Comments for The Visitor's Card

Comment on Imprecatory prayers by Praying for Damnation :Rejected Reality

Praying for Damnation :Rejected Reality — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 20:26:37 +0000

[...] Today she asks the question that I feel, many Christians have failed to ask, “Are we, as Christians, allowed to offer inprecatory prayers? That is, prayers that seek the demise or harm of an enemy. [...]

Comment on Thanks yet again by Albina-jo

Albina-jo — Fri, 06 Feb 2009 14:55:29 +0000

cox and little rock and cebridge mayaangelo sportplanes paper doll banana republic bebe nordstrom the real camelots location cadbury hill

Comment on On doubt by H.

H. — Wed, 08 Oct 2008 05:39:11 +0000

Hello Webmaster,

I am H. and interested in sponsoring your blog and I am contacting you to ask if
you are interested in blog post sponsorship. Please let me know if you have any further questions and if you are interested on this offer.

Yours truly,

H.
k5sino@bigstring.com

Comment on Go, Presbys! by jimsmucker

jimsmucker — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 23:10:09 +0000

You are welcome to visit our blog & web site to check out another Presby. experience. http://www.heritagepc.org http://www.heritageblog.org

Comment on On doubt by tobeme

tobeme — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:26:24 +0000

That was a good read, thanks for sharing.

Comment on My Yom Kippur by tobeme

tobeme — Tue, 11 Mar 2008 18:37:45 +0000

THis is a very good atonement in the sense that you gained a broader awareness of how you and others think. Very good, thanks for sharing.

Comment on My Yom Kippur by juli the horrible speller

juli the horrible speller — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:16:17 +0000

i am a believer who has recently started questioning. for the last 3 years or so i have tried to closely examine what i believed for my entire life, and why. most of my conclusions fly in the face of what i used to and my family still belives. i would like to have an intelligent conversation/debate with them, not only to challenge their thinking, but also to keep challenging my own. (just because i am thinking about things in a new way doesn’t necessarily mean the old way is all wrong). but i fear that will never happen. mostly because they feel so threatened by what may be “heresy” that they never question or think. i am very proud of you for being able to admit that you may not be as right as you thought you were. it’s been an interesting journey for me finding out the same thing. keep up the good work.
ps if you want to hear some good thoughts about being gay and christian, visit revolutioncharlotte.com and download jennifer’s “homosexuality” podcast (from 12-30-07). i recently listened to it and it kind of blew my mind.

Comment on Religion and education by tobeme

tobeme — Sat, 01 Mar 2008 18:18:49 +0000

Thanks for sharing this information. I will have to take a closer look to hopefully understand what it all means. Interesting.

Comment on Also: Atheist Fundamentalism? Really? by Samuel Skinner

Samuel Skinner — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 00:37:06 +0000

Yes… if you disbelieve in god every day, than you are an atheist fundamentalist. Those who disbelieve except on Sunday…

Comment on Another epiphany, but perhaps not a dumb one by Isaac

Isaac — Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:19:53 +0000

> “I was perusing the new books section and I found a book called The Dawkins Delusion?”

Be sure to compare what McGrath claims Dawkins says with what Dawkins says:

1) “Thomas Aquinas … Dawkins misunderstands an a posteriori demonstration of the coherence of faith and observation to be an a priori proof of faith…” p. 26

Reference 14 – God Delusion pp. 77-79

Dawkins clearly writes “Thomas Aquinas’ five are a posteriori arguments, relying upon inspection of the world.” p. 80 – so how can McGrath honestly claim Dawkins misunderstood that very thing?

2) ‘… Dawkins then weakens his argument by suggesting that all religious people try to stop scientists from exploring those gaps: “one of the truly bad effects of religion is that it teaches us that it is a virtue to be satisfied with not understanding.”‘ pp. 29-30

Reference 24 – God Delusion p. 126

Dawkins clearly writes “In this respect, science finds itself in alliance with sophisticated theologians like Bonhoeffer, united against the common enemies of naive, populist theology and the gap theology of intelligent design.” p. 127 – so how can McGrath honestly claim Dawkins’ comment is about all religious people?

3) “When Dyson commented that he was a Christian who wasn’t particularly interested in the doctrine of the Trinity, Dawkins insisted that this meant that Dyson wasn’t a Christian at all.” pp. 44-45

Reference 19 – God Delusion p. 152

McGrath snipped off a rather important part of Dyson’s comment. According to Dawkins, Dyson said: “I … do not care much about the doctrine of the Trinity or the historical truth of the gospels.” p. 152

Dawkins would not be alone in being puzzled that someone who doesn’t care about the historical truth of the resurrection claimed to be a Christian. (Why has McGrath hid that from his readers?)

4) “… the TV series The Root of All Evil? … Dawkins sought out religious extremists who advocated violence in the name of religion, or were aggressively antiscientific in their outlook. No representative figures were included or considered.” p. 51

Alister McGrath himself was not only considered but filmed for that TV series!
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6474278760369344626

Dawkins has previously stated that leading UK religious figures were invited to take part:

“We did invite the Archbishop of Canterbury – and the Chief Rabbi and the Archbishop of Westminster – to be interviewed. All declined, no doubt for good reasons.”
“Diary – Richard Dawkins”, New Statesman, Published 30 January 2006
http://www.newstatesman.com/200601300002