351. God Hates the World

Comment #51949 by the great teapot on June 25, 2007 at 3:50 pm

The only way to stop this selfpromoting childish nonsense is to ignore it completely. Without the attention it will have no reason to exist and hopefully disappear. It has nothing to do with "sensible" religion whatsoever.

Anyway, enough about the wee flea.

352. In the name of the Father

Comment #51585 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 2:26 pm

Northern Ireland was a political battle between Ulster Unionists and Irish Republicans. The Terms Catholics and Protestants were just convenient identity markers. No religious leaders, say with the title Reverend, would ever seek to gain from the situation, surely.

353. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51576 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:49 pm

If only they would hide it from the kids.

354. His word

Comment #51570 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:27 pm

Logicel

David Baddiel is a very tounge in cheek comedian.
The self effacement of him being behind the zeitgeist etc is his main line. Don't take him too seriously. He is very "laid back".
On the other thread of this post(0r may be the last post) someone mentioned Melvyn Bragg, Now there is a typical "I used to be an atheist but I am alright now" pseudointellectual arsehole who needs some serious criticism.
(by needs serious criticism I mean disabusing of his delusion- he doesn't actually preach religion, oh my god I am a fundamentalist. Help)

355. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51567 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 12:11 pm

Wee Flea ,the most notorious thing about Xians is their lack of sense of humour, a close second is the scientists (lack of) sense of humour. I don't expect to see you or Richard Dawkins in the humour section of my local waterstones for quite some time.
Wee flea ,when you look in a mirror do you have reflection?

356. His word: Attacking religion can seem like breaking a butterfly on a wheel

Comment #51556 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 11:40 am

@ the wee flea.

I will dispense with politeness, as you have. Which part of the Thor, Tooth-fairy, Teapot, analogy do you not understand you f***w**. Your trivial arguments cut no ice on this website, you represent the infancy of human thought. David Ike means as much to the average thinking Briton as your Jesus Christ. Wake up and smell the coffee.

He's got a pineapple on his head, a pineapple on his head ....
(Bring back fantasy football.- If you google and read this David I loved the show, and would love to see it back- And if you do read this, which is your Team? - I 've always assumed Spurs, I suppose that makes me a racist SOB)

357. His word

Comment #51479 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 5:01 am

All he is saying is religion is the fear of death.
Nothing more.
I think the article was worth while if only for the imagery of the fragile butterfly of religion being broken by the giant wheel of simple logic.

358. In the name of the Father

Comment #51478 by the great teapot on June 23, 2007 at 4:49 am

"But it is in this capacity to recognise, appreciate and respond to what is of worth that religion has its origin."

Wow, that's quite an admission from a Bishop.
Does that mean religion is man made?
Surely God compelled us to be religious during his various revelations and appearances throughout our history.
I hope his boss doesn't read that.

359. The Future Forum Presents: Christopher Hitchens and Marvin Olasky

Comment #49965 by the great teapot on June 14, 2007 at 9:42 am

Holy shit.
The most accurate 2 words I have ever heard.

360. The Future Forum Presents: Christopher Hitchens and Marvin Olasky

Comment #49963 by the great teapot on June 14, 2007 at 9:40 am

Religion doesn't poison everything.
Ok
So it must be true.

361. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49592 by the great teapot on June 12, 2007 at 1:18 pm

Dianelos wrote

"Now, experiencing having a physical body is not strictly necessary for interacting with our physical environment (one can conceive of a disembodied condition of interacting with physical things) but the presence of a physical body gives coherence and closure to our experience of the physical world, and therefore represents a better experiential environment, a better solution"

Are there any disembodied entities out there that can confirm that. Speak now or forever...
Sorry I see what you are suggesting. We could be disembodied but that would be too easy, we need a challenge. Here son you have this one lets see how you get on with it.i'll judge you when youv'e worn it out, or wrapped it round a lamp post.

Thats too easy. You have used an awful lot of sophisticated argument just to bring us back to a simple an anthropomorphic view of the world.

(Dianelos - Thanks for correcting my misspelling on your quote of my question earlier)

362. Baptists Warned About Islam, Atheism

Comment #49583 by the great teapot on June 12, 2007 at 12:50 pm

Thinks are looking up. Once upon a time the Godfrees were the "evil ones" Now we are just a virus.

363. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49107 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:56 am

Dianelos

Might I just take time out for thanking you on behalf of all this site , if i may be so presumptious, for your continuing contribution under the face of such overwhelming opposition without once losing your self control or dignity- Respect where respect is due.

364. We of little faith

Comment #49101 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:26 am

this may seem a bit crude,
and i am not even a political animal, but Tony Blair-" what a wanker"
A phoney of the first order.

365. We of little faith

Comment #49098 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 10:13 am

Deja fu

thanks for understanding my question and thanks for the answer.

366. We of little faith

Comment #49035 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 3:54 am

No I am not implying Buddhism has a party line I am implying that "this site" has a general common consensus of opinion on most things.Opinion about buddhism seems more divided.

367. We of little faith

Comment #49026 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 3:22 am

Buddhism seems very popular among contributors here. In fact it seems to be the only subject people can be divided on on this site. I can't help but notice there is a"party line" on various questions such as abortion, the Iraq war and homosexuality amongst otherthings, all of which have nothing to do with Religion except for the fact religion also has party lines on some subjects.
I must admitt until reading this website I had no idea how much of the nonsense side of Buddhism was added on at a later date, no doubt to someones gain.
A question I would like to ask of Buddhist adherents is "How long would the teachings of Buddha have been preserved if they weren't wrapped up in all the trappings of the other religions? How much of a shelf life does your average self improvement manual have without dressing it up as something more and how long did his ideas last before they were corrupted into the mumbo jumbo we see today.
Not a criticism just a question.

368. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #49012 by the great teapot on June 10, 2007 at 2:01 am

Dianelos

I once believed that the physical sciences explained the real world, that kept me on an even keel and allowed me to do good things. Then I realised the theories of Newton etc were just mathematical models used to predict the way things would happen within a closed system. Imagine my rage. I now have no way of understanding the world around me in a "real" sense,I feel so miserable. I must have an explanation of life,no matter how preposterous, to get me through the day. I have just read your last (now but one) post, thank you, that could just well be the preposterous notion I am looking for.

369. We of little faith

Comment #48853 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 7:42 am

Sue Blackmore was on a radio 4 program earlier this week, I forget the name and date but it was at 11pm. I was only half listening to it as it was only intended to be a lightweight stocking filler type of program.
The programe was about people who believe in strange things joining the real world.
She described how she believed all the new age nonsense ,Tarot cards etc and was a champion of these beliefs.
Then one day she had a eureka moment and no longer believed. She then was a champion for the skeptics and became the celebrity rent a quote for skeptics. Since then she has not changed her views but claimed to have given up on the rent a quoting - obviously not completely.
She wrapped up with what I thought was the only telling point of the program (loosely quoted) "Skeptics don't send hate mail, believers do"
Funny how you never hear a name all your life, then bang twice in 1 week, spooky.

370. Can we really learn to love people who aren't like us?

Comment #48838 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 7:05 am

Using his criteria for when atheist books hit the best sellers list when would atheist books ever be off the bestsellers list.

Once again priest, Rabbis etc can not confront the simple fact that the reason churches etc are empty is not because people are very naughty or because they are humming under a crystal pyramid but beacause we no longer buy the junk they pedal.

I also think atheists are better for not going on thought for the day. The contributors platitudes and cliches including the above Rabbi are toecurlingly embarrassing. Only the archers theme tune makes me head faster for the dial.

371. Teaching assistant quit in protest at Harry Potter

Comment #48831 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 6:40 am

I hope she wins her case. Before you know it there will be people flying around on broomsticks everywhere, car sales will plummet, CO2 emissions will drop and we will never see that mediterranean climate in the UK we have been promised. Good luck to her. Tax payers money well spent.

372. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48804 by the great teapot on June 9, 2007 at 5:28 am

Dianelos
I am not really up on philosophical debate but if conciousness is supernatural why does it follow my body around like a stalker.

373. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48616 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 3:20 pm

"what the bible meant and what it means for us today" I could just Imagine those words falling from the plum filled mouth of Alister McGrath.
That is a very important question.

374. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48610 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 3:01 pm

Zwingli.

Do you ever ask people, or yourself, what is the point of life without God?

375. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48600 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Zwingli

That point appears daily on this website, but it is usually asked by the atheist. Please tell us what you think God, or as a priest would say Gooooddd, actually is and what your beliefs actually are.

376. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48590 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:23 pm

Devolved.
Why were you at a seminar?

377. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48579 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 1:01 pm

Mr Priapus

I knew that Mr Hitchens was in error, and you are quite correct to point out the error.

As I am also sure you were aware my defence of his position was born of my desire to preserve his dignity.

Regards Mr G Teapot.
(At last someone on this site affords me the respect I deserve)

378. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48574 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 12:30 pm

yes that is right devolved and that is why religion is shit.

379. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #48566 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 12:04 pm

I think it is always worthwhile engaging when peoples arguments are elegant. Eventhough the argumnents may prove to be redherrings, if you are inclined to debate these topics in public (which I don't) forewarned is forearmed. If you can not answer the obscure point there and then it will look to the casual observer as though the opposition has completely won the debate. Coming up with the response in bed the following evening is too late.
Who knows it may even convert you.
If you don't want to listen turn off.

380. Wanted: Moral Education for Secular Children

Comment #48528 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 9:16 am

Shouldn't that be children of secular parents?

381. Atheism is the absence of belief

Comment #48519 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 8:32 am

I believe there is no god. What am I?

382. Republican candidates range from ignorant to dishonest, part 2

Comment #48516 by the great teapot on June 8, 2007 at 8:20 am

What is the Bewler reference he makes about. Not living in the USA that passed me by. Can any americans not hiding from shame enlighten us.

383. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48354 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:49 pm

"We didn't Know the sun went around the earth."

That is still as true today as it was 2 thousand years ago.

What's so funny about that Priapus.

384. Christopher Hitchens on Religion

Comment #48353 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:44 pm

Yes , it is the same interview.
Who could forget Hitchens telling the "Pasta" that he was either a fool or a charlatan and outright "disgusting" for believing that the Lord answered his prayers for the life of his daughter while ignoring the prayers of others. (Although we have since discovered from Mcgrath that this can be explained by the fact that god makes one or two random interjections but wouldn't want to be seen to be showing off by curing everyone- after all who would want to live in a pefect world)

385. Atheism is pretentious and cowardly

Comment #48187 by the great teapot on June 7, 2007 at 2:06 am

bitbutter

I think reading all that once was enough, no, too much for anyone.

386. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47811 by the great teapot on June 5, 2007 at 3:08 pm

Krogercomplete

You just used the word tawdry, have you been reading Hitchens by anychance. I am coincidently reading the chapter in his book "the tawdriness of the miraculous".I really should get a girlfreind.
I love the word though ,it spits contempt.
Why does everyone call me teapot. You just can't get respect around here.

387. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47801 by the great teapot on June 5, 2007 at 2:44 pm

Krogercomplete

I don't think anyone on this site objects to the use of philosophy, it is the misuse of philosphy we object to.
Contrary to popular belief richard dawkins has probably read, volantarily, more religious texts than the average "believer" . I can't remember where I read that 50% (or so) of Xians didn't know who delivered the sermon on the mount. I have never believed my whole life and even I know that.
Those "philosophers" who accuse him of being naive are actually just critisizing him for
not using their language. Dianelos appears to be clever because he is well versed in this language.
However the vast majority of what he says is nonsense. If he was applying his arguments to anything but religion he would be mercilessly ridiculed. He certainly hasn't convinced me with anything he has said, my dictionary is more exhausted than my brain.(I thank him for that atleast)

388. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47456 by the great teapot on June 4, 2007 at 2:43 pm

Billy
my thanks was sincere. I actually like them both.

389. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47443 by the great teapot on June 4, 2007 at 2:17 pm

james and dianelos, welcome to this site.
You are the best unwelcome visitors we have had.
I look forward to your posts. Many thanks.

390. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47281 by the great teapot on June 3, 2007 at 11:48 pm

Dianelos

Unfortunately I have to go to work, otherwise I would reply in depth to your nonsense.
Unless the deeper reality of god speaks to me in the next 8 hours I will pick holes in your horseshit later.
Sorry for the agressive nature of this post it is completely unwarranted,I was obviuosly in a bad mood this morning.Monday bloody mornings.

391. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47173 by the great teapot on June 3, 2007 at 10:08 am

thank you Russell for restoring my faith (mmm not the best choice of words) in the noble science of philosophy.

392. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47112 by the great teapot on June 3, 2007 at 3:24 am

Re comment 114

Most atheists are well aware that there is more to the world than we can imagine. But what we do not subscribe to is viewing fanciful notions of the world as anything more than a parlour game. Fictional world views may well be true but we shouldn't treat them with any seriousness until we have reason to believe they may be true.
Atheists do not yet see any validity in the claims of any religions which would entice them in to belief.
Excuse me for my naiveity.

393. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47099 by the great teapot on June 3, 2007 at 2:33 am

Did I dream the proof for x2+y2=z2.
I must have ate a lot of cheese when I went to bed in my early teens.
Why do people seem to think it is some sort of emprical or finger in the air proposal.

394. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47088 by the great teapot on June 3, 2007 at 1:57 am

Dianelos Georgoudis

I do not understand your position.
Your appear to be saying that philosophically we can prove nothing, and then go on to say that scientists or intelligent people who do not believe can not see the wood for the trees.
You can choose to believe without evidence but I don't see how you can criticise others for not believing when you have already argued that every belief could be false.

395. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #47053 by the great teapot on June 2, 2007 at 11:52 pm

Dianelos Georgoudis wrote in comment 89

"And here is an indisputable fact: Contrary to what popular atheism dogmatically believes there are several good arguments for the existence of God, and knowledgeable atheist philosophers have to struggle long and hard to try to counter them. Examples of such arguments are the argument from morality and the argument from consciousness"

That is a very good point. The argument from morality.
Imagine if there were no moral codes, what would life be like. It would be a short, brutish hell.
All we would have to do would be to go out killing and stealing, No more nine to five for me killing and stealing that's my bag from now on. We could all do it. Put down your plough, your trowel, your scalpel, your pen everyone from now on it is a killing and a stealing for all. No more need for work there is plenty for all.
Thank god for morals, how would we have thought of them without the lord.

396. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #46967 by the great teapot on June 2, 2007 at 12:40 pm

On the subject of evidence for God.
The instigators of your religion are very cute on this subject. They clearly saw this one coming.
God wants us to believe in him, if he presented us with incontravertable evidence we would no longer believe in him,we would simply know that he exists. Therefore ,although proving his existence is a breeze for him it would defeat his purpose.
I would believe if the stars were used to spell out the 10 commandments in the night sky ,exclusivley in the language of the observer.
Or failing that if i fainted when someone dabbed me with some olive oil.(sorry that was a good natured tease - no offence intended.)

I don't know if has anything to do with camera angles but from the above video it would appear that the left hand side of the brain handles reason while the right hand side deals with bullshit.

397. Richard Dawkins and Alister McGrath

Comment #46963 by the great teapot on June 2, 2007 at 12:23 pm

Does it have to be extra virgin olive oil?

398. Christian sports workers degree ridiculed

Comment #45699 by the great teapot on May 29, 2007 at 2:37 am

It never occured to me you were refering to me, no.
Your post invites comment.
And it wasn't sarcasm but sympathy with my fellow bad spellers. It was only through trying to learn Dutch that I realised It was English that couldn't spell and not me.To my relief.The Dutch continually review the "official" spelling of words which keeps it more logical.

399. Christian sports workers degree ridiculed

Comment #45642 by the great teapot on May 28, 2007 at 4:19 pm

I think it was the sheer frustration of you being extremely impolite and insincere in your aplogies that made her remove them. It had little to do with their content. She was showing that in hindsight you weren't worth talking to.
My apologies for any misspelling I will learn to spell as soon as the English language does.

400. Christian sports workers degree ridiculed

Comment #45479 by the great teapot on May 28, 2007 at 1:58 am

I was amazed to see Edwards has forsaken the Lord.
I always thought he jumped for Jesus.
A bit of googling confirmed the reports are true if not the facts.

A couple of interesting quotes from the article

"For convenience - and as a financial investment - Edwards has bought a flat near Westminster. Last week the flat and his home in Gosforth were besieged by journalists seeking to confirm rumours that his loss of Christian conviction had led him into the path of temptation."

Interesting. So loss of faith will lead you into temptation.The archaic view of atheism rears its head again.

"He has a deep, theological comprehension of the Bible, making his spiritual meltdown even more unlikely"

Apparently not.

I can only echoe a comment posted beneath the article "Welcome to the real world Jonathon."

And finally from the telegraph

"Such was Edwards's reputation as a great athlete and decent man that even officials at the world governing body, the International Association of Athletics Federations, would privately joke that if he ever tested positive for drugs, the sport's credibility would never survive."

For "decent man" read christian. Given the only thing that separates him from other honest athletes was his proclamations that he believed without evidence in a God who made him jump further than anyone.Now he is no longer a Xian perhaps we should be taking the piss and testing it.