[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Religion
See other Religion Articles

Title: Richard Dawkins letter to his 10 year old daughter [on science and faith]
Source: Rational Responders [Atheists]
URL Source: http://www.rationalresponders.com/r ... ld_about_this_irrational_world
Published: Sep 20, 2006
Author: Richard Dawkins
Post Date: 2015-01-19 11:29:37 by Fred Mertz
Keywords: None
Views: 23197
Comments: 46

To my dearest daughter,

Now that you are ten, I want to write to you about something that is important to me. Have you ever wondered how we know the things that we know? How do we know, for instance, that the stars, which look like tiny pinpricks in the sky, are really huge balls of fire like the Sun and very far away? And how do we know that the Earth is a smaller ball whirling round one of those stars, the Sun? The answer to these questions is ‘evidence’.

Sometimes evidence means actually seeing (or hearing, feeling, smelling….) that something is true. Astronauts have traveled far enough from the Earth to see with their own eyes that it is round. Sometimes our eyes need help. The ‘evening star’ looks like a bright twinkle in the sky but with a telescope you can see that it is a beautiful ball – the planet we call Venus. Something that you learn by direct seeing (or hearing or feeling…) is called an observation.

Often evidence isn’t just observation on its own, but observation always lies at the back of it. If there’s been a murder, often nobody (except the murderer and the dead person!) actually observed it. But detectives can gather together lots of other observations which may all point towards a particular suspect. If a person’s fingerprints match those found on a dagger, this is evidence that he touched it. It doesn’t prove that he did the murder, but it can help when it’s joined up with lots of other evidence. Sometimes a detective can think about a whole lot of observations and suddenly realize that they all fall into place and make sense if so-and-so did the murder.

Scientists – the specialists in discovering what is true about the world and the universe – often work like detectives. They make a guess (called a hypothesis) about what might be true. They then say to themselves: if that were really true, we ought to see so-and-so. This is called a prediction. For example, if the world is really round, we can predict that a traveler, going on and on in the same direction, should eventually find himself back where he started. When a doctor says that you have measles he doesn’t take one look at you and see measles. His first look gives him a hypothesis that you may have measles. Then he says to himself: if she really has measles, I ought to see… Then he runs through his list of predictions and tests them with his eyes (have you got spots?), his hands (is your forehead hot?), and his ears (does your chest wheeze in a measly way?). Only then does he make his decision and say, ‘I diagnose that the child has measles.’ Sometimes doctors need to do other tests like blood tests or X-rays, which help their eyes, hands and ears to make observations.

The way scientists use evidence to learn about the world is much cleverer and more complicated than I can say in a short letter. But now I want to move on from evidence, which is a good reason for believing something, and warn you against three bad reasons for believing anything. They are called ‘tradition’, ‘authority’, and ‘revelation’.

First, tradition. A few months ago, I went on television to have a discussion with about 50 children. These children were invited because they’d been brought up in lots of different religions. Some had been brought up as Christians, others as Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs. The man with the microphone went from child to child, asking them what they believed. What they said shows up exactly what I mean by ‘tradition’. Their beliefs turned out to have no connection with evidence. They just trotted out the beliefs of their parents and grandparents, which, in turn, were not based upon evidence either. They said things like, ‘We Hindus believe so and so.’ ‘We Muslims believe such and such.’ ‘We Christians believe something else.’ Of course, since they all believed different things, they couldn’t all be right. The man with the microphone seemed to think this quite proper, and he didn’t even try to get them to argue out their differences with each other. But that isn’t the point I want to make. I simply want to ask where their beliefs came from. They came from tradition. Tradition means beliefs handed down from grandparent to parent to child, and so on. Or from books handed down through the centuries. Traditional beliefs often start from almost nothing; perhaps somebody just makes them up originally, like the stories about Thor and Zeus. But after they’ve been handed down over some centuries, the mere fact that they are so old makes them seem special. People believe things simply because people have believed the same thing over centuries. That’s tradition.

The trouble with tradition is that, no matter how long ago a story was made up, it is still exactly as true or untrue as the original story was. If you make up a story that isn’t true, handing it down over any number of centuries doesn’t make it any truer!

Most people in England have been baptized into the Church of England, but this is only one of many branches of the Christian religion. There are other branches such as the Russian Orthodox, the Roman Catholic and the Methodist churches. They all believe different things. The Jewish religion and the Muslim religion are a bit more different still; and there are different kinds of Jews and of Muslims. People who believe even slightly different things from each other often go to war over their disagreements. So you might think that they must have some pretty good reasons – evidence – for believing what they believe. But actually their different beliefs are entirely due to different traditions.

Let’s talk about one particular tradition. Roman Catholics believe that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was so special that she didn’t die but was lifted bodily into Heaven. Other Christian traditions disagree, saying that Mary did die like anybody else. These other religions don’t talk about her much and, unlike Roman Catholics, they don’t call her the ‘Queen of Heaven’. The tradition that Mary’s body was lifted into Heaven is not a very old one. The Bible says nothing about how or when she died; in fact the poor woman is scarcely mentioned in the Bible at all. The belief that her body was lifted into Heaven wasn’t invented until about six centuries after Jesus’s time. At first it was just made up, in the same way as any story like Snow White was made up. But, over the centuries, it grew into a tradition and people started to take it seriously simply because the story had been handed down over so many generations. The older the tradition became, the more people took it seriously. It finally was written down as an official Roman Catholic belief only very recently, in 1950. But the story was no more true in 1950 than it was when it was first invented 600 years after Mary’s death.

I’ll come back to tradition at the end of my letter, and look at it in another way. But first I must deal with the two other bad reasons for believing in anything: authority and revelation.

Authority, as a reason for believing something, means believing it because you are told to believe it by somebody important. In the Roman Catholic Church, the Pope is the most important person, and people believe he must be right just because he is the Pope. In one branch of the Muslim religion, the important people are old men with beards called Ayatollahs. Lots of young Muslims are prepared to commit murder, purely because the Ayatollahs in a faraway country tell them to.

When I say that it was only in 1950 that Roman Catholics were finally told that they had to believe that Mary’s body shot off to Heaven, what I mean is that in 1950 the Pope told people that they had to believe it. That was it. The Pope said it was true, so it had to be true! Now, probably some of the things that Pope said in his life were true and some were not true. There is no good reason why, just because he was the Pope, you should believe everything he said, any more than you believe everything that lots of other people say. The present Pope has ordered his followers not to limit the number of babies they have. If people follow his authority as slavishly as he would wish, the results could be terrible famines, diseases and wars, caused by overcrowding.

Of course, even in science, sometimes we haven’t seen the evidence ourselves and we have to take somebody else’s word for it. I haven’t with my own eyes, seen the evidence that light travels at a speed of 186,000 miles per second. Instead, I believe books that tell me the speed of light. This looks like ‘authority’. But actually it is much better than authority because the people who wrote the books have seen the evidence and anyone is free to look carefully at the evidence whenever they want. That is very comforting. But not even the priests claim that there is any evidence for their story about Mary’s body zooming off to Heaven.

The third kind of bad reason for believing anything is called ‘revelation’. If you had asked the Pope in 1950 how he knew that Mary’s body disappeared into Heaven, he would probably have said that it had been ‘revealed’ to him. He shut himself in his room and prayed for guidance. He thought and thought, all by himself, and he became more and more sure inside himself. When religious people just have a feeling inside themselves that something must be true, even though there is no evidence that it is true, they call their feeling ‘revelation’. It isn’t only popes who claim to have revelations. Lots of religious people do. It is one of their main reasons for believing the things that they do believe. But is it a good reason?

Suppose I told you that your dog was dead. You’d be very upset, and you’d probably say, ‘Are you sure? How do you know? How did it happen?’ Now suppose I answered: ‘I don’t actually know that Pepe is dead. I have no evidence. I just have this funny feeling deep inside me that he is dead.’ You’d be pretty cross with me for scaring you, because you’d know that an inside ‘feeling’ on its own is not a good reason for believing that a whippet is dead. You need evidence. We all have inside feelings from time to time, and sometimes they turn out to be right and sometimes they don’t. Anyway, different people have opposite feelings, so how are we to decide whose feeling is right? The only way to be sure that a dog is dead is to see him dead, or hear that his heart has stopped; or be told by somebody who has seen or heard some real evidence that he is dead.

People sometimes say that you must believe in feelings deep inside, otherwise you’d never be confident of things like ‘My wife loves me’. But this is a bad argument. There can be plenty of evidence that somebody loves you. All through the day when you are with somebody who loves you, you see and hear lots of little tidbits of evidence, and they all add up. It isn’t purely inside feeling, like the feeling that priests call revelation. There are outside things to back up the inside feeling: looks in the eye, tender notes in the voice, little favors and kindnesses; this is all real evidence.

Sometimes people have a strong inside feeling that somebody loves them when it is not based upon any evidence, and then they are likely to be completely wrong. There are people with a strong inside feeling that a famous film star loves them, when really the film star hasn’t even met them. People like that are ill in their minds. Inside feelings must be backed up by evidence, otherwise you just can’t trust them.

Inside feelings are valuable in science too, but only for giving you ideas that you later test by looking for evidence. A scientist can have a ‘hunch’ about an idea that just ‘feels’ right. In itself, this is not a good reason for believing something. But it can be a good reason for spending some time doing a particular experiment, or looking in a particular way for evidence. Scientists use inside feelings all the time to get ideas. But they are not worth anything until they are supported by evidence.

I promised that I’d come back to tradition, and look at it in another way. I want to try to explain why tradition is so important to us. All animals are built (by the process called evolution) to survive in the normal place in which their kind live. Lions are built to be good at surviving on the plains of Africa. Crayfish are built to be good at surviving in fresh water, while lobsters are built to be good at surviving in the salt sea. People are animals too, and we are built to be good at surviving in a world full of … other people. Most of us don’t hunt for our own food like lions or lobsters, we buy it from other people who have bought it from yet other people. We ‘swim’ through a ‘sea of people’. Just as a fish needs gills to survive in water, people need brains that make them able to deal with other people. Just as the sea is full of salt water, the sea of people is full of difficult things to learn. Like language.

You speak English but your friend speaks German. You each speak the language that fits you to ‘swim about’ in your own separate ‘people sea’. Language is passed down by tradition. There is no other way. In England, Pepe is a dog. In Germany he is ein Hund. Neither of these words is more correct, or more truer than the other. Both are simply handed down. In order to be good at ‘swimming about in their people sea’, children have to learn the language of their own country, and lots of other things about their own people; and this means that they have to absorb, like blotting paper, an enormous amount of traditional information. (Remember that traditional information just means things that are handed down from grandparents to parents to children.) The child’s brain has to be a sucker for traditional information. And the child can’t be expected to sort out good and useful traditional information, like the words of a language, from bad or silly traditional information, like believing in witches and devils and ever-living virgins.

It’s a pity, but it can’t help being the case, that because children have to be suckers for traditional information, they are likely to believe anything the grown-ups tell them, whether true or false, right or wrong. Lots of what grown-ups tell them is true and based on evidence or at least sensible. But if some of it is false, silly or even wicked, there is nothing to stop the children believing that too. Now, when the children grow up, what do they do? Well, of course, they tell it to the next generation of children. So, once something gets itself strongly believed – even if its completely untrue and there never was any reason to believe it in the first place – it can go on forever. Could this be what happened with religions? Belief that there is a god or gods, belief in Heaven, belief that Mary never died, belief that Jesus never had a human father, belief that prayers are answered, belief that wine turns into blood – not one of these beliefs is backed up by any good evidence. Yet millions of people believe them. Perhaps this is because they were told to believe them when they were young enough to believe anything.

Millions of other people believe quite different things, because they were told different things when they were children. Muslim children are told different things from Christian children, and both grow up utterly convinced that they are right and the others are wrong. Even within Christians, Roman Catholics believe different things from Church of England people or Episcopalians, Shakers or Quakers, Mormons or Holy Rollers, and all are utterly convinced that they are right and the others are wrong. They believe different things for exactly the same kind of reason as you speak English and someone speaks German.

Both languages are, in their own country, the right language to speak. But it can’t be true that different religions are right in their own countries, because different religions claim that opposite things are true. Mary can’t be alive in the Catholic Republic but dead in Protestant Northern Ireland.

What can we do about all this? It is not easy for you to do anything, because you are only ten. But you could try this. Next time somebody tells you something that sounds important, think to yourself: ‘Is this the kind of thing that people probably know because of evidence? Or is it the kind of thing that people only believe because of tradition, authority or revelation?’ And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: ‘What kind of evidence is there for that?’ And if they can’t give you a good answer, I hope you’ll think very carefully before you believe a word they say.

Your loving,

Daddy


Poster Comment:

I just spoke with my brother on the phone and he mentioned this letter that he plans to share with his daughter when she turns ten. At the URL there are too many comments for me to wade through at this time. Admittedly, this is an atheist site, so their point of view is presented over and over again. My brother is agnostic although he was born and raised as a Catholic.

I originally put this under Science-Technology since the writer is a scientist. The LF system categorized it as Religion, so that's what it is now.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: Fred Mertz, liberator, Vicomte13, A Pole, GarySpFc (#0)

Their beliefs turned out to have no connection with evidence. They just trotted out the beliefs of their parents and grandparents, which, in turn, were not based upon evidence either.

I will open with the following:

Dawkins clearly is misleading his daughter stating there is no evidence for God. He just dismisses the evidence.

Akin to you and me going into court. I am your lawyer I have evidence and witnesses to testify on your behalf. Then for some unknown reason the judge says "I know you have something to present, but it is not evidence." Doing so without even examining our case files. Dawkins is doing the same thing with his daughter.

Dawkins and most atheists won't even "step into court" to debate. Atheism is the perfect liberal/leftist theology.

Now on this:

What can we do about all this? It is not easy for you to do anything, because you are only ten. But you could try this. Next time somebody tells you something that sounds important, think to yourself: ‘Is this the kind of thing that people probably know because of evidence? Or is it the kind of thing that people only believe because of tradition, authority or revelation?’ And, next time somebody tells you that something is true, why not say to them: ‘What kind of evidence is there for that?’ And if they can’t give you a good answer, I hope you’ll think very carefully before you believe a word they say.

Your loving,

Daddy

Well the first question from Dawkins child should be "daddy what is love and can you give me evidence for your love for me?"

A Christian can answer that question. Christ stretched out His arms on the cross for us. That is Love.

"Whatever things, then, the Holy Scripture declare, at these let us look; and whatsoever things they teach, these let us learn..." Hippolytus

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-19   11:53:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Fred Mertz (#0)

I originally put this under Science-Technology since the writer is a scientist. The LF system categorized it as Religion, so that's what it is now.

You caved to tradition. The article is best characterized as science-tech and you could have filed it as such. You're such a bad boy Fred.

tpaine  posted on  2015-01-19   12:20:13 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Fred Mertz (#0)

I had no idea Richard Dawkins was so intelligent.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-19   16:09:02 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: Fred Mertz, *Science and technology* (#0)

Ping.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-19   16:09:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: Fred Mertz (#0)

Millions of other people believe quite different things, because they were told different things when they were children. Muslim children are told different things from Christian children, and both grow up utterly convinced that they are right and the others are wrong.

The solution to the "Dawkins Dilemma" above is answered in the tagline below.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-19   16:20:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: sneakypete, A K A Stone, liberator, TooConservative, Vicomte13, GarySpFc, BobCeleste (#3)

I had no idea Richard Dawkins was so intelligent.

Intelligent YES. Wise? NO.

Jesus and the little children:

Mark 10:13-16New King James Version (NKJV)

13 Then they brought little children to Him, that He might touch them; but the disciples rebuked those who brought them. 14 But when Jesus saw it, He was greatly displeased and said to them, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God. 15 Assuredly, I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little child will by no means enter it.” 16 And He took them up in His arms, laid His hands on them, and blessed them.(NKJV)

Romans 1 New King James Version (NKJV)

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. NKJV

Ecclesiastes 8 New King James Version (NKJV)

16 When I applied my heart to know wisdom and to see the business that is done on earth, even though one sees no sleep day or night, 17 then I saw all the work of God, that a man cannot find out the work that is done under the sun. For though a man labors to discover it, yet he will not find it; moreover, though a wise man attempts to know it, he will not be able to find it. (quote from King Solomon) NKJV

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-19   16:35:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: redleghunter, Fred Mertz (#1)

Juliet Emma Dawkins (born 1984, Oxford).

Also, like Obola, Dawkins is actually a Kenyan.

Dawkins' divorce and daughter

I've just come across a bit of evidence which may help explain why Richard Dawkins so often leaves scientific method behind when he attacks religion:
Now Dawkins does a wonderful analysis in his book The Selfish Gene, and again in later papers in more detail, of Roman Catholicism. As I'm sure you know he's pretty vehement about Roman Catholicism, largely because his daughter, when he split up from his wife was educated against his will in a Catholic nunnery and it must have been pretty painful for him to see this process happening. So he spells out what happens in Roman Catholicism.
This is from a presentation that Susan Blackmore gave at Pop!Tech in Camden in 2005.

A little more evidence:
He married Marian Stamp in 1967, but they divorced in 1984. Later that year, Dawkins married Eve Barham – with whom he had a daughter, Juliet Emma Dawkins in 1984 – but they, too, subsequently divorced. He married actress Lalla Ward in 1992.
This is from Wikipedia (detailed references for both quotes are here) and should be considered, like everything, in context.
I'll post a piece in a few minutes on the Dawkins cult, how he scams his cult followers.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-19   16:57:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: tpaine (#2)

The article is best characterized as science-tech and you could have filed it as such. You're such a bad boy Fred.

I disagree. It is not science because it is a man with a certain marginal reputation in the sciences but who is far better known for his attacks on religion. Ironically, he has established his own very lucrative atheist cult over the years.

Tooconservative  posted on  2015-01-19   16:59:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: redleghunter (#6)

Jesus and the little children:

What did Jesus know about little children? According to all the myths he never had children,and grew up in a home without a father.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-19   19:35:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: sneakypete (#9)

What did Jesus know about little children? According to all the myths he never had children,and grew up in a home without a father.

John 1 New King James Version (NKJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-19   22:56:37 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: redleghunter (#10)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Still, I am not convinced of anything more than the Universe is a complete mystery. All words are manmade ... especially from the little shephards that suggest they possess the blood of God.

Pridie.Nones  posted on  2015-01-19   23:06:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Pridie.Nones (#11)

Still, I am not convinced of anything more than the Universe is a complete mystery. All words are manmade ... especially from the little shephards that suggest they possess the blood of God.

You are going to have to expand on the above. Thanks.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-20   0:37:55 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: redleghunter (#12)

Pridie.Nones: Still, I am not convinced of anything more than the Universe is a complete mystery. All words are manmade ... especially from the little shephards that suggest they possess the blood of God.

redleghunter: You are going to have to expand on the above. Thanks.

I shall be happy to elaborate my position on God and religion as a whole. Where would you like me to start? In the beginning, the middle (somewhere) or the end?

It is all the same.

Pridie.Nones  posted on  2015-01-20   0:47:00 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Pridie.Nones (#13)

It is all the same.

According to Dawkins it is not.

Please proceed.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-20   0:55:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: redleghunter (#14)

Place a personal "thought experiment" about yourself. Do you recall a time you were not conscious about the world around you? The "thought experiment" is not limited to anything or bounded by ideas, concepts or notions.

What do you have to say?

Pridie.Nones  posted on  2015-01-20   1:06:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: sneakypete (#9)

What would you say is someone suggested Julius Caesar was a myth?

Julius Caesar composed his Gallic War in the 50s BC. What do we have? Now, Julius Caesar is the founder of the imperial Roman legacy. All we have are ten fairly well-preserved manuscripts. The oldest dates to about AD 850. Think about that. One of the most important Romans ever to live in antiquity, he wrote Gallic Wars—which made him famous in elite circles in Roman society—and all we have are ten fairly well-preserved manuscripts, and the oldest one is 900 years removed from when he wrote the original.

Or how about Livy? Livy, the Roman historian? He was born around, we think, 59 BC and died, we think, around AD 17—so, a turn-of-the-era scholar. He wrote Roman History, of which about one-third survives. So in this case, we don’t even have the entire work. Two-thirds of it is missing. Well, of this one-third that survives, our oldest manuscript, which contains parts of books 3, 4, 5, and 6—this oldest manuscript dates to about AD 350. In other words, [it’s] more than 300 years removed in time from when he originally wrote, and it isn’t even complete. Most of his work is lost.

How about Tacitus, the Roman historian, author of Annals and Histories, writing sometime around AD 110, 115? The oldest manuscripts of these works date to the 9th and 11th centuries (AD)—in other words, 800 years and 1,000 years after the original. Tacitus’ minor works, like Agricola and Germania, same thing. These two important works [are] preserved in a 10th century codex—in other words, some 800 years after the writing of the original.

Or Thucydides, the great Greek fifth-century-BC historian? His History survives, and our oldest manuscript dates to about AD 900, or about 1400 years after the time of the original. Or Herodotus, also a fifth-century [BC] Greek historian? His Histories survives, and the oldest manuscript [dates] to about AD 800, or about 13 centuries or so after the original.

So what we have are classical works. Classical historians read them, study them, take them seriously—yet the manuscript tradition is rather weak compared to the New Testament manuscript tradition. The classical manuscripts are late and few in number, yet no recognized classical historian doubts the general reliability of these manuscripts, even if they were produced 1,000 years or so after the original. That’s what so impresses me about the Greek NT manuscript tradition.

And if we’re referring to the Gospels, we have virtually the entire Gospel text about 200 years or so after the time of the writing of the originals. We don’t just have a handful of manuscripts—we have hundreds that are old. We have thousands that predate the Gutenberg printing press, which means that through comparison and examination, reconstruction, and hard work—what’s called textual criticism—we can with confidence reconstruct the text as it was originally written, or at least come within about 99 percent of it. This is a record of preservation that by far and away surpasses that of all other texts from antiquity.

Myth? You're smarter than that.

“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org

GarySpFC  posted on  2015-01-20   1:47:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: Pridie.Nones (#15)

What do you have to say?

I have to say you used to post on LP (under a different handle) and I was conscious of our conversation. So conscious that after our short exchange you never posted there again.

Unless of course you have posted here before and recently under a different screen name which would mean I am unconscious to the ruse of multiple screen names.

And the answer is no. I remember being born.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-20   1:48:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: redleghunter (#17)

I want you to share your experience of being born. Please take a few moments and show us your experience.

Pridie.Nones  posted on  2015-01-20   1:56:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: redleghunter (#10)

What did Jesus know about little children? According to all the myths he never had children,and grew up in a home without a father.

John 1 New King James Version (NKJV)

1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was in the beginning with God. 3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made. 4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

How does any of that refute what I wrote?

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-20   8:14:42 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: GarySpFC (#16)

What would you say is someone suggested Julius Caesar was a myth?

Of course not. Like Jesus,he is a historical figure.

WHERE and WHEN have I ever stated that Jesus was a myth?

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-20   8:19:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: sneakypete (#19)

and without Him nothing was made that was made...

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-20   9:26:57 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: redleghunter (#21)

and without Him nothing was made that was made...

I'd like to see some scientific proof of that,please.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-20   14:53:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: sneakypete (#22)

I'd like to see some scientific proof of that,please.

How many eyewitnesses would you like?

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-20   23:20:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: redleghunter (#23) (Edited)

I'd like to see some scientific proof of that,please.

How many eyewitnesses would you like?

Eyewitnesses from 2,000 years ago that believed the Sun revolved around the Earth and that magic was real are now reliable eyewitnesses with scientific proof?

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   1:22:20 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: sneakypete (#24)

Are you sure you seek scientific proof or evidence.

Real humans witnessed miracles and wrote down the account.

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-21   1:29:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#26. To: redleghunter (#25)

Real humans witnessed miracles and wrote down the account.

I know a real human that claimed to have killed a dinosaur that was eating the veggies in his grandfather's garden.

Millions of us see people murdered or killed on tv and in movies every day,yet they show up healed and healthy next week on another show!

It's a miracle!

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   7:53:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: sneakypete (#26)

I know a real human that claimed to have killed a dinosaur that was eating the veggies in his grandfather's garden.

But did over 500 people see the dinosaur?

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-21   9:29:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: sneakypete (#24)

Eyewitnesses from 2,000 years ago that believed the Sun revolved around the Earth and that magic was real are now reliable eyewitnesses with scientific proof?

You and your ilk got real excited over Piltdown man. You thought it was science. It was just another fairy tale that you and your ilk bought into.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-21   9:31:40 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: sneakypete (#24) (Edited)

Eyewitnesses from 2,000 years ago that believed the Sun revolved around the Earth and that magic was real are now reliable eyewitnesses with scientific proof?

Eyewitnesses from 2000 years ago understood very little of the world around them, and constructed myths constantly to explain what they saw or heard about. There was no distinction between myths which they arbitrarily constructed and reality. That lack of distinction persists today. People believe what they want to believe that relieves their own anxieties.

rlk  posted on  2015-01-21   10:12:01 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: rlk, sp, tc, tp (#29)

The mrmagoo cult ... stumbling around the cave - poking out eyes - prophets --- afraid of the unadulterated mirror - light !

If you ... don't use exclamation points --- you should't be typeing ! Commas - semicolons - question marks are for girlie boys !

BorisY  posted on  2015-01-21   10:21:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: redleghunter (#27)

I know a real human that claimed to have killed a dinosaur that was eating the veggies in his grandfather's garden.

But did over 500 people see the dinosaur?

I don't know,but I do know that over 500 people claim to have seen vampires and flying saucers.

More than 500 claim to have bee abducted by UFO's.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   10:42:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: A K A Stone (#28)

You and your ilk got real excited over Piltdown man.

I did?

Where is your proof of this?

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   10:43:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: rlk (#29)

That lack of distinction persists today. People believe what they want to believe that relieves their own anxieties.

Pretty much,and that will pretty much always be the case.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   10:44:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: sneakypete (#32)

ou and your ilk got real excited over Piltdown man. I did?

Where is your proof of this?

You regularly embrace things that are made up and pretend it is scientific. If you were from that age, maybe you were. You would have been jumping up and down in jubilation.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-01-21   10:47:49 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: A K A Stone (#34)

You regularly embrace things that are made up and pretend it is scientific.

No,but you regularly embrace the Bible,and everything in it is either made up or reported wrong based on superstition.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   10:55:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: sneakypete (#31)

don't know,but I do know that over 500 people claim to have seen vampires and flying saucers.

More than 500 claim to have bee abducted by UFO's.

All at the same time?

"Let the inspired Scripture, then, be our umpire, and the vote of truth will surely be given to those whose dogmas are found to agree with the Divine words." Gregory of Nyssa

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-21   11:22:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: redleghunter (#36)

All at the same time?

Probably not,but I really don't follow that stuff very closely.

BTW,I have personally seen UFO's 3 times. All 3 times there were other people that witnessed them at the same time I did,even though I didn't know about it until the next day.

I have no freaking idea what they were,but they weren't airplanes and they weren't helicopters.

Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)

sneakypete  posted on  2015-01-21   19:25:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: Fred Mertz (#0)

I like this interview by Ben Stein from his "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed" documentary.

I have nothing but pity for Richard Dawkins. He comes across as someone who is unable to feel gratitude for anything. The most important thing to him is his own ego and pride in that he simply must be "right" about this or he has no purpose. He is "rich" but I can't help but think, "you poor man."

Zesta  posted on  2015-01-21   20:06:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: sneakypete (#37)

My father in law thinks he saw four one early morning. Back in the 70s and 80s the AF did a lot of open skies testing. Who knows.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-21   20:27:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: Zesta (#38)

Good find thanks. Old Ben put the screws to Dawkins and let him paint himself into a corner.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works." (2 Timothy 3:16-17)

redleghunter  posted on  2015-01-21   20:35:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (41 - 46) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com