Richard Dawkins

This just in--the "Godless" democrats now have control of the House.  What peril lies ahead for this country... God will smite these atheist liberals.

Lol @ Knight's sarcastic Ann Coulter logic... all Democrats are godless. Half of America is Democrat. Therefore half of America is godless... except 90% of Americans are Christian, meaning even if ALL Republicans are Christian, at most 20% of Democrats are non-Christian.

Yup.  The Stem Cell Research amendment passed in Missouri and that supports cloning.   :roll:

The God Delusion is a book not a movie.

Actually it's both. It's the name of the first half of The Root of All Evil?.

at most 20% of Democrats are non-Christian.

Democrats cannot be true Christians.  The Word says "He who is liberal--or Democratic--will be cast into the fires for all eternity whereas he who is conservative--or Republican--will belong to the Kingdom of Heaven forever."  That's a fact.  These liberals are just atheists who claim to believe in God.

What passages does it say that?

Quote from: "dysfunction"

at most 20% of Democrats are non-Christian.

Democrats cannot be true Christians.  The Word says "He who is liberal--or Democratic--will be cast into the fires for all eternity whereas he who is conservative--or Republican--will belong to the Kingdom of Heaven forever."  That's a fact.  These liberals are just atheists who claim to believe in God.

So the republicans will be trying to conserve the environment then?

The environment does not matter.  All that matters is the Kingdom of God.  This earthly place will eventually pass away, yet the Kingdom of Heaven shall never pass away.

The environment does not matter.  All that matters is the Kingdom of God.  This earthly place will eventually pass away, yet the Kingdom of Heaven shall never pass away.

Where is this Kingdom of Heaven of which you speak?  Have you seen it? Been to visit it?  Tasted it?  Touched it?  If you have, remember this: it all could have been an illusion, making you delusional.  Do you want to be delusional?

Where is this Kingdom of Heaven of which you speak? Have you seen it? Been to visit it? Tasted it? Touched it? If you have, remember this: it all could have been an illusion, making you delusional. Do you want to be delusional?

The Kingdom of God is not in a place.  You cannot find it with your senses--you cannot look in a telescope and see it.  The Kingdom is a spiritual realm.  Only those predestined by God to be saved can see the Kingdom.

Isn't it amazing how the majority of Christians don't believe in predestination?

Isn't it amazing how the majority of Christians don't believe in predestination?

The redeemance factor.  (I think I just made up a word ...)

Well, I don't know if I'd say a majority of Christians don't believe in it.  But there are many Christians who believe in predestination and in free will.  But yes, many Christians do not believe in predestination because they want to cling to the idea that we have free will and that God did not create "robots."

I feel like predestination is just the decision as to whether you're getting into Heaven or not... you can still choose to pick your nose or do jumping jacks or whatever totally of your own free will -- that isn't "predestined".  It's not determinism.

Good point, Erasmus.  However, I feel that salvation comes with some sort of action--say, the action of having faith in the divinity of Jesus.  If this is the case, and we are predestined to either believe in this or not believe in this, then we at least do not have free will over that one action.  If we have free will on that one action, then it cannot have been predestined.

The jump that I feel like making is that if one action/event is predestined (which seems necessary to me), all actions/events are predestined.  That is, God cannot have taken away my free will when I was fourteen and became a Christian (predestining me to become a Christian so I would be saved) and then just given the free will back to me because I could subsequently become a non-Christian if I had free will and if the events weren't predestined.  Therefore, "Predestination for one thing, predestination for all."  My idea at least.

Quote from: "dysfunction"

at most 20% of Democrats are non-Christian.

Democrats cannot be true Christians.  The Word says "He who is liberal--or Democratic--will be cast into the fires for all eternity whereas he who is conservative--or Republican--will belong to the Kingdom of Heaven forever."  That's a fact.  These liberals are just atheists who claim to believe in God.

Ahahahaha

So I finally saw the South Park with Dawkins, who thought that was a fair interpertation (not counting the whole... Garrison thing).

Actually they portrayed Dawkins as too soft, at least until he gets 'converted' by Garrison... otherwise pretty accurate, on the whole. They were right on (in  part II) in saying that 'isms' are bad, whether 'theism' or 'atheism'. However, I think what Dawkins wants- and certainly what I want- is not to define ourselves by atheism any more than some people define themselves by theism. Rather, religion should become irrelevant; thus atheism will be irrelevant. Religion should, of course, be taught as an important part of our history, and religious texts as important parts of our literaryr heritage- but nothing more than that.

Hmm, I liked the thing in part two where the United Atheist League was talking, and talking about Dawkins, saying its not enough to simply believe, you have to be an asshole to anyone who believes any different than you.

That is, God cannot have taken away my free will when I was fourteen and became a Christian (predestining me to become a Christian so I would be saved) and then just given the free will back to me because I could subsequently become a non-Christian if I had free will and if the events weren't predestined.

But among religions that adhere to predestination, is it believed that becoming a Christian is sufficient for getting into heaven?  I suspect that even some Christians have not been predestined for salvation, and that some non-Christians have.

I feel like predestination is a little tag that God attaches to your soul when he creates it.  It has no effect on your mortal life.  When you die, if you've got the tag, you get into heaven; otherwise it's tough luck.

But among religions that adhere to predestination, is it believed that becoming a Christian is sufficient for getting into heaven? I suspect that even some Christians have not been predestined for salvation, and that some non-Christians have.

I feel like predestination is a little tag that God attaches to your soul when he creates it. It has no effect on your mortal life. When you die, if you've got the tag, you get into heaven; otherwise it's tough luck.

That's a possibility.  However, it seems to me that the Bible talks about how somebody ought to act in order to get into heaven (i.e. they must act "Christain-ly", if you will).  The type of predestination you're suggesting leads to the ultimate conclusion "Even if you're the most righteous person on earth, even if you believe with all your heart in God and in Jesus Christ as a divine prophet, and even if you act exactly like Jesus tells you to act, it still doesn't matter--you have just as much of a chance to go to hell."

The Bible suggests that God predetermines who will be saved.  John 3:16 says that the saved ones are the ones who believe in Jesus Christ.  Also, Ephesians 2:8 says "For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith..." (emphasis added).  

So it seems to me that the Bible suggests:

1) If you believe in Jesus Christ you are saved, and
2) You are only saved if God predestined you to be saved.

It looks like there's an action/event that needs to occur before you can be saved (that is, accept Jesus Christ).  Let me know what you think.

However, it seems to me that the Bible talks about how somebody ought to act in order to get into heaven (i.e. they must act "Christain-ly", if you will).  The type of predestination you're suggesting leads to the ultimate conclusion "Even if you're the most righteous person on earth, even if you believe with all your heart in God and in Jesus Christ as a divine prophet, and even if you act exactly like Jesus tells you to act, it still doesn't matter--you have just as much of a chance to go to hell."

Grr, that's a good point... I guess I am cloudy on the whole notion of predestination.

So it seems to me that the Bible suggests:

1) If you believe in Jesus Christ you are saved, and
2) You are only saved if God predestined you to be saved.

It looks like there's an action/event that needs to occur before you can be saved (that is, accept Jesus Christ).  Let me know what you think.

Yeah, that makes sense... I have a nagging feeling that at some point I was taught that at least some sects of protestant Christianity believed the thing that I am talking about but until I can back it up with references I will defer to your view, which, as you point out, agrees with what it says in the Bible.

Calvinism is perhaps the most famous of the protestant religions that espouses the idea of predestination.  Basically, God chose some people before the beginning of the world to be saved and decided not to save the others.  In my opinion, I think this logically means the he chose them (the others) to not be saved.  That is, he predestined them to hell.  Many people have a problem with this, obviously.  I don't see any way around it.

Also, many Christians that I know when confronted with this predestination--free will controversy seem to "throw in the towel" and ignore the whole thing.  They call it "taking it on faith" or "trusting in God."  The problem is, it's plain to see that you cannot be both predestined and have free will.  It just doesn't work.  It's a fun discussion topic, to say the least.

This month's TIME has an incredibly good article, a discussion between geneticist Francis Collins, head of the Human Genome Project, and author of The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief, and Dawkins. Non-subscribers will simply have to watch a short ad before they are able to read the article.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1555132,00.html

That was a very interesting artical.
Thanks for posting it.

Good article.  I need to read both books.

Regarding the richard dawkins appearance on south park, I thought it was great...really funny, one thing that was annoying though.

THey got his accent totally wrong, they made him sound like an east end cockney urchin...most ignorant on their part.

I know americans are crap with accents but come on, minimal research is required for that one.

The only thing that annoyed me about it, actually, was that he wasn't enough of a dick.  

Regarding the richard dawkins appearance on south park, I thought it was great...really funny, one thing that was annoying though.

THey got his accent totally wrong, they made him sound like an east end cockney urchin...most ignorant on their part.

I know americans are crap with accents but come on, minimal research is required for that one.

They did his voice better than some of their other impersonations.

The only thing that annoyed me about it, actually, was that he wasn't enough of a dick.

I wouldn't have used that wording, but that's true.

Regarding the richard dawkins appearance on south park, I thought it was great...really funny, one thing that was annoying though.

THey got his accent totally wrong, they made him sound like an east end cockney urchin...most ignorant on their part.

I know americans are crap with accents but come on, minimal research is required for that one.

I reckon they just used their "Generic British Accent" for extra parody..