Richard Dawkins: Answer My Questions Please.

[Ramadhan]

When one in 100% certain your mind closes down and you stop thinking. It is easy to see how destructive this can be if we think about Hitler, or Stalin, or Pol Pot or Mao Tse-Tung, Bin Laden or Anwar al-Awlaki or events like the inquisition. All these men think they have the truth and believe they are in some sense doing good but to me the worst of these is those who claim that they are doing God's will and work and therefore cannot be wrong with minds totally closed and their sense of humanity non existent - if Bin Laden or al-Awarki are Godly men then there is no hope for humanity.

I'm not sure about bin ladin. He has not been captured and tried, is he? so we don't know what his crimes are.
and i don't really know about Anwar al awlaki, but you seem to think he is bad enough to put him in the same sentence as hitler, stalin, pol pot and mao.
Has he killed anyone at all? how many has he killed? a million? two millions?

It seems you are fond of playing who's the worst of "godly men".
Well, let us have a list, shall we?

1. The POPES (we would need days, no, months, to satisfactorily discuss the heinous crimes done by people who claim they are god's representatives on earth, and intercession to god)
the top ten: Pope Urban II (ca. 1035 – 1099), Pope Julius III (1487 – 1555), Pope Boniface VIII (c. 1235 – 1303), Pope Alexander VI (1431 – 1503), Pope John XII (c. 937 – 964), Pope Benedict IX (c. 1012 – 1065/85), Pope Sergius III (? – 911), Pope Stephen VI (? – 897), Pope Clement VI (1291 – 1352), Pope Leo X (1475 – 1521).

2. European kings/queens and US presidents who killed tens of millions of people unjustly throughout history in the name of god and christianity. Many of them claimed they are very pious. see: Bush, George W.

3. American evangelists and televangelists. need I say more?

4. Little boys-loving priests. ugh.

5. Does anyone actually remember Rwanda? And the central role the churches played in the genocide of a million of its people?

I can go on and on, but this alone makes me sick already at those "godly men".

 

[Ramadhan]

Certainly intentions -- meaning the direction of one's heart. Not all are capable of having deeds, but for those who are capable and don't follow through with them, it show a lack of intention and that the focus of one's heart was not truly directed toward Christ no matter what words one has said or rituals one has partcipated in.

so, "directed towards christ", eh? not god?

Also, it seems "being saved by jesus" is not guaranteed enough to enter paradise, from you and glo's latest explanations.

 

[Grace Seeker]

so, "directed towards christ", eh? not god?

You did ask about Christians, correct. We understand that Christ is our mediator with the Father. But to say "directed towards Christ" or "directed towards God" are in essense synonymns for us.

Also, it seems "being saved by jesus" is not guaranteed enough to enter paradise, from you and glo's latest explanations.

Being saved is being saved. Of course that is enough. But a person simply making the claim that he/she is saved is not synonymous with the experience of it. Many may think that they are saved who are not. I believe that I am, but I also understand that all such a statement really means is that I have put my trust in Christ to save me and believe that to be enough. One might need to ask the question is salvation a past tense or future tense experience -- I have been saved or I will be saved? One of the confusing things about Christianity is that we speak of a future event (our salvation and entry into eternal life) as if it has already happened, such is our confidence in the saving work of Christ on the cross and God's promises to accept our trust in Christ as sufficient for salvation. (Bearing in mind what I have already said, that trust is something that we must then live out as we have opportunity to express it in words and deeds.)

 

[Hugo]

The Pope has said many crazy things in the past - Like the thing he said about the prophet Muhammad pbuh - and whats his issues with condoms? - Divinely mandated thanks to the bible? Whats your problem with Anwar Al waki the guys got an Assassination contract on his head by the US - Is that violent enough for you - so has Bin Laden by the way.

I cannot see that we can have any meaningful discussion if you regard an 86 year old priest's comment on condoms to be as reprehensible as someone advocating in the name of Allah violent Jihad - our moral standpoints and sense of values are miles apart.

 

[Argamemnon]

I cannot see that we can have any meaningful discussion if you regard an 86 year old priest's comment on condoms to be as reprehensible as someone advocating in the name of Allah violent Jihad - our moral standpoints and sense of values are miles apart.

LOL Hugo, all Muslims support Jihad and we are all jihadists. You can't be a Muslim and reject jihad. You westerners are truly obsessed with this term, aren't you?

 

[Hugo]

LOL Hugo, all Muslims support Jihad and we are all jihadists. You can't be a Muslim and reject jihad. You westerners are truly obsessed with this term, aren't you?

Well that is pretty clear YOU are all for killing the infidel, the kaffa, the idolater as advocated in the verse I quoted (there are many similar ones). So much for a the religion of peace.

 

[جوري]

Well that is pretty clear YOU are all for killing the infidel, the kaffa, the idolater as advocated in the verse I quoted (there are many similar ones). So much for a the religion of peace.

can't have peace without getting rid of evil and corruption!

try to reconcile that with your loving god who brought a sword instead of peace, alleges to love everyone yet according to your faith would throw the faithful in hell while favoring manworshipping idolaters such as yourself.. so much for love love love...

all the best

 

[aadil77]

Well that is pretty clear YOU are all for killing the infidel, the kaffa, the idolater as advocated in the verse I quoted (there are many similar ones). So much for a the religion of peace.

hmm perhaps you don't understand that 'infidel, the kaffa, the idolater' are terms used to describe those who waged war against us at the time because of our beliefs.
Again islam is not a religion of pacifism, it is a religion of peace in the sense that it brings about peace in the land and in one's own self

I didn't notice this post of yours, let me again expose your hypocrisy:

-46 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Bring a mob against them and give them over to terror and plunder. 47 The mob will stone them and cut them down with their swords; they will kill their sons and daughters and burn down their houses.

-Ezekiel 9:5-7 "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children.

-Hosea 13:16 (King James) Samaria will bear her guilt because she has rebelled against her God.
They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.

-If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky… Take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. – Deut 17:2-7


read more about the religion of love and peace here: http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134296465-repulsive-verses-bible.html

 

[Zafran]

I cannot see that we can have any meaningful discussion if you regard an 86 year old priest's comment on condoms to be as reprehensible as someone advocating in the name of Allah violent Jihad - our moral standpoints and sense of values are miles apart.

Yes the thousands of people/catholics who have contracted aids cannot have sex with condoms because the pope says so - even though its one of the easiest way in preventing aids from spreading. Thats preety messed up. How many lives are going to be ruined there Hugo? This guy isnt just a priest hes the Pope and serious authority for many christians.

You cant seem to have a meaningful discussion with anyone except anybody that agrees with your own world view - Frankly most of us here dont. We wonder why you come here?

Your all out in "condeming violent Jihad" but have zero problem when america or any other country that its allied with which does the same - is Iraq and afghanistan violent enough for you - or actually killing Bin laden without a trial violent enough for you? or anwar al waki who hasnt killed anyone - no problem america is willing to assassinate him. Is that violent enough for you?

Your a pure hypocrite - its easy saying the other guys are bad - try looking at yourself first.

Bin Laden maybe a terrorist but the way the US acts it clearly takes the cake for the biggest terrorist on the planet.

 

[جوري]

hmm perhaps you don't understand that 'infidel, the kaffa, the idolater' are terms used to describe those who waged war against us at the time because of our beliefs.
Again islam is not a religion of pacifism, it is a religion of peace in the sense that it brings about peace in the land and in one's own self

I didn't notice this post of yours, let me again expose your hypocrisy:

-46 "This is what the Sovereign LORD says: Bring a mob against them and give them over to terror and plunder. 47 The mob will stone them and cut them down with their swords; they will kill their sons and daughters and burn down their houses.

-Ezekiel 9:5-7 "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children.

-Hosea 13:16 (King James) Samaria will bear her guilt because she has rebelled against her God.
They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.

-If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky… Take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. – Deut 17:2-7


read more about the religion of love and peace here: http://www.islamicboard.com/comparative-religion/134296465-repulsive-verses-bible.html

we all know christians personal beliefs are at odds with what their books say, as to why they insist that they are actually following some sort of religion is beyond me as they clearly concoct beliefs to suit the moment!

 

[Ramadhan]

You did ask about Christians, correct. We understand that Christ is our mediator with the Father. But to say "directed towards Christ" or "directed towards God" are in essense synonymns for us.

So Christ is your mediator with your father?
can you not directly connect with the father, or does christ have the monopoly?

Being saved is being saved. Of course that is enough. But a person simply making the claim that he/she is saved is not synonymous with the experience of it. Many may think that they are saved who are not. I believe that I am, but I also understand that all such a statement really means is that I have put my trust in Christ to save me and believe that to be enough. One might need to ask the question is salvation a past tense or future tense experience -- I have been saved or I will be saved? One of the confusing things about Christianity is that we speak of a future event (our salvation and entry into eternal life) as if it has already happened, such is our confidence in the saving work of Christ on the cross and God's promises to accept our trust in Christ as sufficient for salvation. (Bearing in mind what I have already said, that trust is something that we must then live out as we have opportunity to express it in words and deeds.)

This is all very confusing. Christianity concept seems to always need lots of vague words to explain simple concept.

So, you say that "intentions" and "deeds" are needed in order to be saved.
Does christianity provide guidance on those necessary "intentions" and "deed"?
Because I've always read about how Jesus pbuh abolished the old covenant and created new covenant that seemingly does not require anyone to do anything to be saved (this is the essence of what paul said)?

 

[Ramadhan]

Well that is pretty clear YOU are all for killing the infidel, the kaffa, the idolater as advocated in the verse I quoted (there are many similar ones). So much for a the religion of peace.

the person you worship as the ultimate loving god (Jesus pbuh) will lead big big war, and he will kill at least one kaffir person (the antichrist), the ultimate idolater. And all people who will be true followers of Jesus pbuh will certainly kill a lot (maybe millions) of kafirs and idolaters.

really, are all christians THAT disconnect from their own true religion teachings??
It seems every christians are allowed to make up things related to their religion to suit their own desires.

Are you not worry that your belief seems to be at the opposite end of jesus pbuh sword?

 

[Zafran]

the person you worship as the ultimate loving god (Jesus pbuh) will lead big big war, and he will kill at least one kaffir person (the antichrist), the ultimate idolater. And all people who will be true followers of Jesus pbuh will certainly kill a lot (maybe millions) of kafirs and idolaters.

really, are all christians THAT disconnect from their own true religion teachings??
It seems every christians are allowed to make up things related to their religion to suit their own desires.

Are you not worry that your belief seems to be at the opposite end of jesus pbuh sword?

He seems to forget about His own so called religion of peace. He real does have a deep hatred for Islam - from his quote you can see it very clearly. Seems to explain why he knocks around here.

 

[Ramadhan]

Your a pure hypocrite - its easy saying the other guys are bad - try looking at yourself first.

He truly is.
He is even willing to say things which are definitely against his religions teachings just to advance his argument. see: jesus pbuh and violence/killing.

 

[Zafran]

He truly is.
He is even willing to say things which are definitely against his religions teachings just to advance his argument. see: jesus pbuh and violence/killing.

Ofcourse he is - he doesnt dare to to apply the same moral standards to himself and his own views which applies to others who disagree with him.

 

[marwen]

can someone give me any references of books or writings/articles written by Richard Dawkins. I saw some of his articles on the net, but I didn't have the chance to read a detailed article or book from the guy. I just want to know his main ideas and arguments. does someone know links or book names ?

 

[Hugo]

hmm perhaps you don't understand that 'infidel, the kaffa, the idolater' are terms used to describe those who waged war against us at the time because of our beliefs. Again islam is not a religion of pacifism, it is a religion of peace in the sense that it brings about peace in the land and in one's own self

I take this to mean that its ok to kill those who don't or will not agree with Islam because ultimately that will bring peace - this is one supposes your hypocrisy? Thanks for the quotation but I guess you have not actual read the passage fully. But (Ignore the first quote as you give no reference)

Ezekiel 9:5-7 "Then I heard the LORD say to the other men, "Follow him through the city and kill everyone whose forehead is not marked. Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children.

This is clearly a vision and it is mean to show the wickedness of sin and how it is an abomination to God. No Jew or Christian would take this as a command to go and kill those they thought were evil.
Hosea 13:16 (King James) Samaria will bear her guilt because she has rebelled against her God. They will fall by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to pieces, and their pregnant women ripped open.

This is a prophesy and its is speaking of the various invasions that engulfed the land of Israel from the Assyrians to the Romans over many many years. Again it is not about going out and doing this kind of thing.

If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the LORD gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the LORD your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky… Take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death. Deut 17:2-7

This was that law but both Jews and Christian regard this kind of command as 'shut up' and so we interpret it in a metaphorical sense as speaking of evil. If you had read the passage you would also find the line in verse 6 "On the testimony of two or three witnesses a man shall be put to death, but no one shall be put to death on the testimony of only one witness."

There is ONLY one witness to the verses in the Qu'ran about violent Jihad - Mohammed so those verses are unreliable.Now, how do you interpret the violent Jihad verses, are they commands to go and do likewise or not - shall I spell them out as there are a large number of them and all on the single witness of one man.

 

[Hugo]

can someone give me any references of books or writings/articles written by Richard Dawkins. I saw some of his articles on the net, but I didn't have the chance to read a detailed article or book from the guy. I just want to know his main ideas and arguments. does someone know links or book names ?

The quickest way is just to go to Amazon and search for Dawkins and all his books will be listed there and also there will be second hand copies. His books mare very well written and in many way a good read though one does not have to agree with all he says. But you will be foolish to suspect that you can easily refute what he says, he is not a professor at Oxford for nothing.

 

[Hugo]

the person you worship as the ultimate loving god (Jesus pbuh) will lead big big war, and he will kill at least one kaffir person (the antichrist), the ultimate idolater. And all people who will be true followers of Jesus pbuh will certainly kill a lot (maybe millions) of kafirs and idolaters. really, are all christians THAT disconnect from their own true religion teachings??
It seems every christians are allowed to make up things related to their religion to suit their own desires. Are you not worry that your belief seems to be at the opposite end of jesus pbuh sword?

Can you give is the scriptural references to all this and whether those reference's are about visions or actual events or what? Why don't you go an look up where Jesus says in Matt 10 and find out its context and meaning

 

[marwen]

The quickest way is just to go to Amazon and search for Dawkins and all his books will be listed there

Thanks Hugo. I just did that, some of his work are about theology, others are not (evolution-ism, biology etc.). I wondered if someone (who read his works) could redirect me to one or 2 main books which reflect the most his approach. I can only afford to buy one or 2 books, so I needed some advice to get something worthy .
But Thanks a lot for your help.

But you will be foolish to suspect that you can easily refute what he says

Refuting is not my strongest point, especially when it comes to consistent writings from big scientists. So, no, it's not my intention to refute what he said, at least right now. There are more competent people (non muslims and muslims) who don't agree with his ideas and can refute (if they didn't already).
I just want to participate in open discussions to learn first, and to show others that there is other viewpoints they don't know and to clarify/correct some misconceptions.

Besides, I never think about refuting a whole thesis or theory if I'm not learned enough about it, even if I don't agree with it in the beginning. For example when dealing with Dawkins' ideas, I can assure that I believe what he writes is mainly wrong, and I'll never agree with him because it's totally against my convictions. But I can not proceed to refuting his ideas before learning in deep what he said, what are his arguments and his reasons and what he really means (because I can understand him wrongly). I should never start reading an article or a book with the intention to refute what is written (before reading), that's not correct. I'll never be objective.
We should first try to read a book just to learn and to find the truth if it exists. We should be as objective as possible when we are still learning. When we finally learn all the details about the problem and become able to define the reasons that support the ideas presented to us, that's the right time to try to find if there is any logical inconsistency in the arguments/deductions, or any misconception in it. And then finally, try to refute it.