Atheist Confusion?

[Theland]

Its about time the AB atheists had a big fat believer to sink their teeth into, and tear to shreds, all red in tooth and claw.
Like fox hunting, it is an acceptable blood sport :-)

So, Richard Dawkins has stated that the universe is simply blind indifference, (paraphrased), that we simply dance to the demands of our DNA.

Yet he has said that science has put men on the moon, yet evil religion flies planes into towers.

Do you see the inconsistency?

This raises questions about morality, and maybe, just maybe, we could discuss it without spilling too much blood, burning too many martyrs, or sending hate mail?
(But just in case I shall be wearing full body armour and a crash helmet :-)

[nailit]

Even people that advocate the death penalty believe that the forfeiting of life is adaquate punishment for the most heinous of crimes. Not torturing somebody in unimaginably agony...for ever!

[Old_Geezer]

Ah, you shouldn't knock it until you tried it.

[nailit]

Morally, The bible is bankrupt as an advisable way to live, unless you cherry pick a few scriptures. (mostly from the New Testament...just disregard the barbaric laws that God designed JUST

[nailit]

FOR THE JEWS)

[nailit]

Stoning to death a young girl because she doesnt bleed on her wedding night is not a moral act.
Stoning to death a man for collecting sticks is not a moral act.
Killing kids (by the mauling to death by bears) is not a moral act.
Offering your daughters to be gang raped by a mob is not a moral act
The list could go on...
The bible is not Moral,
Show me where it is....

[Theland]

Nailit, haven't you read Jesus?

[nailit]

Killing your own 'rebellious' kids is not moral.
Killing homosexuals is not moral.
Killing those that worship other Gods than yours is not moral.
KILLING is not moral....
(but shall we just ignore the old testament...a 3rd of your bible???)

[nailit]

//Nailit, haven't you read Jesus?//
Havnt you read the Bible?
By your own addmission you havnt.

[Theland]

Nailit, this is beginning to sink into a tit for tat as so often happens on here.
If you are quite happy with your atheism for the reasons you have given, then I won't stand in your way, to be honest, I couldn't care less.

[Theland]

Nailit, (and I promised myself not to bet all defensive), for the record, I read it several times a day.

[nailit]

You wanted a thread on morality, not me. No tit for tat here, just a few basic questions (for which there was no reply)
You couldnt care less eh?
Not so concerned with the state of my everlasting soul then?
The usual evangelical with the usual ''I love you but'' youre a sinner destined for hell.

[nailit]

Street evangelists have the same record as you.
''Im righteous and saved and you are going to hell because im right and you are wrong''
Just cant put a tune to the song at the mo!

[Theland]

Oh dear Nailit, you are getting angry, or at least unreasonable.

The New Testament is all you have to concern yourself with, to satisfy any desire you may have to seek God.
The Old Testament is vitally important, but superseded by the New.
But, you have made it perfectly clear what your position is.

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // … to be honest, I couldn't care less. //

At least have the courage of your convictions.

If you didn't 'care less' you wouldn't constantly start threads about your faith, including this one baiting non-believers.

If you really didn't care less, you would never post on here again - but you will - you can't help yourself.

[nailit]

//Oh dear Nailit//
That umistakable, supercilious tone taken by you, and other religious nut jobs !

[nailit]

Tried to have a discussion but the minute Theland said ''couldnt care less'' then case closed.
Says it all.

[Theland]

Andy, I assure you that I really wanted a discussion not evangelise.
How could I? The AB atheists have made it perfectly clear they do not want it, so I don't attempt it.
But I respect everybody's ability to be critical, and that is what I asked, about an inconsistency in Dawkins' approach.
As I said, a discussion, not a debate with winners and losers.

[Theland]

Nailit, no need to get angry.
Truly, I couldnt care less about your atheism, or your consistent anger at the god you don't believe in.
Calm down.

[andy-hughes]

Theland - // Andy, I assure you that I really wanted a discussion not evangelise.
How could I? The AB atheists have made it perfectly clear they do not want it, so I don't attempt it.
But I respect everybody's ability to be critical, and that is what I asked, about an inconsistency in Dawkins' approach.
As I said, a discussion, not a debate with winners and losers. //

I doubt that, based on past history, but if you want a debate with 'the opposite side' - assuming they can be bothered knowing how 'debates' with you go - then try not kicking off with a deliberately inflammatory OP, and banging on about Richard Dawkins all the time.

You as a fervent Christian, are obsessed with his views, whereas the majority of atheists, especially on here, care as much about him and his views as they do about the bible and yours - i.e. - not at all.