Comments by Quetzalcoatl

Comment #233118 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 6:43 am

Bonzai-

According to Islam, he didn't die, but was raised up to heaven while still alive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus#Islamic_views

202. A flea we missed?

Comment #233110 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 6:34 am

Something that I just remembered that I wanted to comment on.

Someone said (I can't remember who, sorry)

Herod died 4BC.A documented historical fact.

David Robertson responded:

And your point is?

David- is it not disingenuous for you to pretend that you are genuinely unaware of the point that the poster was trying to make? The implications of Herod's death in 4 BC for the tales about Jesus are immediately obvious.

It is extremely improbable that Herod would, as the Gospels say, have given an order to kill all the newborn male children in Israel, given that he had been dead for about four years. Does that not demonstrate that the Biblical stories about this are wrong?

203. A flea we missed?

Comment #232998 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 2:23 am

Evolution and The Fall are inconsistent with one another to a significant extent. If everyone will forgive the blatant self-promotion, I did a blog post that addresses some of this a while ago:

http://musingsofastrangemind.blogspot.com/2007/12/sin-or-selection.html

204. A flea we missed?

Comment #232971 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 1:31 am

David Robertson-

I do not think that everyone on this site is a follower of Dawkins - although many act as though they are. Sychophantic would be a good word.

The problem is you keep saying that without specifying WHO you are referring to, even when challenged to both here and on your own site.

205. After Bibles seized, U.S. group won't leave Chinese airport

Comment #232947 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 12:54 am

Goldy-

I'm not saying that an American protestant sect has an ulterior motive, but, as my comment at 47 may indicate, there may be more to these smuggled bibles than meets the eye.

It strikes me as being a publicity stunt, so they can cry "Help! Help! We're being repressed!"

206. Fleabytes

Comment #232944 by Quetzalcoatl on August 19, 2008 at 12:52 am

Diacanu-

If you just can't get enough of RM, I can point you in the direction of his blog.....

207. A flea we missed?

Comment #232776 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 3:10 pm

ToCT-

Very appropriate.

208. A flea we missed?

Comment #232770 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 3:06 pm

Goldy-

As a former British schoolkid, I agree with you there!

209. A flea we missed?

Comment #232768 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 3:04 pm

This WAS a productive discussion, can we avoid it degenerating?

(I agree with Phatbat in 608 BTW).

210. A flea we missed?

Comment #232740 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:42 pm

Gregg-

I know you're being sarcastic, but you'd never get on his list. I only asked him for two reasons: it irritates me when people use phrases like "certain posters" but never clarify who they mean, and because I'm always curious to see if I'm on the list.

211. A flea we missed?

Comment #232726 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:31 pm

JAMCAM87-

Will you name names?

212. Catholic leaders block contraceptive advice for 30,000 Scots girls

Comment #232715 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:18 pm

Padster1976-

I'm sorry, but WHY THE FUCK SHOULD THERE HAVE BEEN 'A DEAL'?

I thought this, but the Catholics would have the power to prevent the jab being administered to girls in Catholic schools. This deal could be considered the lesser of two evils- it's just so damn irritating that it's even necessary.

213. A flea we missed?

Comment #232697 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 1:56 pm

My two-pence worth-

I post more than my fair share of off-topic banter: tea, divine powers, whacking etc, and I accept responsibility for that. As a consequence of the discussion around this subject, I will do my best to stay on topic, and will try and give greater thought to avoiding unnecessary posts that don't add anything to the discussion.

However, there are a couple of things that need to be borne in mind. There's only so much mileage to be had out of each starting article, so I think it's fairly inevitable that once all the points have been covered the discussion will turn off-topic.

The same off-topic subjects are also going to come up over and over again, that's the peril of an established forum with a large group of regular posters. There's not much that can be done about that, as irritating as it may be to some posters.

I notice also that certain posters have been named as being particularly guilty in this regard (I haven't read all the comments so I don't know if my name is among them). All I would say is that, particularly since this subject is under discussion, it is all too easy to remember their off-topic contributions and not necessarily the salient and valuable points they make.

I'm sure I'm just telling you what you already know, but just thought I'd put my point across.

214. A flea we missed?

Comment #232447 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 6:16 am

Coretemprising-

I actually took the time to type a response (265) to your previous rant on this subject, it's a shame that you haven't read it or at least not paid attention to what I was trying to say.

If you don't like what is being discussed on a thread, nobody is forcing you to read it. But leaving a succession of comments bemoaning that (while being careful not to name names) is pointless, and just makes you look bad, regardless of how old or what gender you are.

215. A flea we missed?

Comment #232426 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 5:27 am

To everyone asking David Robertson questions- you're in for a long wait. I asked him these questions almost four months ago. I insist that I get my answers first.

216. A flea we missed?

Comment #232390 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 3:07 am

Steve Zara-

There is no answer â€" only despair, death and destruction. But what about Darwin's argument? He makes one big mistake â€" he assumes that the world as it is now is the world as God created it. But that is not the case. When you read Genesis One notice the repeated refrain, 'And God say that it was good'. God did not create the world to have natural disasters, cancer and death. Something came into the world which has upset the natural order of things and polluted the whole environment.

This is not an argument of someone who accepts evolution. If he did, then he could not use this argument, given that death and parasites are part of the evolutionary process. If God created the world to not have death and cancer, then he cannot be behind evolution. Or is the argument that human sin somehow retroactively polluted the entire evolutionary process?

217. A flea we missed?

Comment #232384 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:57 am

Steve Zara-

It seems that it is open to interpretation. No death/spiritual death only/no human death but plants and bugs died. Much like the Bible, it seems to be reinterpreted in light of changes in circumstance.

218. A flea we missed?

Comment #232380 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:49 am

Steve-

Animals did die. If grass was eaten, then bugs and stuff on the grass would get eaten too. Insects on the ground would get crushed underfoot (those Diplodocuses never look where they're going). And unless falcons and eagles ate berries back then, birds died too.

219. A flea we missed?

Comment #232375 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:40 am

mordacious1-

All those speaking engagements will bump up the income nicely.

220. A flea we missed?

Comment #232374 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:38 am

Hasn't David Robertson dismissed it previously when people have pointed out to him that events in the Old Testament are not historically accurate?

221. A flea we missed?

Comment #232366 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:23 am

Diacanu-

Maybe his mates put him in a tomb for a laugh.

222. A flea we missed?

Comment #232362 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 2:19 am

Does Lazarus count as a zombie?

223. Richard Dawkins Lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #232339 by Quetzalcoatl on August 18, 2008 at 12:54 am

Chewedbarber-

It's even possible that life on Earth could have started via two sources- as the result of chemical reactions on Earth, AND delivered via panspermia from other planets in the system. Mars would be a likely candidate.

224. A flea we missed?

Comment #231762 by Quetzalcoatl on August 17, 2008 at 2:56 am

Coretemprising-

I do not understand why TWP's deleted post, so much talked about, has not been reproduced here for all to see on THIS forum. There were no copies?
Did I miss it?

And as much as I can't believe I'm saying this, TWP et al hereon are all acting like a bunch of young spoiled brats. Boring, useless foolishness. And David Robertson's reasoning on HIS OWN forum concerning why he deleted TWP's post seemed to me perfectly reasonable, exhibiting kindness the poster didn't merit, and well within his right as the site owner. And if the short quote was representative, I don't blame him for the deletion.

RD must be so pleased with all this recent nonsense, and you all must have too much time to waste. Get an adult life, the lot of you, Jesus! Some of you people make me ashamed to be an atheist.

Coretemprising, while you are of course entitled to your view, I think you are mistaken. Referring to a group of posters as "young, spoiled brats" seems to me to be a pointless and needlessly snide comment to make. I note, furthermore, that you did not define precisely which posters you were referring to, apparently preferring to single out thewhitepearl for the focus of your ire, for whatever reason.

The "short quote" you mentioned was merely an extract from a far larger post- perhaps you should have taken the time to read it before jumping to conclusions about its validity or lack of same.

You complain about "time-wasting", ignoring the irony of your submitting several comments purely to complain about it! Most threads go off-topic at some point, since there is only such mileage to be had from discussing a particular article. Would you prefer that, when on-topic conversation is exhausted, that everyone refrain from posting until a new article appears?

Finally, I find it quite bizarre that you would claim that the behaviour of others causes you to be ashamed that you don't believe in God. You seem to have forgotten that atheism is defined solely as an absence of belief, and atheists are an incredibly diverse group of people. It is not for anyone else to "validate" your atheism.

225. A flea we missed?

Comment #231760 by Quetzalcoatl on August 17, 2008 at 2:34 am

I would call Christianity a historical evidence based belief based upon the person and work of Jesus Christ.

One might argue that if the historical evidence was sufficiently strong, then far more people would believe it.

226. Richard Dawkins Lecture at UC Berkeley

Comment #231592 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 3:54 pm

Second I can understand the argument that everything that has a beginning must have a cause

Not necessarily.

But it's entirely logical to argue that there may exist an intelligent being who created time space and matter and that that being was not caused because he / it did not have a beginning

Actually, it's not logical at all, not least because the concept of something happening "before" the beginning of time is itself a logical impossibility.

227. A flea we missed?

Comment #231584 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 3:36 pm

David A Robertson-

Our members are perfectly capable of dealing with such things.

I would have thought that a far better impression of the site could be given to potential visitors, if they were able to see not only the "questionable statements" but also the concise, intelligent responses that said statements would surely be met with from the members of your forum. Just my opinion.

EDIT

twp- got it.

228. A flea we missed?

Comment #231582 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 3:31 pm

Laurie-

http://www.fcosonline.org/index.php?action=forum

But you need to register.

229. A flea we missed?

Comment #231572 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 3:08 pm

thewhitepearl-

Another PM for you.

Maybe you're right, I'm not sure.

230. A flea we missed?

Comment #231569 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 2:54 pm

thewhitepearl-

PM for you re that.

231. A flea we missed?

Comment #231562 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 2:40 pm

thewhitepearl-

Onto a blank document. Which of course, you're capable of doing yourself. Never mind. Forget I said anything.

232. A flea we missed?

Comment #231553 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 2:28 pm

thewhitepearl-

Aaaaannnnddd it's gone again.

233. A flea we missed?

Comment #231545 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 2:19 pm

thewhitepearl-

My mistake, I copied it in case it got removed again, but pasted it to the wrong place! Now removed. That'll teach me to pay more attention!

234. A flea we missed?

Comment #231530 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 1:47 pm

thewhitepearl-

D'oh. Your initial complaint post has now been removed!

235. A flea we missed?

Comment #231526 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 1:43 pm

thewhitepearl-

No, you can't retrieve or modify a post while it's awaiting approval, but you're currently not moderated. So you don't need approval at the moment, and it will get through straight away. If it meets his "standards" he'll leave it there when he notices later.

236. A flea we missed?

Comment #231522 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 1:31 pm

Apathy-

Been googling for the last fifteen minutes and came up with very little about the latest flea. Plenty of references to it, but no detail on precisely what the arguments are. Plus it seems to be out of stock on Amazon- limited print run?

This strikes me as being a very minor flea.

EDIT-

I'll make it up to him. I suppose I'll let him put one of those paralysing moves on me again

Geez, Pearl, it's called private life for a reason, you know! :(

Oookay NOW I'm pissed. That is B.S. Suppose I'll post it up myself.

He'll just take it down again if you do it without editing it. Not that you should have to, but if you do make some alterations it'll get through.

237. A flea we missed?

Comment #231508 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 1:12 pm

Apathy Personified-

So, another flea - who thinks there will be any new arguments coming our way?

Probably not. However, I've looked on Amazon.com and.co.uk, and can't find any description. I'll see what a google can tell me.

238. A flea we missed?

Comment #231502 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 1:03 pm

thewhitepearl-

Check out FCOS. Your post is gone'ded. DR has posted an "explanation".

Diacanu-

Sorry, but this thread has been effectively destroyed by now anyway.

239. A flea we missed?

Comment #231496 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:58 pm

thewhitepearl-

I've been accused of being the kryptonite of focused and intelligent discussion around here.

No big deal. Let's face it, Diacanu and I are hardly renowned for searing intellectual debate and an ability to stick to the subject.

EDIT-

Dude, I'm this close to deleting the link to your precious little flea book AND then treating you to the bat.

Well. I didn't know it was such an insult.

- Hangs head, sniffs melodramatically -

240. A flea we missed?

Comment #231490 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:45 pm

Diacanu-

sorry about that. I have a tendency to wander off-topic. :(

241. A flea we missed?

Comment #231485 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:40 pm

thewhitepearl-

Would you like me to edit it to mention that you're young and attractive? :)

242. A flea we missed?

Comment #231479 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:32 pm

thewhitepearl-

I thought I'd be clear, I didn't want people to get confused about who wrote it and not give you the credit. It wasn't intended negatively.

243. A flea we missed?

Comment #231473 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:24 pm

thewhitepearl-

Well, that was Huitzilopochtli. But I put him up to it.

244. A flea we missed?

Comment #231469 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:14 pm

Steveroot-

try here: http://www.fcosonline.org/index.php?action=forum

245. A flea we missed?

Comment #231467 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:13 pm

thewhitepearl-

You're mom was still a slut.

Hey, don't speak ill of the dead! She came to a bad end, thanks to that bitch Coyolxauhqui....

I am a little curious about what your password is- you mentioned they might not like it?

246. A flea we missed?

Comment #231462 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 12:03 pm

thewhitepearl-

I also read about Quetz mom. Goddess of prostitues...

Yeah, but my virtue is white and pure.

Well, kind of grey.

PS- thewhitepearl: your post has appeared on FCOS!

EDIT-

I have just been welcomed to the FCOS

Congratulations! Did you get the complementary biscuits?

247. A flea we missed?

Comment #231453 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 11:50 am

mordacious 1 said-

Diacanu

Does that book really qualify? Usually the fleas have a reference to Dawkins, Harris, Hitch on the cover. Sometimes they use a part of a title in their title, eg. The Delusion Delusion, or the Dawkins' Delusion.

Hurry! Read this post before it's deleted

248. A flea we missed?

Comment #231450 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 11:48 am

Josh-

While your attention is drawn, do you know what's causing the disappearing comment syndrome?

249. Saudi Arabia Bans Dog Walking in Capital

Comment #231439 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 11:16 am

thewhitepearl-

Hey, I was being sincere! Hmmph. I'd just finished packing as well. I've changed my mind- I'm not going now. So there.

250. Saudi Arabia Bans Dog Walking in Capital

Comment #231434 by Quetzalcoatl on August 16, 2008 at 10:59 am

thewhitepearl-