing out the straight forward fact there is an absolute supermarket of gods to chose from out there

My advice is don't look at Harris as angry, from the evidence I have seen and read so far and this is from reading Letter To a Christian Nation as well, is that he is very direct when dealing with the issue in front of him. If you don't believe me go and look at his debate with Andrew Sullivan on this site or I think there is a recent video of him speaking in one of the recent articles.

I am glad you are reading it though, keep up the good work, cheers,
Philip

1217. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58276 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 8:14 am

Billy,
One lump these days, used to be 2 in my youth, but I found I can issue rational vengeance with less effort these days, such are the wonders of the training!

1218. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58274 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 8:10 am

Just had a thought, could anyone actually and democratically get to power in a place like that?

Military dictatorship is vile, I oppose it as much as you do, but how on earth could anyone step in there saying "Right, lets actually vote for this one, women included..."! (Riot breaks out...speaker says "sorry, did I say something wrong? Which part exactly"?!) How do you control fundamentalists in a volatile country like that? If AQ get in you are then facing the same problem as Iraq, getting rid of AQ would mean replacing them with something that would work out there, the mind doth boggle as to where to start!

Please someone give them some beer drinking etiquette , education as to how to be nice to women and get rid of that bloody stupid book!

1219. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58267 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 7:28 am

Quetzalcoatl

I agree with you, the place is better off with Musheraff, its such a terrible position for him to be in. The pressure of the extremists upon the government is huge, the problem is Musheraff has acquiesced to them before, e.g when he wanted to revise Rape law. That reduced his power base considerably, I think he is slowly making it back up but its so difficult. The fact those guys and their surrounding fanatical countries have now got nuclear knowledge does not help matters at all, as you said, its horrific. If the real nutters get in I do not want to think about the consequences and I think that's what the international community is working on, maintaining relations so they don't have to go that far. I hope...eek!

Dammit, why cant they just worship you and the prophet billy, tis so much safer!

1220. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58254 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 6:49 am

MadMonk,

I think the Madrasa can be split into two things

1) a "hifz" which is memorisation of the Qu'ran and

2) "alim" which is more a sort of university course on Arabic, shari'ah law, Hadith Studies etc A bit like a history degree with law!

Both in my opinion dangerous because it allows for more religious indoctrination disguised as a form of education and learning. This is one of the reasons they are so fanatical about Islam, its all they are ever taught and it does not prepare them for the modern world, its so sad.

One day they might learn, oh well,
cheers,
Philip

1221. Red Mosque Fueled Islamic Fire in Young Women

Comment #58247 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 6:16 am

I always feel numb when reading this sort of thing, I read all these statements like

"In heaven you get everything without hardship," explained Miss Sarfraz, daughter of a bus driver. "In heaven, if a martyr feels hungry, food appears, the best quality food, and you won't even know where it came from"

and it makes me feel ill

Religion and its promise of afterlife really annoys me, what is so wrong with this life? Don't these people ever connect the hardships they are going through are the direct result of their religion and if they gave it up and used common sense their lives would improve? Do they not connect their 14th century existence is a result of adhering to a 8th century book? No they don't and that is what makes me so numb and powerless to do anything about it, I hope things change, I really do

1222. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58244 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 6:02 am

JC
I agree with you, one of the reasons I love the Iliad and the Oddessey is because of the poetry, I think one thing that amused me about it is even after a most bloody and gratuitous battle the day before the sun rises "rosy fingered" the next morning!

I dont suppose you could recommend any books on the Wromans (no, Roman... STWIKE HIM!) of that period, I am going to read more about it one day and any assistance would be welcomed! I have learned a little here and there about the spread of Judaism and Christianity throughout the Wroman empire in face of the one god religion(whose name escapes me at this point of typing!). I know that Constantine had a very marked effect upon the spread of Christianity when he came to power but my knowledge of stuff beforehand is still very sketchy. I have studied the Goon Show, but I think their interpretation of the Histories of Pliny the Elder are a little off the scale! hehehehe!

Cheers,
Philip

1223. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58235 by Philip1978 on July 24, 2007 at 4:45 am

I am from the south of England, my martial art is Tea-Fu, powerful and quick it is! Plus has many forms depending on the time of day (Breakfast, Afternoon etc) or other powerful forms such as Assam and Earl Grey!

Re-generation of limbs is incredible, Billy, why are we so crap at re-generation, is it highly improbable with our DNA or something?

I can't understand the bible and how people keep interpreting it in different ways to justify "faith" in their god as opposed to another as being plausible. I have posed this question to several of the theists on this site and have usually got the same answer along the lines of "but my god is different...". I think what I want from the bible as Mark has suggested is to use it as a historical document since we have very little to show for that period of time. From what I have seen so far from writers such as Josephus's or Tacitus's it is highly interesting comparing their versions with the bible authors. Sadly, as Billy has shown, parts have been tampered with by future writers. As I posted before I have read things like Homer's Iliad and found it to be full of holes but possibly showing the way of life from that time period. Evidence is so sketchy and minimal but the story is much better than reality!!

Tally Ho, I am off to study more advanced Tea-Fu moves,
Philip

1224. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #58040 by Philip1978 on July 23, 2007 at 5:20 am

Bouwe
I think it has been this so far in no particular order:

1) Bible Prophesy, is it accurate?
2) Bible Historical Inaccuracy
3) Did Jesus Exist?
4) The Great Deluge- Problems with Noah and the flood itself
5) Billy's Gay Fruit Fly collection and Lab coat
6) Pigeon Hate
7) Monty Python
8) Douglas Adams
Forgive me if I missed anything, please feel free to add!

Personally I dislike pigeons greatly, when evolution was handing out decent bird song and vision, pigeon was either last in line, drunk or out playing with the chickens. I hated being woken up at 5:00am with that ridiculous oooooo hooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hoooo ooooooooooo hooooooooooooooooooooooooooo hoooo, them pooing on my parent's patio with reckless abandon and their inability to walk around and see anything without moving their heads back and forth.

Yay to Falcons!

Bouwe, one more thing, what....is your favourite colour?! :)
Cheers,
Philip

1225. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #58038 by Philip1978 on July 23, 2007 at 4:54 am

Dear all,
I have now decided after many cups of tea that I will now go and follow the religion of the Malaysians and worship The Giant Tea Pot and also go worship the Campaign For Real Ale.

Tea provides me with an inner comfort and strength, Ale provides me with fuzzy warmth and clarity of mind unachieved by normal means

I have found that by drinking Tea and Ale I can achieve equilibrium in life, I will explain.
Tea makes you more awake, Ale makes you sleepy, drinking too much of either results in heading too far in one way. So, for example, having a fine pint of Wells Bomabadier after too much tea regains my worldview balance to being more stable. I awaiting the day where I can drink enough Tea and Ale to achieve True Balance.

Who thinks this is mad?

Answers on a post,
Cheers,
Philip

1226. Is there an Artificial God?

Comment #57387 by Philip1978 on July 19, 2007 at 5:21 am

I am a massive Douglas Adams fan, I read this speech when I got the Salmon of Doubt but I appreciate it a whole lot more listening to his voice.

I love the caveman and his cousin Ug analogy, priceless, plus I love the "Anything that happens, happens" argument very powerful indeed, that and "I'll have it off him"! kind of explains religious history quite well hehehehehehe!

Its weird, I obviously never knew him or met him but I lament the fact that I will never have the chance, in all improbability of it happening in the first place, to say to a friend if he had ever walked past "Hey you, sass that hoopy Douglas Adams, now there's a frood who really knows where his towel is!"

Thanks Douglas, much appreciated

Philip

1227. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #57370 by Philip1978 on July 19, 2007 at 3:32 am

_J_
(I'm a bit jealous, actually. You, Sharon McT, Dr Benway and Philip1978 seem to have brains and depth perception)

Me? Depth, brains? Have you completely lost it young man? Has that play of yours finally sent your massive intellect completely barking mad? My debating skills so far on this thread is to point out to poor Dianelos that I can spell anthropomorphism correctly without my spell-checker hinting otherwise, my knowledge of Norse Mythology and Douglas Adams! I used the Hunt The Wocket Analogy for crissakes! The others, yes, without a doubt I take my hat off to all of you, you really have got Dianelos thinking, my only hope is that I have been making him and the rest of you laugh! Now get back to work you crapulent fool! hehehehe

Corylus, I have often wondered if humans would ever dare find a cure for the 200 strains of the cold virus, Madras and a good Shiraz sounds like the right stuff, but not now cos its only half past 11 in the morning where I am!

Right, lunch!
Philip

1228. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #57139 by Philip1978 on July 18, 2007 at 11:16 am

Dianelos,

This is all getting too weird for me, I will have to be honest here, I was referring to the real world vs real world with your god in it. Call it Naturalism if you want but I call it the real world

My mind is totally and utterly confused as to what your god actually does cos the whole reason I put another god in your sentence was to highlight the fact your god is exactly the same as Odin, here goes again:

"No, nothing like that. First of all, again, you must not imagine that idealistic Norse God worship asserts the same reality that naturalism does plus Odin guiding or interfering with nature. According to idealistic Norse Religion Odin produces all order present in our experience of physical phenomena. So, evolution by natural selection is nothing more than a (indeed very clever) idea in the mind of Odin, as are all explanatory patterns present in our experience of physical phenomena, including all physical laws or the Andromeda galaxy."

See? Odin has absolutely every right to take your god's place because it is just as possible for him to do it, except he made the earth out of the dead body of his dad!


Whats all this predetermined and guiding stuff your god does? Can you thank him from me for the fact I have a mild case of Fragile X? Was he a bit slow on the uptake? Whoops, missed that Philip, I was too busy guiding and predetermining which switches I would use to turn the galaxy on!

If I have a little girl child she will grow up with the equivalent of Downs Syndrome and Autism or my son might possibly grow up with learning difficulties. A few years ago a doctor took some blood, did some tests and now I know that I am never going to have kids in my life cos it would be too cruel to inflict that on them knowing what I do now. Its a load of shitty biology and a rubbish x chromosome, that's easy for me to accept and I am not in the slightest bit upset or angry. Do you realise that if your god was real I would have to blame him for being a complete **** for knowing he could have prevented it or that he somehow predetermined I should have this. What makes me so special that I could even say something like that when others in this world are having a worse time of it than I am?. How ridiculous does that sound, me blaming the improbable and invisible for my misfortunes when I can simply attribute it to my crap biology. I don't have to use anthropomorphism my problems, I simply have to deal with it and I have.

Please understand I am not frothing at you for any of this, I simply do not like the idea of a god buggering around with my life as if I was on some sort of path.

You typed:

theism = naturalism + God

heres my version

theism = Asking and inviting the Invisible and Highly Improbable for help explaining Life, The Universe and Everything

I see you disagree with my magic theory:

If it were then what you say above would be reasonable: Here we have naturalism's understanding of reality, it works pretty well (actually it doesn't really but never mind), so why should I add to it some magical being like God?

I think you are failing to understand just how much of a magical being your god actually is to be able to do the things you claim he can do. Heres a list of all the magical things I think he can do, please correct me if I am wrong

1. Omniscience
2. Omnipotence
3. Omnipresence
4. Invisibility



Humans have created their gods out of all sorts of things, even the Malaysian Tea Pot God for goodness sake! They have been claiming since the dawn of time that he can do this that and the other better and more plausibly than the other gods that others worship

I know Douglas Adams was no philosopher but I cant argue with the phrase "Anything that happens, happens", that to me is life at it most simple, if you want Occam's Razor to shave with there it is. It just happens, why is god needed to help nudge it into happening that? To me implies magic, mysticism, super-natural, weird or as I am sorry to crudely put it BOLLOCKS! Really, the search for god is in my view exactly the same as Douglas's Hunt the Wocket!

I hope you understand I only think you are only slightly more barking mad than I and that if you understood any of the above, bravo! I have a cold at the moment so sense may have gone out with the Wocket hunters and I will edit this later.

Right, I need more Tea, tally ho!
Philip

1229. Convict sues God for broken contract

Comment #56984 by Philip1978 on July 18, 2007 at 3:52 am

Lee,
You never know, he might go for the affirmation! hehehehehe

Philip

1230. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #56963 by Philip1978 on July 18, 2007 at 1:06 am

Paul,

I think you might have glossed over the part of my post which said I am an absolute duffer when it comes to science! I am a very poor English and History grad, I don't mean to appear so thick, even after being on this site for a heck of a long time its still all sinking in! I do hope that my argument about animals evolving over time seems a bit silly for a god that is supposed to be able to wave his magic and divine hands and thus it should simply be done.

Downunder,

You ask how long to wait, I would probably have to say when hell freezes over! oh no, wait, that happened in the Norse religion! Don't put yourself down, my rubbish is far worse than yours is!

Hello Eli, great to have you here, I have been following this thread for a while and to be honest my conclusion is I am completely confused, granted it doesn't take much, but confused I am! I am of the opinion that Dianelos's god is completely unnecessary in explaining things that happen, I have mentioned this to him several times, heck I even quoted the mighty Douglas Adams at him, TWICE! He is a resolute fellow and has not yet failed to be a highly intelligent and forceful debater, how dare he!
I am still winning though (you can tell I'm an optimist cant you!!), he hasn't yet proved to me that Odin or Thor are any different to his god, mwhahahaha get out that one matey!! neither has he got his god posting on this thread yet, I would then understand why prayers would not get answered for a while cos he would be too addicted to posting on here arguing his existence!! hehehehe

As you see I am crap at all this but feel its worth the effort because all of the others on this thread are enormously intelligent and its incredible reading, cheers,
Philip

1231. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #56769 by Philip1978 on July 17, 2007 at 6:57 am

Dianleos,
Hehe, am glad your god is not too strict!

"No it doesn't make any sense to me, because I don't believe that Thor exists. But I believe that God exists, so the situation is quite different, don't you think?"

Well, no, I don't see any difference between your god or Thor (or even his dad Odin, who along with his brothers is supposed to have made the earth out of their dad!) The only difference I see between the two is that more people have realised Thor is but a myth, a legend, man made at that.

Thor is/was a god, yes? Men created him to suit their specific surroundings, environment and for example attributed lightning as being one of his little quirks. Anthropomorphising lightning so it has that extra "magic" of being hurled by a displeased deity is the bit that makes no sense to me. Lightning is lightning, Thor, Zeus, Odin etc did not and do not chuck it about, mankind has learned that its not "magic", its just lightning!

Can you see where I am heading with this, things happen on this world, in the universe, its mind bogglingly fun and exciting, there are things we can and cant explain but why oh why is magic added into it? I can see your point about being able to criticize naturalism, of course you should, I welcome it.

But surely reason is better at making things work than magic? God waving his magic hands around to make things do stuff is beyond reason and sense. At least I have a clearer idea as to how evolution happens and I am a complete duffer when it comes to science! I have no idea at all as to how or why your god does the things you say he can.

An example, a set of creatures are bouncing around in tropical climates on planet Earth when, over a number of years, an Ice age arrives. Most of these creatures snuff it, some baby creatures develop over time, if the species is able to survive long enough, fur to adapt to the cold. Now did your god or even Odin and his brothers organise the cold weather in the tropical climate to kill off the weakest creatures, then muck around with the genetics of the little baby creatures so that over a number of generations there are more animals with fur coats? Being a god, Odin would, if he had been in the mood (worked primarily as the mood took him from what I read!), might have conjured up a fur coat for the animal before the Ice Age hit. Would that not seem a little bit more logical for a god? Surely being a god he would know the Ice age is on its way cos he created it all, why all that mucking around over sometimes millions of years when he/she/it has the power to simply create it there and then? Or am I applying human standards to a deity I know nothing about?

The only reason I type that your god or Odin should not have taken their time over the whole thing is that prayers are supposed to be answered quite quickly. If dear old Odin has the power to do that, if he is in the mood, why not with small creatures on a world he is supposed to have created? "Quick here you go guys the weather is about to get cold, kapow, there's something to help you along a bit!"

Evolution is a gradual process over many many years, starting from simple to more complicated as the need arises. Gods should not have to take that long surely?

6 days sounds about better, "right, that's your lot, I am taking Sunday off, catch you later, call me on Monday if you need to!"

Forgive me, I am being a little silly, I cant help it, but I am seriously interested as to how and why your god needs to be involved with the world, as I said before he is not needed, it simply happens anyway,
Cheers,
Philip

1232. Darwin or Design

Comment #56737 by Philip1978 on July 17, 2007 at 4:42 am

I could never wear The Coat I am not worthy, Billy's knowledge (that of course you gave unto him too) of how to create Gay Fruit Flies surpasses anything I may conjure up, plus he can clone CJ22's avatar for Your Glory, he is Worthy!

1233. Darwin or Design

Comment #56731 by Philip1978 on July 17, 2007 at 4:18 am

Sciphishow, I really urge you to stop and think before calling someone like PZ or any other atheists dogmatic or religious. I am convinced there is no god because of good evidence, my opinion like all the others here, was shaped by reason and proper logical thinking. That could all change were we presented with other evidence for god's existence that was reasonable. At the moment evidence for any deity is unreasonable, untestable and more to the point MAN made, nothing more. That is not dogmatic or religious, how can it be when there is no god involved?


pewkatchoo:
Billy is wearing his Lab coat bequeathed to him by the Almighty Quetz, logicbombs simply explode next to Him, he will be fine... wont you Billy...of course, I have Faith, he will be ok...that means he will be...right?....BILLY SPEAK TO US!

Edit: Ahhhh Thank Quetz, for He lives!

1234. The New New Atheism

Comment #56722 by Philip1978 on July 17, 2007 at 3:55 am

I really love the way he says Hitchens et all are fantastically intelligent yet its McGrath who is the really clever and intelligent one cos he uses GOD!

I agree with J (So the play is finished then young man, is it, hmmm?!!) the more pressing issue is Dr Benway's return to mooning!

Philip

1235. The fundamentalist delusion

Comment #56499 by Philip1978 on July 16, 2007 at 3:51 am

Nooooo Mr Dawkin's, you evil evil man, wanting to take my god away and call HIM naughty names!

I really laugh at the way that the Professor is made to sound shrill and nasty even though that quote he used is the nastiest thing typed into the God Delusion! I love it when people get offended about the invisible being insulted! Does his god
really need this much protection from those naughty atheists who say bad things about his existence and character? There he is quoting McGrath saying we are worried and that atheism is falling, what a load of rubbish! I would say people are becoming more aware than ever that there is now a bigger voice for atheism than there ever has been, this guy is definitely worried about that!

stephenray you are right, they should not make such preposterous assertions!
Cheers, Philip

1236. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #56494 by Philip1978 on July 16, 2007 at 3:21 am

Dianelos, you are a naughty boy, you said you were not coming back!!

"Indeed, if people can live well while believing that God does not exist then so much the better: it only shows how many paths towards Him/Her God opens for us, how really open God's arms are for us all."

Huh? I am convinced there is no god so how am I on the path to god?

I really do think you need to think about that statement. That's like saying the TV man in Douglas Adams's quote is actually working his way to believing in the little men in the TV despite the fact that he has just spent time explaining that they dont exist. They are not required to make the TV work so why would he then be making his path towards the little men?

Same with me and your god, I don't need your god, I am convinced he is a figment of your imagination and am not working down any path to go find him.

Here is your statement again, does it make sense now?

"Indeed, if people can live well while believing that Thor does not exist then so much the better: it only shows how many paths towards Thor opens for us, how really open Thor's arms are for us all."

Thor does not exist yet Thor's arms are open for us? Odd, very odd!

Anyway, stop being such a naughty boy and posting on here, you are a bad influence!!
Cheers
Philip

1237. The Republican War on Science Rages On

Comment #55992 by Philip1978 on July 13, 2007 at 5:54 am

J get back to that play writing you naughty naughty boy! ( You did ask us to remind you heheheh!)

1238. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #55981 by Philip1978 on July 13, 2007 at 4:59 am

Quetz,
And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene. (Matthew 2.22,23)

So if that is Samson in the Judges quote, what prophesy is Matthew referring to in his gospel? I am going cross eyed...

1239. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #55972 by Philip1978 on July 13, 2007 at 4:25 am

I...cant...help...it...must post!!

My favourite colour is blue!

Ok, here's my full take on Nazareth, I am convinced there is a big problem with this whole thing because of the prediction supposedly made in Judges 13.5 where it is said:


'For, lo, thou shalt conceive, and bear a son; and no razor shall come on his head: for the child shall be a Nazarite unto God from the womb: and he shall begin to deliver Israel out of the hand of the Philistines.' '

Now as far as I know Nazarite means 'he who vows to grow long hair and serve god', (Ozzy Ozbourne?heheh!)The Nazarenes were a Jewish/Christian split off group from the 2nd Century Jewish/Christian group called the Essenes. They even had their own Gospel of the Nazarenes, nothing of course to do with Nazareth the city and more the Hebrew name for Truth or Flower(netser)

I find it a huge and strange coincidence that then Matthew attributes it to the Old Testament prophesy by twisting a word to fit a city name.

I nicked this from another site http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/nazareth.html cos I am a lazy man and I think this is a clearer explanation than I could give

"It seems that, along with the Nozerim, a related Jewish/Christian faction, the Evyonim – 'the Poor' (later to be called Ebionites) – emerged about the same time. According to Epiphanius (Bishop of Salamis , Cyprus, circa 370 AD) they arose from within the Nazarenes. They differed doctrinally from the original group in rejecting Paul and were 'Jews who pay honour to Christ as a just man...' They too, it seems, had their own prototype version of Matthew – 'The Gospel to the Hebrews'. A name these sectaries chose for themselves was 'Keepers of the Covenant', in Hebrew Nozrei haBrit, whence Nosrim or Nazarene!

In other words, when it came to the crunch, the original Nazarenes split into two: those who tried to re-position themselves within the general tenets of Judaism ('Evyonim'-Nosrim); and those who rejected Judaism ('Christian'-Nosrim)

Now, we know that a group of 'priestly' families resettled an area in the Nazareth valley after their defeat in the Bar Kochbar War of 135 AD (see above). It seems highly probable that they were Evyonim-Nosrim and named their village 'Nazareth' or the village of 'The Poor' either because of self-pity or because doctrinally they made a virtue out of their poverty.


So, there be the history of Nazareth, I just cant see Jesus having lived there when it was a graveyard (well, old JC has a reputation for raising folk from the dead, it could have happened..hehe) I think the story of Jesus being there is just a confusion with the earlier prophesy made in the Old Testament that Luke et all managedd to merge into their interpretations of the Christian/Jewish religion that had managed to gain such a reputation in the 1st Century
I hope I am not talking wiffle here, someone please help me out if I am being daft!

Billy, here is the link
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/11/ntablet111.xml
Cheers All!

Philip

1240. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #55946 by Philip1978 on July 13, 2007 at 2:31 am

I also would like to add my thanks to you all for posting on this thread, I have been reading it with great interest and slight bewilderment!
Dianelos, I am still convinced your belief in your God is very much like that Douglas Adams story I offered you all the way back in the dark depths of this thread. BUT I think you have brought a lot to this thread and I am glad to have learned things from you, all the best for the future unless you cant go cold turkey and HAVE to come back and post one more time!! hehehe!


Downunder, Remember, the Force will be with you, always...

Cheers, Philip

1241. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #55736 by Philip1978 on July 12, 2007 at 6:04 am

Mark,
Cheers tons again, I promise I will treat the Bible, both testaments, as a historical document along the same lines as you said about Zeus and the ancient gods. Good example is the Trojan War, I love reading about it, I have read Homer's Iliad and Oddessey in the poem form and small books as well, they may not be completely historically accurate, heck the Trojan War may not have been fought, Troy may not have existed but I still think there is some historical worth to it.
Right, stop bothering this poor man Philip, let him answer other questions!! hehehe
All the best,
Philip

1242. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #55675 by Philip1978 on July 12, 2007 at 1:09 am

Mark, thank you for your advice, I really appreciate it. I did indeed read in the paper yesterday about that discovery they made that proves part of the Old Testament that was previously thought to be false all because a scholar managed to catch sight of a name, very interesting
I have no desire to become weird over all this, rather I wish to learn more about this particular piece of history simply because it interests me greatly. I see what you mean about getting too pedantic over it and then being made to look daft later on. I don't mind being proved wrong on something that I am convinced of being right, I just think its good to have somewhere to start from and see where it takes me. I will always question what I see as wrong but am not too stubborn to accept others advice and ideas.

I have been an atheist all my life, through no coercion from anyone, I stopped praying at about 8 years old to see what would happen and nothing did, nothing changed for me. I enjoyed studying English and History because it allowed me to question things, research it, formulate opinions and back them up with evidence ( Am still completely rubbish at it hehehe!). The Bible, in my opinion, has many questionable aspects to it and I want to investigate them to see what I can find out. Looking through this thread the others have also found amazing and interesting facts that they have presented you with, you have also produced some well put together arguments and I have decided that I want to know more about it. Until I have proof or evidence to change my mind I will keep up with the opinion that the Bible is wrong on many levels, but that could change, I hope you too would change your mind too if properly convinced. ( Judging by what I have seen you type on this thread I get the impression you would)
Right, I will sit back for a while and let you get back to your discussions with Lee and the others, I hate to interrupt but did want to hear your opinion, thank you for your time,
Philip

1243. Inferior Design: Richard Dawkins reviews Behe's lastest book

Comment #55672 by Philip1978 on July 12, 2007 at 12:43 am

Robert Maynard, Creator, typed

Who are you, mere mortal, to question the perceived deficiencies of your own perfect design?

Philip, Mere Mortal replies,

I am Philip and I was supposed to be made in your own image! Why the hell did you include the foreskin if you only want to cut it off again, get back to the drawing board matey or do I have to bring out the babel fish and prove you exist therefore you don't!
*Stomps on Distortion Pedal and delivers a dramatic and resounding E Chord on guitar played through a Fender Valve Amp*

1244. Inferior Design: Richard Dawkins reviews Behe's lastest book

Comment #55469 by Philip1978 on July 11, 2007 at 7:55 am

Bizzaro,
You typed "I was obviously implying that the human body functions just as it is supposed to function if it was created by a Creator."

My body is not really functioning as if a creator had any say in it, one look would tell you I need to exercise more if I want those abs of justice hehehe!
Seriously though, I have a very mild form of a condition known as Fragile X, it has all the hallmarks closely akin to that of Downs Syndrome and Autism. I was technically lucky in the sense that I have a very mild case of it. I have an almost dyslexic problem with maths, it simply does not work in my head, even simple sums sometimes baffle me for ages. The result of this is that I am a more visual and lateral thinking person because of how I arrive at conclusions that others would have a more straight forward way of arriving at.

The big problem with this and this is why I don't agree that there is a Creator who designed my body is that there is a strong chance that if I had a female child she would have this condition full blown. If I have a male there is a chance of it not being there or he will have learning difficulties worse than mine. I would call that imperfect design rather than the thinking of a supposedly omniscient and omnipotent deity. Why bother mucking around with my genetics to that degree? Makes more sense that I am simply unlucky enough to have been given a weak X chromosome passed down from one side of family and that is simply biology and shitty genetics and nobody's fault. At the moment, there is also no known cure, a Creator again has mucked up because this needs curing and correcting. I hope someday scientists do find an answer, I know people who have this worse than I do and its awful.

I am not having a go at you I promise but I just cant see a Creator having anything to do with my condition, seems a bit strange to me,
take care
Philip

1245. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #55454 by Philip1978 on July 11, 2007 at 6:44 am

Mark, its great to have you back and that you are not too Tyred hehehehahahahah, please troll me now, that was awful!

I actually have been meaning to ask you a question, I have posted somewhere else about the subject of Nazareth and if it actually existed during the time of Jesus in the 1st Century. The only information I have garnered so far has shown me that the site that modern day Nazareth sits on was in fact a graveyard for the people of a nearby town called Japha up until the year 67Ad when Emperor Trajan destroyed the place. I was wondering if you knew of any historical writings other than the Bible that there was an actual city called Nazareth around the start of the 1st Century. I know you have a load to catch up on, I think you might want to reply to other posts on here first but if you could offer some advice I would be grateful

Lee, I could quit too, I could, just...dont...want to...

More Single Malt, less CK One, it will do you good!

Cheers, Philip

1246. Praying to a milk jug

Comment #55450 by Philip1978 on July 11, 2007 at 6:05 am

Billy,
Its ok, I firmly believe that if I keep my rock solid faith in Quetz and all His glory,he will embolden Arthur the Caterpillar with great strength and thus he will save the day and foil Evil Edna's plans

How do you convince the religious their god does nothing? I think Rtambree is right, human weirdness has a lot to answer for!
This reminds me a lot of Andrew Sullivan, how that guy keeps his faith going whilst all that has happened to him I don't know. His internal fantasy is indeed limitless as the debate on this site has shown, Sam won the argument yet he feels stronger, the Catholic church hates gay people, yet he is gay and Catholic! My mind could not be more boggled unless I had been at the Pan Galactic Gargle Blasters!

Ah back to Willow the Wisp, its more logical!

1247. Praying to a milk jug

Comment #55430 by Philip1978 on July 11, 2007 at 4:40 am

Praise be to the prophet Dr Billy and to Quetz for sending His one and only Lab Coat, blessed be His Television may it grant us all with The Wisdom, Thank Quetz for capital letters!


Oh bl**dy hell, not again, what is this stuff in my sandwiches?

I am convinced that any Christian or Muslim or Mormon looking at those videos can simply turn around and say "But that's not my God!" and remain steadfast in their delusion. I think this is best explained by posters like Bizzaro, David Robertson, Diaenelous and others, defining what their God is and what that God does is extremely difficult because each has their own special idea as to how things work. Each time I have made suggestions as to what I think of their God and the response is always along the lines of "but my God does this..."

Good video though and yes, shame about the voice!

1248. Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it

Comment #55402 by Philip1978 on July 11, 2007 at 2:57 am

GBG
Hello at last! I did post something last night but it went weird on me and I was too tired to do it again!

Right, I will press on, hopefully not making howlingly stupid errors about where Jesus was born but rather where he grew up ( History and English grad, what do you expect!)

Right, I said I was going to provide evidence on why I think Jesus did not exist so here goes, I think first I will concentrate on Nazareth where he grew up and move on from there.

According to the Bible this is what Luke has to say on it

And when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth. And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him.
(Luke 2.39,40)

Now if I am correct Jesus grew up around the start of the 1st century, ok its highly debatable as to exactly when this happened because Matthew and Luke cannot agree on that but that is for a later discussion.

My problem is this, after having read a few articles here and there on the internet and then discovering a book by Kenneth Humphreys, Jesus Never Existed I have come to the conclusion that it would have been pretty harsh for Jesus growing up in that area.
Humphreys argues that there was a place not far from the site of present day Nazareth called Japha. He states that up until the year 67, when Emperor Trajan demolished them, Japha had been using the site of Nazareth as a burial ground and evidence of a cemetery have been found. Don't you think it would have been a little harsh growing up in a graveyard? (I suppose since JC was able to raise the dead, company would have not been a problem! hehehe please excuse me, that was juvenile, I can't help it!)

My other big problem is the name Nazareth's connection to Jesus does not appear until the 4th Century on anything I have looked at, I could be wrong, as I said before, I am only beginning to learn about all this. Thing is The Old Testament makes no reference to it, the Talmud, Jewish History and Law book mentions Galilee and 63 towns inside and around it, but no Nazareth. There are records of a Itinerarium Burdigalens that Humphreys refers to, a Pilgrim from Bordeaux who anonymously left a document dated to 333 AD showing where the route went. This person goes through Jerusalem and Bethlehem amongst other places, yet again he does not pass through the "City" that his saviour grew up in, why?

Now, Matthew wrote this in his gospel:

"...And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.
(Matthew 2.22,23)

The Nazarenes were a break off group from the Jewish group the Essenes from around the 2nd century AD. According to some bits I have read they were followers who took their beliefs from the Old and New Testament. The Old Testament refers to a "Nazarite" in Judges 13.5, translated from the Hebrew means 'One how vows to grow his hair long and serve God' and Matthew amazingly manages to turn this around so that the prophesy comes true by making him a Nazarene to imply that the Nazareth story fits. I personally think that is a little fabricated to say the least, what do you think? Hang on, wait a minute, isn't that above quote from the book of Judges about Samson? Have I found an error? Time to start brushing up on your evolution I think! hehehehe

How did Nazareth get its name? Humphreys says this:

It seems that, along with the Nozerim, a related Jewish/Christian faction, the Evyonim – 'the Poor' (later to be called Ebionites) – emerged about the same time. According to Epiphanius (Bishop of Salamis , Cyprus, circa 370 AD) they arose from within the Nazarenes. They differed doctrinally from the original group in rejecting Paul and were 'Jews who pay honour to Christ as a just man...' They too, it seems, had their own prototype version of Matthew – 'The Gospel to the Hebrews'. A name these sectaries chose for themselves was 'Keepers of the Covenant', in Hebrew Nozrei haBrit, whence Nosrim or Nazarene!

In other words, when it came to the crunch, the original Nazarenes split into two: those who tried to re-position themselves within the general tenets of Judaism ('Evyonim'-Nosrim); and those who rejected Judaism ('Christian'-Nosrim)

Now, we know that a group of 'priestly' families resettled an area in the Nazareth valley after their defeat in the Bar Kochbar War of 135 AD (see above). It seems highly probable that they were Evyonim-Nosrim and named their village 'Nazareth' or the village of 'The Poor' either because of self-pity or because doctrinally they made a virtue out of their poverty

Right, I have wiffled for long enough, I will go and look at the stuff you gave me and get back to you, though I may just concentrate on the Tacitus stuff because I cant see Jesus of Nazareth in that Testimony, I only see the words "wise man" alongside Socrates and Pythagoras, doesn't make sense to say that is proof of his existence
I quoted most of what I have typed from http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/ and also the book itself should you wish to read more.

I will hunt for other books at some point, I don't like just relying on one source, even though Humphreys uses many sources of his own.

Hope you find this interesting and I would love to hear your comments on this, as I said before, I am here to learn and understand and well as wiffle hehe!
take care,
Philip

1249. Yes, the universe looks like a fix. But that doesn't mean that a god fixed it

Comment #54889 by Philip1978 on July 9, 2007 at 8:34 am

Dammit GBG, I had a whole passage just deleted as I was checking stuff!

I was wrong to say Nazareth was the birthplace, thanks for pointing that out, but I still stand by my opinion that it was not there at the time of Jesus, it was a grave yard for the people who lived nearby in Jafa who were massacred by Emperor Trajan later on but more on that later I promise

I will have to get back to you tomorrow with a whole argument but I would like to thank you for the stuff you sent

The "Testimony" of Mara Bar-Serapion, I will explain more but I can't find Jesus in there, he mentions Pythagoras and Socrates by name, why not this "Wise Man" it refers to?

Tacitus, wow, now that has got me thinking, my initial thoughts are directed the group Christiani, who were part of the Jewish Revolt in 66 to 73 which fits with Nero's reign of 54 to 68 but give me more time tomorrow

Right, I have to go home, catch you tomorrow,
Philip

1250. Open Debate: The Righteousness of Blasphemy

Comment #54827 by Philip1978 on July 9, 2007 at 4:08 am

Didn't Professor Dawkins quote on his Galapagos trip from bumper stickers saying "Blasphemy is a victimless crime!"