₦airaland Forum

mazaje: The mumu still can not keep to his words. . .The mumu is still responding, eh?. . .

mazaje: The mumu is still responding?. . .Will the mumu keep to HIS OWN words and stop making a fool of himself?. . .

mazaje: And you are responding to me that should be ignored, eh?. . .Who is now the .... here?. . .Enigma the deluded guy that can not even keep to his own words. . .

Enigma: Well, it is indeed true that several of the evangelical atheists and some other anti-Christians here rarely say anything constructive and, accordingly, some of us don't take them seriously other than to point out their own dogmas, absurdities, inconsistencies, intellectual folly, sleight of hand and even intellectual dishonesty.

. . . . we may be in a post-biblical — and post-moral — age, we have not disposed of belief. Far from it. We have just changed what we believe in. Our society may have junked the Judaeo-Christian foundations of the West for secularism. But this has given rise to a set of other religions. Secular religions. Anti-religion religions.

These are also based on a set of dogmas. They proselytise. They involve faith. But unlike the Judaeo-Christian thinking they usurp, these secular anti-religions suspend truth and reason. What's more, I would say that it was the Judaic foundations of the West which, far from denying reason, gave the world both reason and science in the first place.

Logicboy03: Enigma lies about everything.

In a follow-up to our "little green men" conversation, Richard Dawkins once again provided an example of what I'm talking about. In a lecture to the American Atheists' Association, which was mainly an attack upon a Christian professor of mathematics who is one of his fiercest critics, he also claimed — falsely — that I had selectively quoted him in order to misrepresent what he had said. In fact, since he was ascribing to me something that someone else altogether had written, it was he who had misquoted me. Nevertheless, the point of this anecdote is that, intent as he was on dramatising to the American Atheists' Association the full depth of my iniquity, he displayed on screen just three words to sum up what both I and the maths professor had done. Those words were "Lying for Jesus".

. . . Dawkins appears to think that everyone who opposes scientism and evangelical atheism is an evil Christian. . . .

There are other aspects of the New Atheist movement that remind me of religion. One is the adulation by supporters and enthusiasts for the leaders of the movement. It is not just a matter of agreement or respect, but of a kind of worship. This certainly surrounds Dawkins, who is admittedly charismatic.

manmustwac: @post
Your topic just proves that its total nonsense to call us non believers evangelical atheists since the majority of us keep our views on religion to ourselves.

. . . despite the protestations of Dawkins and his fellows, the behaviour of the Humanists does not exhibit the kind of openness to evidence and adaptability that we’d expect from a rational, non-religious mindset. On the contrary, it is awash with the intolerance of enthusiasm.

For a start, there is the nigh-hysterical repudiation of religion. As with religions themselves, the implication is that those who fail to follow the New Atheist line are not just wrong, but morally challenged.

davidylan: Another brainless simpleton who simply supports another non-believer without thinking. So you do believe, along with ifeness, that time travel is real? You do support his view on nephilims from another planet seeding us with alien DNA? Quite rich to call "christians" ignorant when you havent fully digested ifeness viewpoint... he does take a lot of his views straight from the very bible you think is full of spurious myths.

But then... who has ever lost betting on the stupidity of the average NL atheist.

ifeness: Darwin story of evolution is valid. Scientists have been looking for the missing link,the stuff that made man very clever. In my opinion, the missing link is the DNA from the advanced scientist recorded in ancient scrolls of india,dead sea scroll,book of the dead.

The bible never tells complete stories. Why? Becos it aint original. The book of enoch says it all, it confirmed the presence of advanced beings coming from the sky to mate with homo sapience. They came down and taught human the act of war,societies,government and mathematics.

For [Julian] Huxley, science was the basis of a ‘religion without revelation’:

What the sciences discover about the natural world and about the origins, nature and destiny of man is the truth for religion. There is no other kind of valid knowledge. This natural knowledge, organised and applied to human fulfilment, is the basis of the new and permanent religion.

F00028: why do atheists need a church?

toba: hahaaha. Wisdom is exclusive to the wise and elders.

I think Atheism get relevance when atheists attack the non violent christian, indirectly revealing the obsession for God and religion

toba: not maybe. He actually does. traffic and more money from division

A knighted superhead and five of his former colleagues have today appeared in court charged with swindling their old school out of £2.7 million.

Sir Alan Davies, the 65-year-old former head of Copland Community School in Wembley, north west London is accused of conspiring to defraud the cash-strapped local authority.

He {Lord Rees} is equally scathing about Hawking's more recent comments about there being no need for God in order to explain creation. "Stephen Hawking is a remarkable person whom I've known for 40 years and for that reason any oracular statement he makes gets exaggerated publicity. I know Stephen Hawking well enough to know that he has read very little philosophy and even less theology, so I don't think we should attach any weight to his views on this topic," he said.

Dawkins is perhaps the world's most popular science writer; he is also an extremely gifted writer. (For example, his account of bats and their ways in his earlier book The Blind Watchmaker is a brilliant and fascinating tour de force.) The God Delusion, however, contains little science. It is mainly philosophy, theology and evolutionary psychology, along with a substantial dash of social commentary decrying religion and its allegedly baneful effects.

But despite the fact that this book is mainly philosophy (Dawkins is not a philosopher, but a biologist), much of the philosophy he purveys is remarkably jejune. You might say that some of his forays into philosophy are at best undergraduate, but that would be unfair to undergraduates. The fact is many of his arguments would receive a failing grade in a basic philosophy class.