Dear david f,

>>Dawkins has never claimed that his scientific theories led to the conclusion that there is no God<<
If I could contradict you with a quote I would not have posted that long sentence that you also quoted, where I mention association etc. I was trying to explain why, in my opinion, there are many more theist scientists who respect (though do not necessarily share) Einstein’s views on the relation between religion and science than Dawkins’. That is all, apparently you do not accept this explanation, and I am not able to provide statistical or what evidence to support my view of why that difference.

I own only “The Blind Watchmaker”, which is not about religion, nevertheless Creator - a concept that does not belong to science - is mentioned at least three times. As to “The God Delusion” I have only the freely downloadable translation, so I am not going to quote by translating back into English, nevertheless the very Chapter IV that you mention contains the phrase “natural selection” many times.

I am not sure what you mean by Creationism since some people denote by it the pseudo-scientific theory that claims to have arrived at the need of a “creator” within scientific investigations (c.f. the phlogiston), others as a derogative term to describe ALL those who believe in a Creator, a religious and metaphysical concept.

You mention Kant. I never had any subject like Religious Education at school (only atheist, towards a so called “scientific world-view”), and it was only my father - who was a Catholic admirer (and knower more than I) of Kant - who could counteract this education not by telling me that the teacher was wrong, and the right answer was this or that, but by convincing the teenager in me that the answer to questions concerning world-view, evaluation of historical facts, etc, were more complicated, than what the materialist (and anti-Church) teacher was offering, that one had to view many possible answers and analyses, including, but not exclusively, the one offered at school.

david f,
Your bigitory, misrepresentation and dishonesty about the facts of Christ disqualifies you as a teacher of balance and truth. None of the true followers of Christ I know fit into your view of "Christian". I have friends all around the world working in medicine, rehabilitation, education and community development among all nations.

Obviously you sit on the sidelines of life throwing stones of people from the past who claimed to be "Christian" but did not practise Christ's teaching.

I think Grim has put it nicely, including:

>>IF there was an historical Jesus, then I would suggest an objective reading would indicate he was a Jewish reformer. His goal appeared to be to reform the Jewish religion rather than start a new religion in his own name -at least in the beginning.<<

And George has offered a most worthy insight (from his father):

>>..the answer to questions concerning world-view, evaluation of historical facts, etc, were more complicated, than what the materialist (and anti-Church) teacher was offering, that one had to view many possible answers and analyses, including, but not exclusively, the one offered at school.<<

I would contend that human motivations are subject to many and varied influences, not least being propaganda, misleading instruction, peer pressure, societal and political bias and pressure (eg by the state or military), and individual and societal circumstance (eg poverty, famine, factional conflict). Is Shia v Sunni a religious conflict, or one of envy, power-struggle or evil-minded leadership? Complex questions cannot be reduced to simplistic or convenient scapegoats or stereotypes. Similar question may be effectively applied to all conflicts and acts of inhumanity or indecency, including those laid at the door of 'religious zealotry'. Can anyone ever clearly see into the mind and motivation of another? What may be the motivation(s) behind 'sharia law'?

Could either the Bible or the Koran (Qu'ran) be legitimately construed (in toto) as a 'call to arms' in anything but the most myopic, narrow, twisted, biased and/or delusional view?

Tony Lavis,

I am still waiting for that RETRACTION - else your credibility is shot, and your motivations no more impressive than that which revels in wallowing in the mud.

Based on my recollections of listening to what *Dawkins* had to say on Q&A recently and interpretations thereof, I got the impression that he doesn't adopt a position of belief one way or the other. Rather, if there is "non-corporeal existence" that he seeks to evidence the fact.

Notwithstanding been brought up in a "Christian" tradition and having in the past had a religious phase, I prefer evidence based consideration now and not closing my mind off to that which is not known.

..

Re:Einstein, I recall a chapter in "The Dancing Wu Li" entitled:

"Einstein doesn't like it"

From memory, this referred to our inability to do other than predict in terms of probabilities of the behavior of the majority of a group of particles, as distinct from the "good old world" of Newtonian physics.

..

I was interested to see some of the works on Leonardo on display, but dissapointed again in our ABC who did not point out that the reason for the delay in the publication of his works was because it was suppressed by the church. I have been led to believe that Leonardo put his fingers on a lot of significant medical issues such as vascular disease, but that it was a pool of knowledge that we subsequently lost for centuries.

..

In my travels, it appears to me that you certainly get a great diversity in religious belief, even amongst those of the same persuasion, and where there is often an interesting fusion of religious and traditional culture and values. Certainly what seems to be common right across the board between believers and non believers alike, is that once people gain political power, they most often do not like to give it up.

..

*DavidF* I think that there are more important things than family, and note that those who I love and cherish most do not include members of my biological family. That is not to say that I believe that "family" has no value and no place, however ...

>>None of the true followers of Christ I know fit into your view of "Christian".<<

Just like no true Scotsman:

* Ever wears bifurcated pants.
* Ever eats any food outside of the three Scottish food groups: Haggis Neeps and Tatties.
* Ever hates the sound of the bagpipes.
* Ever turns his nose up at a wee dram 'o whisky.
* Ever holds any love for those English bastards.

Which means that Scotland is almost entirely by people who aren't true Scotsmen. Weird... or what?

Joesephus: google 'no true scotsman'. Read the wikipedia article. I realise it will be a shock to your system to read wikipedia instead of conservapedia but I urge you to stick with it. Then have a good hard think about how it might apply to your claims that no true Christian would etc.

>>Irrespective of anything covered in the article or posted on this thread, the above is uncalled-for and totally unjustified, AND I CALL UPON YOU TO MAKE A RETRACTION.<<

>>I am still waiting for that RETRACTION<<

Oh dear. You do have your panties in quite a bunch don't you?

Hasn't anybody told you that Patience is one of the Seven Heavenly Virtues?

>>your motivations no more impressive than that which revels in wallowing in the mud.<<

Hippopotamuses? That is quite possibly the weirdest and least impressive attempt at an insult that I've ever heard. What have you got against the noble hippopotamus?

All things considered I'd rather be a mud-wallower than a tree-hanger. Hasn't anybody told you that Sloth is one of the Seven Deadly Sins as well as fascinating type of mammal?

Apparently you were too slothful to follow my link. So here is it again for lazy people like KNO3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-nh7xOjkSs

If you still don't get the joke then I CALL UPON YOU TO GO FORNICATE YOURSELF WITH AN IRON STICK.

Cheers,

Tony

Josephus:

You referred to my ‘bigitory [sic], misrepresentation and dishonesty” about the facts of Christ.” There are very few facts about Christ. All we have are the accounts in the New Testament which were written several years after his death.

From E. C. Carpenter: “Pagan & Christian Creeds Their Origin and Meaning"

There were Temples without end dedicated to gods like Apollo or Dionysus among the Greeks, Hercules among the Romans, Mithra among the Persians, Adonis and Attis in Syria and Phrygia, Osiris and Isis and Horus in Egypt, Baal and Astarte among the Babylonians and Carthaginians, and so forth... Societies, large or small, united believers and the devout in the service or ceremonials connected with their respective deities, and in the creeds which they confessed concerning these deities. …, the general outlines of their creeds and ceremonials were--if not identical--so markedly similar as we find them.… I may say roughly that of all or nearly all the deities above-mentioned it was said and believed that:

(1) They were born on or very near our Christmas Day.

(2) They were born of a Virgin-Mother.

(3) And in a Cave or Underground Chamber.

(4) They led a life of toil for Mankind.

(5) And were called by the names of Light-bringer, Healer, Mediator,
Savior, Deliverer.

(6) They were however vanquished by the Powers of Darkness.

(7) And descended into Hell or the Underworld.

(8) They rose again from the dead, and became the pioneers of mankind to the Heavenly world.

(9) They founded Communions of Saints, and Churches into which disciples were received by Baptism.

(10) And they were commemorated by Eucharistic meals.

The ‘facts’ about Jesus are mostly the creation of a legendary figure created by incorporating tales of other legendary figures around at the time.Jesus is not a historical figure of whom one can cite facts. Whether or not there was a real Jesus he is so overlaid with legend that we have few if any facts.