[On Richard Dawkin's book The God Delusion .]
YOu do not really expect that Christians are going to read dribble like that do you?
The thing about Dawkins is that everything is black and white. What he believes is either true or false. There either is a God or there is no God. Atheism is either true or false. There is no middle ground and there are no doubts.
To many people try to compromise and end up being luke warm. But you are either in or out with God, you are either for Him or against Him. You are either a friend of God or an enemy of God.
56 comments
There simply aren't any words that could adequately describe any of this. The ironies, the double standards, contradictions, hypocrisies. This is like a brand new form of art... professional bullshitting, and we have a Picasso right here. This guy is unbelievable.
[On Richard Dawkin's book The God Delusion.]
YOu do not really expect that Christians are going to read dribble like that do you?
I think that the word you are looking for is drivel. Yes, I expect open minded people searching for truth to read and examine things from different points of view. I have read your Bible.
The thing about Dawkins is that everything is black and white. What he believes is either true or false. There either is a God or there is no God. Atheism is either true or false. There is no middle ground and there are no doubts.
The thing about the Bible is that everything is black and white. What Christians believe is either true or false. There either is a God or there is no God. Christianity is either true or false. There is no middle ground and there are no doubts.
To many people try to compromise and end up being lukewarm. But you are either in or out with God, you are either for Him or against Him. You are either a friend of God or an enemy of God.
QED
On the thread:
Odd that you started off criticizing Dawkins for a quality which you yourself chose to adopt by the end of your post.
How about don't care one way or the other about him? Before you can be an enemy or a friend, he has to be there.
I consider myself a friend to Darth Vader and an enemy of Paul Bunyan. Or was that the other way around? I'm lukewarm to Scooby Doo.
I'm a lover of Cherry Poptart. If she existed, I'd invite her over.
JohnR7: I am not criticizing Dawkins, I am just stating a fact. Dawkins is ignorant about religion. He knows nothing about it. Perhaps that is not his fault, perhaps the people who he thinks represents religion do not know what they are talking about either. So he has never really had the opportunity to learn. In fact if your going to put your trust in man, then you may never learn anything about God. It does not even make any sense to go to man to learn about God. WE can go directly to God and He will teach us all we need to know. So you can be pretty sure that Dawkins attempts to learn about God was in seeking after what man has to say about God. You can be sure that he did not directly seek to know God for himself in a personal way. So I guess you can not blame him being ignorant and knowing nothing about religion.
Chalnoth: Really? Try listening to one of his talks some time. He likely knows quite a lot more about Christianity than you do.
Brimshack: Your post is contradictory. It is also irrelevant to the post I was commenting on. Lastly, it is circular.
"YOu do not really expect that Christians are going to read dribble like that do you?"
I expect that some of the brighter, curious Christians will want to read it. I don't expect that you, Johnny, will want to nor be able to read it.
"The thing about Dawkins is that everything is black and white. What he believes is either true or false."
Not on all questions. Certainly concerning physical issues that is usually the case. On social issues things are seldom black and white.
"There either is a God or there is no God. Atheism is either true or false."
Well, that is correct. I mean, what would be the third choice, that there is part of a god?
"There is no middle ground and there are no doubts."
On many questions there are doubts, but, for me, there are no doubts about the existence of God.
"To many people try to compromise and end up being luke warm."
Indeed, I find "luke warm" Christianity just as silly as rabid Fundamentalism.
"But you are either in or out with God, you are either for Him or against Him."
OK, then count me as "out," however, I am not against God, I am neither for nor against that which does not exist.
"You are either a friend of God or an enemy of God."
No, one either suffers from the God delusion or one does not.
Well, I just had a half vision sent by half a goddess. She is one quarter male and one quarter female ("she" is just her preference with a .3 to a .2 vote) and she demanded at least half a prayer every half year during the second half of you most precious half an hour. Don't believe me? Just send half a prayer out to her and you'll never get some half assed response.
Oh my. I think...for once, we are reading JohnR7 wrong.
When he says "The thing about Dawkins is that everything is black and white." I think we are supposed to read that JohnR7 believes "everything is black and white", and Dawkins doesn't, and that's the thing about Dawkins.
Which is amazing it and of itself, but doesn't really fit the "ironic" bill.
That, gentlemen, is some vintage JohnR7. Not the run-of-the-mill JohnR7 shite he feeds us on a weekly... Umm, daily basis. Nope, siree. That is the real crap.
I think we should set this post as a standard, hold it high, and only publish anything from him that is more outrageous (if possible), or deliver to anybody that comes close to that level a JohnR7 Award.
JohnR7, would you like to know your problem???
Instead of reading 1,000 books once, you've read bits of one book 1,000 times!
"This isn't an argument, this is just contradiction!"
Or in JohnR7's case, may I paraphrase classic Python by complaining that this isn't irony, it's just self-contradiction.
No it isn't
Yes it is
I dunno, this made (marginally) more sense than anything else I've ever read from JohnR7.
Therefore, it contained much lower concentrations of teh funnay.
Don't slack, John; more posts about the space traveling ark and fire-breathing dinosaurs, please! I wouldn't have to start relying entirely on Bro. Randy for my daily guffaw!
So JohnR7 says that Dawkins should recognize "gray" areas, yet he says there is no gray areas with god.
OK, he couldn't have contradicted himself better. His logic reminds me of this. -
The following statement is true: The previous statement is false.
"YOu do not really expect that Christians are going to read dribble like that do you?"
Sadly, no, I don't.
Expecting fundies to know what they're talking about before they spew their moronic screeds is futile.
YOu do not really expect that Christians are going to read dribble like that do you?
I've read some drivel in my time, but I try to stay away from dribble as much as possible.
The thing about Dawkins is that everything is black and white. What he believes is either true or false...But you are either in or out with God, you are either for Him or against Him.
Pot, kettle. Kettle, pot.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.